The p factor. The structure underlying psychopathology?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35670/1667-4545.v19.n3.26774Keywords:
personality maladaptive traits, general factor of psychopathology, dimensional models, PID-5, confirmatory factor analysis, bifactor modelAbstract
Psychopathology is in a moment of crisis. The categorical classification systems have received several criticisms from researchers and clinicians. New proposals try to present a superior, dimensional and hierarchical model. Among them are those that propose a single dimension of general psychopathology. In this study, we sought to analyze the underlying structure of pathological personality traits, looking to provide evidence for such proposals. In doing so, the internal structure of the Spanish version of the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 [PID-5] was examined by a confirmatory factor analysis. Four alternative models were compared: the five-factor model, a second-ordered factor model, bifactor, and one-factor. The bifactor model presented a better fit to the data. This suggests that the observed variables reflect five specific pathological traits but also a general propensity for psychopathology.
Downloads
References
Al-Dajani, N., Gralnick, T. M., & Bagby, R. M. (2016). A psychometric review of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5): Current status and future directions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(1), 62-81. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1107572
American Psychiatric Association. (1952). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington, D. C.: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. DSM-III (3ª ed.). Washington, D. C.: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. DSM-IV (4ª ed.). Washington, D. C.: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. DSM-5 (5ª ed.). Washington, D. C.: Author. doi: 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
Arias, V. B., Ponce, F. P., & Núñez, D. E. (2018). Bifactor models of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): An evaluation of three necessary but underused psychometric indexes. Assessment, 25(7), 885-897. doi: 10.1177/1073191116679260
Batstra, L., & Thoutenhoofd, E. D. (2012). The risk that DSM-5 will further inflate the diagnostic bubble. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 8(4), 260-263. doi: 10.2174/157340012803520531
Blashfield, R., Flanagan, E., & Raley, K. (2010). Themes in the evolution of the 20th-Century DSMs. En T. Millon, R. F. Krueger & E. Simonsen (Eds.), Contemporary directions in psychopathology: Scientific foundations of the DSM-V and ICD-11 (pp. 53-71). New York, NY: Guilford.
Bonifay, W., Lane, S. P., & Reise, S. P. (2017). Three concerns with applying a bifactor model as a structure of psychopathology. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(1), 184-186. doi: 10.1177/2167702616657069
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230-258. doi: 10.1177/0049124192021002005
Caspi, A., Houts, R. M., Belsky, D. W., Goldman-Mellor, S. J., Harrington, H. L., Israel, S., … Moffitt, T. E. (2014). The p Factor: One general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders? Clinical Psychological Science, 2(2), 119-137. doi: 10.1177/2167702613497473
Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2018). All for one and one for all: Mental disorders in one dimension. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 175(9), 831-844. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17121383
Conway, C. C., Forbes, M. K., Forbush, K. T., Fried, E. I., Hallquist, M. N., Kotov, R., … Eaton, N. R. (2019). A hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology can transform mental health research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(3), 419-436. doi: 10.1177/1745691618810696
Coolidge, F. L., & Segal, D. L. (1998). Evolution of personality disorder diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Clinical Psychology Review, 18(5), 585-599. doi: 10.1016/S0272-7358(98)00002-6
Costa, P. T., & Widiger, T. A. (1994). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Recuperado de doi: 10.1037/10140-000
Dominguez-Lara, S. A. (2016). Evaluación de la confiabilidad del constructo mediante el coeficiente H: Breve revisión conceptual y aplicaciones. Psychologia. Avances de la Disciplina, 10(2), 87-94. doi: 10.21500/19002386.2134
Dominguez-Lara, S. A., & Rodriguez, A. (2017). Índices estadísticos de modelos bifactor. Interacciones, 3, 59-65. doi: 10.24016/2017.v3n2.51
Flores-Kanter, P. E., Dominguez-Lara, S., Trógolo, M. A., & Medrano, L. A. (2018). Best practices in the use of bifactor models: Conceptual grounds, fit indices and complementary indicators. Revista Evaluar, 18(3), 44-48. doi: 10.35670/1667-4545.v18.n3.22221
Forbes, M. K., Baillie, A. J., & Schniering, C. A. (2015). Should sexual problems be included in the internalising spectrum? A comparison of dimensional and categorical models. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 42(1), 70-90. doi: 10.1080/0092623X.2014.996928
Frances, A. (2010). Opening Pandora’s box: The 19 worst suggestions for DSM5. Psychiatric Times, 27(9).
Frances, A. (2014). ¿Somos todos enfermos mentales? Manifiesto contra los abusos de la Psiquiatría. Barcelona, España: Ariel.
