Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, U-1020, Storrs, CT, 06269, USA.
J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2020 Jul;48(7):911-915. doi: 10.1007/s10802-020-00645-4.
Questions persist about whether attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), and conduct disorder are in fact distinct from one another. When such questions arise, ODD is often suggested to be subsumed under one or the other condition. Modeling approaches that can evaluate whether specific subfactors can be distinguished from general psychopathology are of great interest, and the general bifactor model has been increasingly applied in studies evaluating the structure of psychopathology. However, evidence for bias in the model, the frequency of anomalous indicators, and theoretical concerns about the applicability of the general bifactor model to these questions raise doubts about whether it is reliable or appropriate to do so. Burns and colleagues propose the bifactor S-1 model as a psychometrically sounder alternative. Their systematic examination provides a compelling argument that it is psychometrically sounder, but it is not clear that it is a true alternative. It may not be answering the same questions, cannot test hypotheses regarding the same sets of specific subfactors, and relies on a priori decisions on the part of the researcher that may change the interpretation of the results. The bifactor S-1 model approach appears to be a valuable, psychometrically sound approach to test the structure of psychopathology, particularly in regard to ADHD and ODD.
关于注意缺陷多动障碍（ADHD）、对立违抗性障碍（ODD）和品行障碍是否实际上彼此不同，仍然存在疑问。当出现此类疑问时，ODD 通常被认为包含在其中一种或另一种病症之下。能够评估特定子因素是否可以与一般精神病理学区分开来的建模方法非常有趣，并且一般双因素模型已越来越多地应用于评估精神病理学结构的研究中。然而，该模型存在偏差的证据、异常指标的频率以及关于一般双因素模型在这些问题上的适用性的理论问题，使人对其是否可靠或合适产生了怀疑。Burns 及其同事提出了双因素 S-1 模型作为一种更可靠的替代方法。他们的系统检查提供了一个令人信服的论点，即它在心理测量上更可靠，但尚不清楚它是否是一个真正的替代方法。它可能无法回答相同的问题，不能检验关于相同特定子因素集的假设，并且依赖于研究人员的先验决策，这可能会改变对结果的解释。双因素 S-1 模型方法似乎是一种有价值的、心理测量上可靠的方法，可以测试精神病理学的结构，特别是在 ADHD 和 ODD 方面。
