Haeffel Gerald J, Jeronimus Bertus F, Fisher Aaron J, Kaiser Bonnie N, Weaver Lesley Jo, Vargas Ivan, Goodson Jason T, Soyster Peter D, Lu Wei
Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame.
Department of Psychology, University of Groningen.
Clin Psychol Sci. 2022 Mar;10(2):285-290. doi: 10.1177/21677026211068873. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
In their response to our article (both in this issue), DeYoung and colleagues did not sufficiently address three fundamental flaws with the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP). First, HiTOP was created using a simple-structure factor-analytic approach, which does not adequately represent the dimensional space of the symptoms of psychopathology. Consequently, HiTOP is not the empirical structure of psychopathology. Second, factor analysis and dimensional ratings do not fix the problems inherent to descriptive (folk) classification; self-reported symptoms are still the basis on which clinical judgments about people are made. Finally, HiTOP is not ready to use in real-world clinical settings. There is currently no empirical evidence demonstrating that clinicians who use HiTOP have better clinical outcomes than those who use the (). In sum, HiTOP is a factor-analytic variation of the that does not get the field closer to a more valid and useful taxonomy.
在对我们文章的回应中（均在本期），迪扬及其同事没有充分解决精神病理学层次分类法（HiTOP）的三个基本缺陷。首先，HiTOP是使用简单结构因子分析方法创建的，该方法不能充分代表精神病理学症状的维度空间。因此，HiTOP不是精神病理学的实证结构。其次，因子分析和维度评分并不能解决描述性（民间）分类所固有的问题；自我报告的症状仍然是对人进行临床判断的基础。最后，HiTOP尚未准备好在现实世界的临床环境中使用。目前没有实证证据表明使用HiTOP的临床医生比使用（此处原文缺失内容）的临床医生有更好的临床结果。总之，HiTOP是（此处原文缺失内容）的一种因子分析变体，它并没有使该领域更接近一个更有效和有用的分类法。
