Department of Psychology, University of Miami, 5665 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA.
Psychol Assess. 2013 Mar;25(1):194-203. doi: 10.1037/a0029966. Epub 2012 Sep 17.
Despite controversy regarding the classification and diagnostic status of hoarding disorder, there remains a paucity of research on the nosology of hoarding that is likely to inform the classification debate. The present investigation examined the latent structure of hoarding in three, large independent samples. Data for three well-validated measures of hoarding were subjected to taxometric procedures, including MAXimum EIGenvalue, Mean Above Minus Below A Cut, and Latent-Mode factor. Two symptom measures, one of which closely mirrors the proposed diagnostic criteria for hoarding disorder, and a measure of hoarding beliefs were analyzed. Sample 1 (n=2,501) was representative of the general German population, while Samples 2 (n=1,149) and 3 (n=500) consisted of unselected undergraduate students. Findings across all three samples and taxometric procedures provided converging evidence that hoarding is best conceptualized as a dimensional construct, present in varying degrees in all individuals. Results have implications across research and treatment domains, particularly with respect to assessment approaches, treatment response determination, and policy decisions. These findings underscore the need for further investigations on the nosology of hoarding, to help validate this construct as we move forward with respect to our research and treatment efforts, as well as the potential inclusion of hoarding disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2012).
尽管关于囤积障碍的分类和诊断地位存在争议,但关于囤积症的分类学研究仍然很少,这可能会影响分类辩论。本研究在三个独立的大样本中检验了囤积症的潜在结构。对三种经过充分验证的囤积症测量方法的数据进行了分类测量程序,包括最大特征值、平均值高于减去低于切割值和潜在模式因子。对两个症状测量值进行了分析,其中一个与囤积障碍的拟议诊断标准非常相似,另一个是囤积信念的测量值。样本 1(n=2501)代表德国普通人群,而样本 2(n=1149)和样本 3(n=500)由未经选择的本科生组成。所有三个样本和分类测量程序的结果提供了一致的证据,表明囤积症最好被概念化为一个维度结构,在所有个体中以不同的程度存在。结果对研究和治疗领域都有影响,特别是在评估方法、治疗反应确定和政策决策方面。这些发现强调了需要进一步研究囤积症的分类学,以帮助验证这一结构,因为我们在研究和治疗努力方面向前推进,以及在《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》(第五版;DSM-5;美国精神病学协会,2012 年)中可能包括囤积障碍。