Gagne, P., & Hancock, G. R. (2006). Measurement model quality, sample size, and solution propriety in confirmatory factor models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41(1), 65-83. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr4101_5
Gutiérrez, F., Aluja, A., Peri, J. M., Calvo, N., Ferrer, M., Baillés, E., ... Krueger, R. F. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Spanish PID-5 in a clinical and a community sample. Assessment, 24(3), 326-336. doi: 10.1177/1073191115606518
Hancock, G. R. (2001). Effect size, power, and sample size determination for structured means modeling and MIMIC approaches to between-groups hypothesis testing of means on a single latent construct. Psychometrika, 66(3), 373-388. doi: 10.1007/BF02294440
Haslam, N., Holland, E., & Kuppens P. (2012). Categories versus dimensions in personality and psychopathology: A quantitative review of taxometric research. Psychological Medicine, 42(5), 903-920. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711001966
Holzinger, K. J., & Swineford, F. (1937). The bi-factor method. Psychometrika, 2(1), 41-54. doi: 10.1007/bf02287965
Hopwood, C. J., Malone, J. C., Ansell, E. B., Sanislow, C. A., Grilo, C. M., McGlashan, T. H., … Morey, L. C. (2011). Personality assessment in DSM-V: Empirical support for rating severity, style, and traits. Journal of Personality Disorders, 25(3), 305-320. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2011.25.3.305
Hoyle, R. H.. (2012). Handbook of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. En L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102-138). New York, NY: Guilford.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., & Walters, E. E. (2005). Prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of 12-month DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617-627. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617
Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., Watson, D., Achenbach, T. M., Althoff, R. R., Bagby, R. M., … Zimmerman, M. (2017). The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(4), 454-477. doi: 10.1037/abn0000258
Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Medicine, 42(9), 1879-1890. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711002674
Krueger, R. F., Kotov, R., Watson, D., Forbes, M. K., Eaton, N. R., Ruggero, C. J., ... Zimmermann, J. (2018). Progress in achieving quantitative classification of psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 282-293. doi: 10.1002/wps.20566
Kupfer, D. J., First, M. B., & Regier, D. A. (Eds.). (2002). A research agenda for DSM-V. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.
Lahey, B. B., Applegate, B., Hakes, J. K., Zald, D. H., Hariri, A. R., & Rathouz, P. J. (2012). Is there a general factor of prevalent psychopathology during adulthood? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121, 971-977. doi: 10.1037/a0028355
Lahey, B. B., Krueger, R. F., Rathouz, P. J., Waldman, I. D., & Zald, D. H. (2017). A hierarchical causal taxonomy of psychopathology across the life span. Psychological Bulletin, 143(2), 142-186. doi: 10.1037/bul0000069
Li, C. H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 936-949. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
Livesley, J. (2012). Tradition versus empiricism in the current DSM-5 proposal for revising the classification of personality disorders. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 22(2), 81-90. doi: 10.1002/cbm.1826
Lorenzo-Seva, U., & Ferrando, P. J. (2013). FACTOR 9.2: A comprehensive program for fitting exploratory and semiconfirmatory factor analysis and IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(6), 497-498. doi: 10.1177/0146621613487794
Mayes, R., & Horwitz, A. V. (2005). DSM-III and the revolution in the classification of mental illness. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 41(3), 249-267. doi: 10.1002/jhbs.20103
Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519-530. doi: 10.2307/2334770
Millon, T. (1983). The DSM-III: An insider’s perspective. American Psychologist, 38(7), 804-814. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.38.7.804
Mîndrilă, D. (2010). Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) estimation procedures: A comparison of estimation bias with ordinal and multivariate non-normal data. International Journal of Digital Society, 1(1), 60-66. doi: 10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2010.0010
Muthukrishna, M., & Henrich, J. (2019). A problem in theory. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(3), 221-229. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0522-1
Paris, J. (2012). The risk that DSM-5 will give personality dimensions a bad name. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 8(4), 268-270. doi: 10.2174/157340012803520441
Patrick, C. J., Hicks, B. M., Nichol, P. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2007). A bifactor approach to modeling the structure of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised. Journal of Personality Disorders, 21(2), 118-141. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2007.21.2.118
Quinn, H. O. (2014). Bifactor models, Explained Common Variance (ECV), and the usefulness of scores from unidimensional item response theory analyses. (Tesis de Maestría Inédita). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Reise, S. P. (2012). The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(5), 667-696. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2012.715555
Reise, S. P., Kim, D. S., Mansolf, M., & Widaman, K. F. (2016). Is the bifactor model a better model or is it just better at modeling implausible responses? Application of iteratively reweighted least squares to the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51(6), 818-838. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2016.1243461
Ringwald, W. R., Beeney, J. E., Pilkonis, P. A., & Wright, A. G. (2019). Comparing hierarchical models of personality pathology. Journal of Research in Personality, 81, 98-107. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2019.05.011
Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137-150. doi: 10.1037/met0000045
Sanchez, R. O. (en prensa). Modelos dimensionales para los trastornos de la personalidad: Un proceso inconcluso. Revista Argentina de Clínica Psicológica. doi: 10.24205/03276716.2019.1126
Sanchez, R. O., & Ledesma, R. (2007). Los Cinco Grandes Factores: Cómo entender la personalidad y cómo evaluarla. En A. Monjeau (Ed.), Conocimiento para la transformación (pp. 131-160). Mar del Plata, Argentina: Universidad Atlántida Argentina.
