Promises and Pitfalls of Latent Variable Approaches to Understanding Psychopathology: Reply to Burke and Johnston, Eid,
- PDF / 495,823 Bytes
- 6 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 80 Downloads / 196 Views
Promises and Pitfalls of Latent Variable Approaches to Understanding Psychopathology: Reply to Burke and Johnston, Eid, Junghänel and Colleagues, and Willoughby G. Leonard Burns 1
&
Christian Geiser 2 & Mateu Servera 3 & Stephen P. Becker 4 & Theodore P. Beauchaine 5
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract The commentaries by Burke and Johnston (this issue), Eid (this issue), Junghänel et al. (this issue), and Willoughby (this issue) on Burns et al. (this issue) provide useful context for comparing three latent variable modeling approaches to understanding psychopathology—the correlated first-order syndrome-specific factors model, the bifactor S – 1 model, and the symmetrical bifactor model. The correlated first-order syndrome-specific factors model has proven useful in constructing explanatory models of psychopathology. The bifactor S – 1 model is also useful for examining the latent structure of psychopathology, especially in contexts with clear theoretical predictions. Joint use of correlated first-order syndrome-specific model and bifactor S – 1 model provides leverage for explaining psychopathology, and both models can also guide individual clinical assessment. In this reply, we further clarify reasons why the symmetrical bifactor model should not be used to study the latent structure of psychopathology and also discuss a restricted bifactor S – 1 model that is equivalent to the first-order syndrome-specific factors model. Keywords ADHD . Bifactor model . Restricted bifactor S – 1 model . Factor analysis . p factor . Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder . Oppositional defiant disorder . Psychopathology
Latent variable models play an important role in understanding psychopathology. Beginning with early work in the mid1960s to the present (Willoughby, this issue), the correlated first-order syndrome-specific factors model has been instrumental in explanations of psychopathology. This latent variable model has been used countless times to evaluate the internal validity of dimensions of psychopathology. Internal validity occurs with convergent and discriminant validity of symptoms and syndromes within and across methods, sources, occasions, and age groups.
With the identification of the latent variable (Preszler & Burns 2019), additional research is required to establish causes and specify external correlates of a latent syndrome. Establishing causal linkages across levels of analyses (e.g., genetic, neural, environmental influences on latent symptom dimensions) is, however, a complex endeavor (Beauchaine & Hinshaw, in press). With this context in mind, we discuss the four commentaries to Burns et al. (this issue).
* G. Leonard Burns [email protected]
Commentaries
1
Department of Psychology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
2
Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA
3
University of the Balearic Islands, Carretera de Valldemossa, km 7.5, 07122 Palma, Illes Balears, Spain
4
Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and University of Cincinna
Data Loading...
