Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology

22Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Historically, researchers have proposed higher-order factors to explicate the structure of psychopathology, including Externalizing, Internalizing, Fear, Distress, Thought Disorder, and a general factor. Despite extensive research in this domain, the underlying structure of psychopathology remains unresolved. Here, we examine several issues in adjudicating among structural models of psychopathology. Using simulations and analyses of the extant literature, we contrast the model-based reliability of alternative structural models of psychopathology and highlight shortcomings of conventional model-fit indices for such adjudication. We propose alternative criteria for evaluating and contrasting competing structural models, including various model characteristics (e.g., the magnitude and consistency of factor loadings and their precision), the consistency and sensitivity of factors to their constituent indicators, and the variance explained in and patterns of associations with relevant variables. Using these criteria as adjuncts to conventional fit indices should become standard practice and will greatly facilitate adjudication among alternative structural models of psychopathology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Waldman, I. D., King, C. D., Poore, H. E., Luningham, J. M., Zinbarg, R. M., Krueger, R. F., … Zald, D. (2023). Recommendations for Adjudicating Among Alternative Structural Models of Psychopathology. Clinical Psychological Science, 11(4), 616–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026221144256

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free