Sánchez, R. O. & Montes, S. A. (2019). La taxonomía jerárquica y el factor general de psicopatología. Acta Psiquiátrica y Psicológica de América Latina, 65(2), 116-129.
Sanchez, R. O., Montes, S. A., & Somerstein, L. D. (en prensa). Inventario de Personalidad para el DSM-5: Propiedades psicométricas en población argentina. Estudio preliminar. Interdisciplinaria.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1990). Model conditions for asymptotic robustness in the analysis of linear relations. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 10(3), 235-249. doi: 10.1016/0167-9473(90)90004-2
Sharp, C., Wright, A. G. C., Fowler, J. C., Frueh, B. C., Allen, J. G., Oldham, J., & Clark, L. A. (2015). The structure of personality pathology: Both general (‘g’) and specific (‘s’) factors? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124(2), 387-398. doi: 10.1037/abn0000033
Shedler, J., Beck, A., Fonagy, P., Gabbard, G. O., Gunderson, J., Kernberg, O., ... Westen, D. (2010). Personality disorders in DSM-5. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 167(9), 1026-1028. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10050746
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74(1), 107-120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0
Snyder, H. R., Young, J. F., & Hankin, B. L. (2017). Strong homotypic continuity in common psychopathology-, internalizing-, and externalizing-specific factors over time in adolescents. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(1), 98-110. doi: 10.1177/2167702616651076
Smits, I. A. M., Timmerman, M. E., Barelds, D. P. H., & Meijer, R. R. (2015). The Dutch symptom checklist-90-revised: Is the use of the subscales justified? European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 31(4), 263-271. doi: 10.1027/1015-5759/a000233
Stucky, B. D., Thissen, D., & Edelen, M. O. (2013). Using logistic approximations of marginal trace lines to develop short assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(1), 41-57. doi: 10.1177/0146621612462759
Ten-Berge, J. M., & Sočan, G. (2004). The greatest lower bound to the reliability of a test and the hypothesis of unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 69(4), 613-625. doi: 10.1007/BF02289858
Tyrer, P. (2005). The problem of severity in the classification of personality disorder. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19(3), 309-314. doi: 10.1521/pedi.2005.19.3.309
Urbán, R., Arrindell, W. A., Demetrovics, Z., Unoka, Z., & Timman, R. (2016). Cross-cultural confirmation of bi-factor models of a symptom distress measure: Symptom Checklist-90-Revised in clinical samples. Psychiatry Research, 239, 265-274. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2016.03.039
Van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486-492. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2012.686740
Verheul, R. (2012). Personality disorder proposal for DSM-5: A heroic and innovative but nevertheless fundamentally flawed attempt to improve DSM-IV. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 19(5), 369-371. doi: 10.1002/cpp.1809
Waszczuk, M. A., Kotov, R., Ruggero, C., Gamez, W., & Watson, D. (2017). Hierarchical structure of emotional disorders: From individual symptoms to the spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(5), 613-634. doi: 10.1037/abn0000264
Watters, C. A., & Bagby, R. M. (2018). A meta-analysis of the five-factor internal structure of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Psychological Assessment, 30(9), 1255-1260. doi: 10.1037/pas0000605
Widiger, T. (2011). A shaky future for personality disorders. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 2(1), 54-67. doi: 10.1037/a0021855
Widiger, T. (2013). A postmortem and future look at the personality disorders in DSM-5. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 4(4), 382-387. doi: 10.1037/per0000030
Zinbarg, R. E., Yovel, I., Revelle, W., & McDonald, R. P. (2006). Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale´s indicators: A comparison of estimators for ωh. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30(2), 121-144. doi: 10.1177/0146621605278814
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Revista Evaluar aplica la Licencia Internacional de Atribuciones Comunes Creativas (Creative Commons Attribution License, CCAL). Bajo esta licencia, los autores retienen la propiedad de copyright de los artículos pero permiten que, sin que medie permiso de autor o editor, cualquier persona descargue y distribuya los artículos publicados en Evaluar. La única condición es que siempre y en todos los casos se cite a los autores y a la fuente original de publicación (i.e. Evaluar). El envío de artículos a Evaluar y la lectura de los mismos es totalmente gratuito.
