The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) posits that psychopathology is a hierarchy of correlated dimensions. Numerous studies have examined the validity of these dimensions using bifactor models, in which each disorder loads onto both a general and specific factor (e.g., internalizing, externalizing). Although bifactor models tend to fit better than alternative models, concerns have been raised about bifactor model selection, factor reliability, and interpretability. Therefore, we compared the reliability and validity of several higher-order HiTOP dimensions between bifactor and correlated factor models using familial aggregation and associations with Research Domain Criteria (RDoC; sub)constructs as validators. Lifetime psychopathology was assessed in a community sample (N = 504) using dimensional disorder severity scales calculated from semistructured interview data. A series of unidimensional, correlated factor, and bifactor models were fit to model several HiTOP dimensions. A bifactor model with two specific factors (internalizing and disinhibited externalizing) and a correlated two-factor model provided the best fit to the data. HiTOP dimensions had adequate reliability in the correlated factor model, but suboptimal reliability in the bifactor model. The disinhibited externalizing dimension was highly correlated across the two models and was familial, yet largely unrelated to RDoC (sub)constructs in both models. The internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model and the general factor in the bifactor model were highly correlated and had similar validity patterns, suggesting the general factor was largely redundant with the internalizing dimension in the correlated factor model. These findings support concerns about the interpretability of psychopathology dimensions in bifactor models. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

跨模型评估层次精神病理学维度的标准有效性：家族聚集和与研究领域标准（子）结构的关联。

精神病理学层次分类法 (HiTOP) 假定精神病理学是相关维度的层次结构。许多研究使用双因素模型检验了这些维度的有效性，其中每种疾病都加载到一般和特定因素上（例如，内化，外化）。尽管双因子模型往往比替代模型更适合，但人们对双因子模型的选择、因子可靠性和可解释性提出了担忧。因此，我们使用家族聚合和与研究领域标准 (RDoC; 子) 构造的关联作为验证器，比较了双因子模型和相关因子模型之间几个高阶 HiTOP 维度的可靠性和有效性。使用从半结构化访谈数据计算的维度障碍严重程度量表在社区样本 (N = 504) 中评估终生精神病理学。一系列单维、相关因子和双因子模型适合对几个 HiTOP 维度进行建模。具有两个特定因素（内化和去抑制外化）的双因素模型和相关的双因素模型提供了对数据的最佳拟合。HiTOP 维度在相关因子模型中具有足够的可靠性，但在双因子模型中的可靠性次优。去抑制的外化维度在两个模型中高度相关，并且是家族性的，但在两个模型中都与 RDoC（子）结构基本无关。相关因子模型中的内化维度与双因子模型中的一般因子高度相关并且具有相似的效度模式，表明一般因子与相关因子模型中的内化维度在很大程度上是冗余的。这些发现支持了对双因子模型中精神病理学维度可解释性的担忧。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA，保留所有权利）。