scholarly journals Criterion Validity and Relationships between Alternative Hierarchical Dimensional Models of General and Specific Psychopathology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler M. Moore ◽  
Antonia N. Kaczkurkin ◽  
E. Leighton Durham ◽  
Hee Jung Jeong ◽  
Malerie G. McDowell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Order ◽  
Statistical Models ◽  
Child Psychopathology ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
External Criterion ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
External Variables

ABSTRACTPsychopathology can be viewed as a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Many studies have supported this conceptualization, but they have used alternative statistical models with differing interpretations. In bifactor models, every symptom loads on both the general factor and one specific factor (e.g., internalizing), which partitions the total explained variance in each symptom between these orthogonal factors. In second-order models, symptoms load on one of several correlated lower-order factors. These lower-order factors load on a second-order general factor, which is defined by the variance shared by the lower-order factors. Thus, the factors in second-order models are not orthogonal. Choosing between these valid statistical models depends on the hypothesis being tested. Because bifactor models define orthogonal phenotypes with distinct sources of variance, they are optimal for studies of shared and unique associations of the dimensions of psychopathology with external variables putatively relevant to etiology and mechanisms. Concerns have been raised, however, about the reliability of the orthogonal specific factors in bifactor models. We evaluated this concern using parent symptom ratings of 9-10 year olds in the ABCD Study. Psychometric indices indicated that all factors in both bifactor and second-order models exhibited at least adequate construct reliability and estimated replicability. The factors defined in bifactor and second-order models were highly to moderately correlated across models, but have different interpretations. All factors in both models demonstrated significant associations with external criterion variables of theoretical and clinical importance, but the interpretation of such associations in second-order models was ambiguous due to shared variance among factors.General Scientific SummarySome investigators have proposed that viewing the correlated symptoms of psychopathology as a hierarchy in which all symptoms are related to both a general (p) factor of psychopathology and a more specific factor will make it easier to distinguish potential risk factors and mechanisms that are nonspecifically related to all forms of psychopathology versus those that are associated with specific dimensions of psychopathology. Parent ratings of child psychopathology items from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study were analyzed using two alternative statistical models of the proposed hierarchy. All factors of psychopathology defined in both bifactor and second-order models demonstrated adequate psychometric properties and criterion validity, but associations of psychopathology factors with external variables were more easily interpreted in bifactor than in second-order models.

Issues in Estimating Interpretable Lower Order Factors in Second-Order Hierarchical Models: Commentary on Clark et al. (2021)

2021 ◽  
pp. 216770262110351
Author(s):  
Tyler M. Moore ◽  
Benjamin B. Lahey
Keyword(s):  
Lower Order ◽  
Hierarchical Modeling ◽  
Simulated Data ◽  
Second Order ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
Factor Modeling ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Criterion Variables

In a previous issue of Clinical Psychological Science, Clark and colleagues asserted that lower order factors in second-order models are comparable with specific factors in bifactor models when residualized on the general factor. Modeling simulated data demonstrated that residualized lower order factors are correlated with bifactor-specific factors only to the extent that factor loadings are proportional. Modeling actual data with violations of proportionality showed that specific and residualized lower order factors are not always highly correlated and have differential correlations with criterion variables even when both models fit acceptably. Because proportionality constraints limit only second-order models, bifactor models should be the first option for hierarchical modeling.

How Data Analysis Can Dominate Interpretations of Dominant General Factors

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 438-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenton M. Wiernik ◽  
Michael P. Wilmot ◽  
Jack W. Kostal
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Substantial Proportion ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Single Factor ◽  
Traditional Methods ◽  
External Variables ◽  
Specific Factors ◽  
Data Analytic

A dominant general factor (DGF) is present when a single factor accounts for the majority of reliable variance across a set of measures (Ree, Carretta, & Teachout, 2015). In the presence of a DGF, dimension scores necessarily reflect a blend of both general and specific factors. For some constructs, specific factors contain little unique reliable variance after controlling for the general factor (Reise, 2012), whereas for others, specific factors contribute a more substantial proportion of variance (e.g., Kinicki, McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim, & Carson, 2002). We agree with Ree et al. that the presence of a DGF has implications for interpreting scores. However, we argue that the conflation of general and specific factor variances has the strongest implications for understanding how constructs relate to external variables. When dimension scales contain substantial general and specific factor variance, traditional methods of data analysis will produce ambiguous or even misleading results. In this commentary, we show how several common data analytic methods, when used with data sets containing a DGF, will substantively alter conclusions.

