Interpretational issues with the bifactor model: A commentary on 'Defining the p-Factor: An Empirical Test of Five Leading Theories' by Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro

9Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro (2022, Psychological Medicine) conducted an ambitious investigation aimed at determining the nature of the general p factor of psychopathology by considering the correlation between the p factor and five candidate constructs. Generally, in this area of research, the bifactor model is preferred to the second order common factor model. In this commentary, we identify several interpretational issues concerning the bifactor model, which are based on a realistic psychometric view of latent variables. These issues may hamper the study of the nature of p factor model using the bifactor model.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dolan, C. V., & Borsboom, D. (2023, May 11). Interpretational issues with the bifactor model: A commentary on “Defining the p-Factor: An Empirical Test of Five Leading Theories” by Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro. Psychological Medicine. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291723000533

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