Many models of psychopathology include a single general factor of psychopathology (GFP) or “p factor” to account for covariation across symptoms. The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study provides a rich opportunity to study the development of the GFP. However, a variety of approaches for modeling the GFP have emerged, raising questions about how modeling choices affect estimated GFP scores. We used the ABCD baseline assessment (ages 9–10 years old; N = 11,875) of the parent-rated Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) to examine the implications of modeling the GFP using items versus scales, using a priori CBCL scales versus data-driven dimensions, and using bifactor, higher order, or single-factor models. Children’s rank-ordering on the GFP was stable across models, and GFP scores were similarly related to criterion variables. Results suggest that although theoretical debates about modeling the GFP continue, the practical implications of these choices for rank-ordering children and assessing external associations will often be modest.

许多精神病理学模型包括一个单一的精神病理学一般因素 (GFP) 或“ p因子”，以解释症状之间的协变。青少年大脑认知发展 (ABCD) 研究为研究 GFP 的发展提供了丰富的机会。然而，出现了多种建模 GFP 的方法，引发了关于建模选择如何影响估计的 GFP 分数的问题。我们使用了 ABCD 基线评估（年龄 9-10 岁；N= 11,875) 的父母评定的儿童行为清单 (CBCL) 以检查使用项目与量表、使用先验 CBCL 量表与数据驱动的维度以及使用双因子、高阶或单因子​​模型对 GFP 建模的影响. 儿童在 GFP 上的排序在不同模型中是稳定的，并且 GFP 分数与标准变量类似。结果表明，尽管关于 GFP 建模的理论争论仍在继续，但这些选择对排序儿童和评估外部关联的实际影响通常是适度的。