On the Meaning of the “P Factor” in Symmetrical Bifactor Models of Psychopathology: Recommendations for Future Research From the Bifactor-(S−1) Perspective

Assessment ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107319112110602
Author(s):  
Manuel Heinrich ◽  
Christian Geiser ◽  
Pavle Zagorscak ◽  
G. Leonard Burns ◽  
Johannes Bohn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Modeling Framework ◽  
Factor Loadings ◽  
Negative Factor ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Unexpected Findings ◽  
P Factor

Symmetrical bifactor models are frequently applied to diverse symptoms of psychopathology to identify a general P factor. This factor is assumed to mark shared liability across all psychopathology dimensions and mental disorders. Despite their popularity, however, symmetrical bifactor models of P often yield anomalous results, including but not limited to nonsignificant or negative specific factor variances and nonsignificant or negative factor loadings. To date, these anomalies have often been treated as nuisances to be explained away. In this article, we demonstrate why these anomalies alter the substantive meaning of P such that it (a) does not reflect general liability to psychopathology and (b) differs in meaning across studies. We then describe an alternative modeling framework, the bifactor-( S−1) approach. This method avoids anomalous results, provides a framework for explaining unexpected findings in published symmetrical bifactor studies, and yields a well-defined general factor that can be compared across studies when researchers hypothesize what construct they consider “transdiagnostically meaningful” and measure it directly. We present an empirical example to illustrate these points and provide concrete recommendations to help researchers decide for or against specific variants of bifactor structure.

scholarly journals On the Meaning of the General Factor of Psychopathology (“P-Factor”) in Symmetrical Bifactor Models

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Heinrich ◽  
Christian Geiser ◽  
Pavle Zagorscak ◽  
G. Leonard Burns ◽  
Johannes Bohn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Modeling Framework ◽  
Factor Loadings ◽  
Negative Factor ◽  
Bifactor Models ◽  
Unexpected Findings ◽  
P Factor

Symmetrical bifactor models are frequently applied to diverse symptoms of psychopathology to identify a general P factor. This factor is assumed to mark shared liability across psychopathology dimensions and mental disorders. Despite their popularity, however, symmetrical bifactor models often yield anomalous results, including but not limited to non-significant or negative specific factor variances and non-significant or negative factor loadings. To date, these anomalies have often been treated as nuisances to be explained away. In this paper, we demonstrate why these anomalies alter the substantive meaning of P such that it (1) does not reflect general liability to psychopathology and (2) differs in meaning across studies. We then describe an alternative modeling framework, the bifactor-(S − 1) approach. This approach avoids anomalous results, provides a framework for explaining unexpected findings in published symmetrical bifactor studies, and yields a general factor with well-defined meaning across studies. We present an empirical example to illustrate these points and provide concrete recommendations to help researchers decide for or against a specific variant of bifactor structures. In summary, bifactor-(S − 1) models provide an approach to answer questions posed in symmetrical bifactor models in a more comparable and replicable manner.

The Relationship Between Career Adaptability and Job-Search Self-Efficacy of Graduates: The Bifactor Approach

2021 ◽  
pp. 106907272110022
Author(s):  
Marijana Matijaš ◽  
Darja Maslić Seršić
Keyword(s):  
Job Search ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sem Analysis ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Career Adaptability ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Interview Performance

Career adaptability is an important resource for dealing with career transitions such as the transition from university to work. Previous research emphasized the importance of focusing on career adapt-abilities instead only on general career adaptability. The aim of this research was to investigate whether career adaptability can be conceptualized as a bifactor model and whether general and specific dimensions of career adaptability have a relationship with job-search self-efficacy of graduates. In an online cross-sectional study, 667 graduates completed the Career Adapt-Abilities Scale and Job Search Skill and Confidence Scale. The CFA analysis showed that the bifactor model of career adaptability had a good fit where general factor explained most of the items’ variance. The SEM analysis revealed that general career adaptability and the specific factor of confidence positively correlated with job-search and interview performance self-efficacy. Control only correlated with interview performance self-efficacy. Neither concern nor curiosity showed a significant relationship with job-search and interview performance self-efficacy.

scholarly journals A less evaluative measure of Big Five personality: Comparison of structure and criterion validity

2021 ◽  
pp. 089020702110129
Author(s):  
Joshua K Wood ◽  
Jeromy Anglim ◽  
Sharon Horwood
Keyword(s):  
Big Five ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Blood Donation ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Communication Styles ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Academic Grades

Researchers and practitioners have long been concerned about detrimental effects of socially desirable responding on the structure and criterion validity of personality assessments. The current research examined the effect of reducing evaluative item content of a Big Five personality assessment on test structure and criterion validity. We developed a new public domain measure of the Big Five called the Less Evaluative Five Factor Inventory (LEFFI), adapted from the standard 50-item IPIP NEO, and intended to be less evaluative. Participants ( n = 3164) then completed standard (IPIP) and neutralized (LEFFI) measures of personality. Criteria were also collected, including academic grades, age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption, exercise, protesting, religious worship, music preferences, dental hygiene, blood donation, other-rated communication styles, other-rated HEXACO personality, and cognitive ability (ICAR). Evaluativeness of items was reduced in the neutralized measure. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest reliability were maintained. Correlations between the Big Five were reduced in the neutralized measure and criterion validity was similar or slightly reduced in the neutralized measure. The large sample size and use of objective criteria extend past research. The study also contributes to debates about whether the general factor of personality and agreement with socially desirable content reflect substance or bias.

