Departments of Psychiatry and Psychology, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities Campus, 2450 Riverside Ave, Suite F227, Minneapolis, MN 55454, United States.
Department of Psychiatry, Stony Brook University, HSC, Level T-10, Room 060H, Stony Brook, NY 11794-8101, United States.
Compr Psychiatry. 2017 Nov;79:19-30. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2017.04.006. Epub 2017 Apr 29.
A large body of research has focused on identifying the optimal number of dimensions - or spectra - to model individual differences in psychopathology. Recently, it has become increasingly clear that ostensibly competing models with varying numbers of spectra can be synthesized in empirically derived hierarchical structures.
We examined the convergence between top-down (bass-ackwards or sequential principal components analysis) and bottom-up (hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis) statistical methods for elucidating hierarchies to explicate the joint hierarchical structure of clinical and personality disorders. Analyses examined 24 clinical and personality disorders based on semi-structured clinical interviews in an outpatient psychiatric sample (n=2900).
The two methods of hierarchical analysis converged on a three-tier joint hierarchy of psychopathology. At the lowest tier, there were seven spectra - disinhibition, antagonism, core thought disorder, detachment, core internalizing, somatoform, and compulsivity - that emerged in both methods. These spectra were nested under the same three higher-order superspectra in both methods: externalizing, broad thought dysfunction, and broad internalizing. In turn, these three superspectra were nested under a single general psychopathology spectrum, which represented the top tier of the hierarchical structure.
The hierarchical structure mirrors and extends upon past research, with the inclusion of a novel compulsivity spectrum, and the finding that psychopathology is organized in three superordinate domains. This hierarchy can thus be used as a flexible and integrative framework to facilitate psychopathology research with varying levels of specificity (i.e., focusing on the optimal level of detailed information, rather than the optimal number of factors).
大量研究集中于确定最佳维度数量——或光谱——以建模精神病理学中的个体差异。最近,越来越明显的是,具有不同光谱数量的表面上相互竞争的模型可以在经验衍生的层次结构中综合。
我们检查了自上而下(低音向后或顺序主成分分析)和自下而上(层次凝聚聚类分析)统计方法用于阐明层次结构以阐明临床和人格障碍的联合层次结构的收敛性。分析检查了基于门诊精神病样本中半结构化临床访谈的 24 种临床和人格障碍(n=2900)。
两种层次分析方法在精神病理学的三层联合层次上收敛。在最低层次上,有七个光谱——抑制障碍、对抗、核心思维障碍、分离、核心内化、躯体形式和强迫——这两种方法都出现了。这些光谱嵌套在两种方法中相同的三个更高阶超光谱下:外化、广泛思维功能障碍和广泛内化。反过来,这三个超光谱嵌套在一个单一的一般精神病理学光谱下,这代表了层次结构的最高层次。
层次结构反映并扩展了过去的研究,包括一个新的强迫光谱,以及精神病理学组织在三个高级领域的发现。因此,这个层次结构可以用作一个灵活和综合的框架,以促进具有不同特异性水平的精神病理学研究(即,关注最佳的详细信息水平,而不是最佳的因素数量)。