School of Psychology, University of Ulster at Magee, L'Derry, Northern Ireland.
J Abnorm Psychol. 2012 Aug;121(3):610-5. doi: 10.1037/a0028591. Epub 2012 Jun 11.
Factor analytic studies of the structure of self-reported posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms have consistently supported two 4-factor models; the "Dysphoria" and the "Emotional Numbing" model. The fit of both models has been satisfactory; however, it has been difficult to unequivocally determine which model is best. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that there is no single "correct" model, but rather that the models represent different subpopulations. A confirmatory factor 2-class mixture model was specified with the Dysphoria model in one class and the Emotional Numbing model in the other. This model was tested using data from participants from 4 trauma groups. This model fitted the data better than 1 and 2-class models of the Dysphoria, Emotional Numbing, and cross-factor loading model. It was concluded that the search for the "correct" model of PTSD based on the assumption of a single homogenous population may not be a worthwhile research endeavor.
自我报告的创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)症状的结构进行因素分析研究一直支持两种四因素模型;“抑郁”和“情绪麻木”模型。两种模型的拟合都令人满意;然而,很难明确确定哪种模型是最佳的。本研究旨在检验以下假设,即没有单一的“正确”模型,而是模型代表不同的亚群。使用来自 4 个创伤组的参与者的数据,指定了一个确认性因素 2 类混合模型,其中一个类是抑郁模型,另一个类是情绪麻木模型。与抑郁、情绪麻木和交叉因子加载模型的 1 类和 2 类模型相比,该模型更适合数据。结论是,基于单一同质人群的假设来寻找 PTSD 的“正确”模型可能不是一项有价值的研究工作。