Suppr超能文献

摩尔等人(2020 年)的更正。

Correction to Moore et al. (2020).

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania.

Department of Psychology, Vanderbilt University.

出版信息

J Abnorm Psychol. 2020 Oct;129(7):759. doi: 10.1037/abn0000646.

Abstract

Reports an error in "Criterion validity and relationships between alternative hierarchical dimensional models of general and specific psychopathology" by Tyler M. Moore, Antonia N. Kaczkurkin, E. Leighton Durham, Hee Jung Jeong, Malerie G. McDowell, Randolph M. Dupont, Brooks Applegate, Jennifer L. Tackett, Carlos Cardenas-Iniguez, Omid Kardan, Gaby N. Akcelik, Andrew J. Stier, Monica D. Rosenberg, Donald Hedeker, Marc G. Berman and Benjamin B. Lahey (, Advanced Online Publication, Jul 16, 2020, np). In the article (http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/abn0000601), an acknowledgment is missing from the author note. The missing acknowledgement is included in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2020-50590-001.) Psychopathology can be viewed as a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Many studies have supported this conceptualization, but they have used alternative statistical models with differing interpretations. In bifactor models, every symptom loads on both the general factor and 1 specific factor (e.g., internalizing), which partitions the total explained variance in each symptom between these orthogonal factors. In second-order models, symptoms load on one of several correlated lower-order factors. These lower-order factors load on a second-order general factor, which is defined by the variance shared by the lower-order factors. Thus, the factors in second-order models are not orthogonal. Choosing between these valid statistical models depends on the hypothesis being tested. Because bifactor models define orthogonal phenotypes with distinct sources of variance, they are optimal for studies of shared and unique associations of the dimensions of psychopathology with external variables putatively relevant to etiology and mechanisms. Concerns have been raised, however, about the reliability of the orthogonal specific factors in bifactor models. We evaluated this concern using parent symptom ratings of 9-10 year olds in the ABCD Study. Psychometric indices indicated that all factors in both bifactor and second-order models exhibited at least adequate construct reliability and estimated replicability. The factors defined in bifactor and second-order models were highly to moderately correlated across models, but have different interpretations. All factors in both models demonstrated significant associations with external criterion variables of theoretical and clinical importance, but the interpretation of such associations in second-order models was ambiguous due to shared variance among factors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

报告了 Tyler M. Moore、Antonia N. Kaczkurkin、E. Leighton Durham、Hee Jung Jeong、Malerie G. McDowell、Randolph M. Dupont、Brooks Applegate、Jennifer L. Tackett、Carlos Cardenas-Iniguez、Omid Kardan、Gaby N. Akcelik、Andrew J. Stier、Monica D. Rosenberg、Donald Hedeker、Marc G. Berman 和 Benjamin B. Lahey 的“一般和特定精神病理学的替代分层维度模型的准则有效性和关系”(,高级在线出版,2020 年 7 月 16 日,np)一文中的错误。在文章中(http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/abn0000601),作者注释中缺少一个致谢。缺失的致谢包含在勘误表中。(原始文章的以下摘要出现在记录 2020-50590-001 中。)精神病理学可以被视为相关维度的层次结构。许多研究都支持这种概念化,但它们使用了具有不同解释的替代统计模型。在双因素模型中,每个症状都同时加载在一般因素和 1 个特定因素(例如,内化)上,这将每个症状的总解释方差在这些正交因素之间进行划分。在二阶模型中,症状加载在几个相关的低阶因素之一上。这些低阶因素加载在二阶一般因素上,该因素由低阶因素之间的共享方差定义。因此,二阶模型中的因素不是正交的。选择这些有效统计模型取决于正在测试的假设。由于双因素模型定义了具有不同方差源的正交表型,因此它们最适合研究精神病理学维度与外部变量之间的共享和独特关联,这些外部变量被认为与病因和机制有关。然而,人们对双因素模型中正交特定因素的可靠性提出了担忧。我们使用 ABCD 研究中 9-10 岁儿童的父母症状评分来评估这一担忧。心理测量学指标表明,双因素和二阶模型中的所有因素都表现出至少足够的结构可靠性和估计可重复性。两个模型中的因素在模型之间高度相关到中度相关,但具有不同的解释。两个模型中的所有因素都与具有理论和临床重要性的外部标准变量显著相关,但由于因素之间存在共享方差,二阶模型中的这种关联的解释是不明确的。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2020 APA,保留所有权利)。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验