scholarly journals Reliability and validity of an adapted hip abductor strength measure as a potential new fall risk assessment for older persons: a study protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Chantal Gafner ◽  
Caroline Henrice Germaine Bastiaenen ◽  
Emmanuel Biver ◽  
Serge Ferrari ◽  
Lara Allet
Keyword(s):  
Fall Risk ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Risk Assessments ◽  
Index Test ◽  
Timed Up And Go ◽  
External Criterion ◽  
Closed Chain ◽  
Hip Abductor ◽  
Abductor Strength

Abstract Background Persons aged ≥ 65 years are currently the world’s fastest growing age group. An important complication of age is the increasing risk of falls. Falls have multifactorial etiology and modifiable risk factors open for interventions in prevention and rehabilitation, are of high interest. In this context, strong hip abductors seem to be important to prevent falls. A newly adapted measurement device to measure hip abductor strength (HAS) in a closed chain position was developed. We aim to assess feasibility, intra- and inter-tester reliability and construct and criterion validity of the new measure. Methods In two subsequent parts a feasibility, reliability and validity study with an adapted measurement instrument for the assessment of HAS (index test) in a closed chain position in persons aged ≥ 65 years will be conducted. Part I investigates feasibility of the measure in clinical settings as well as reliability of the new HAS test (n = 26). Part II evaluates construct and criterion validity (n = 169). Construct validity will be assessed cross-sectional, criterion validity by comparison with prospectively followed up fall history for 12 months (external criterion) and other functional fall risk assessments (Short Physical Performance Battery, Timed Up and Go test, usual gait speed and hand grip strength). Discussion Results of feasibility, will give insight in its applicability in daily clinical life and clinimetric properties will show if measurements of HAS in a closed chain position should be encouraged to include in fall risk assessments in older adults.

Manifest Anxiety: Unifactorial or Multifactorial Composition?

1965 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 773-780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter D. Fenz ◽  
Seymour Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Striated Muscle ◽  
Muscle Tension ◽  
Autonomic Arousal ◽  
Specific Factor ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Personality Variable ◽  
Specific Nature ◽  
Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale ◽  
Manifest Anxiety ◽  
Differential Contribution

The study investigates three subscales of manifest anxiety, consisting of symptoms of striated muscle tension, symptoms of autonomic arousal, and feelings of fear and insecurity. There was both a general factor of anxiety and a specific factor associated with striated muscle tension. Further evidence for the specific nature of striated muscle tension was indicated by its positive relationship to feelings of hostility, its failure to relate to a personality variable of inhibition, and the relatively high score obtained by males. It was hypothesized that striated muscle tension is more closely associated with overt activity than autonomic symptoms, which represent a deeper level of inhibition. Discrepant results of studies using the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale may be due to a failure to take into account the differential contribution of items relating to different kinds of anxiety.

scholarly journals Exposure to Bullying and General Psychopathology: A Prospective, Longitudinal Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolien Rijlaarsdam ◽  
Charlotte A. M. Cecil ◽  
J. Marieke Buil ◽  
Pol A. C. van Lier ◽  
Edward D. Barker
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Child Psychopathology ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Report ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal Study ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
Prospective Longitudinal ◽  
Internalizing And Externalizing

AbstractAlthough there is mounting evidence that the experience of being bullied associates with both internalizing and externalizing symptoms, it is not known yet whether the identified associations are specific to these symptoms, or shared between them. The primary focus of this study is to assess the prospective associations of bullying exposure with both general and specific (i.e., internalizing, externalizing) factors of psychopathology. This study included data from 6,210 children participating in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). Child bullying was measured by self-report at ages 8 and 10 years. Child psychopathology symptoms were assessed by parent-interview, using the Development and Well-being Assessment (DAWBA) at ages 7 and 13 years. Bullying exposure significantly associated with the general psychopathology factor in early adolescence. In particular, chronically victimized youth exposed to multiple forms of bullying (i.e., both overt and relational) showed higher levels of general psychopathology. Bullying exposure also associated with both internalizing and externalizing factors from the correlated-factors model. However, the effect estimates for these factors decreased considerably in size and dropped to insignificant for the internalizing factor after extracting the shared variance that belongs to the general factor of psychopathology. Using an integrative longitudinal model, we found that higher levels of general psychopathology at age 7 also associated with bullying exposure at age 8 which, in turn, associated with general psychopathology at age 13 through its two-year continuity. Findings suggest that exposure to bullying is a risk factor for a more general vulnerability to psychopathology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document