Clinical diagnosis by the objective-analytic personality batteries

Cattell, Raymond B.; Schmidt, Lother R.; Bjerstedt, Åke

doi:10.1002/1097-4679(197207)28:3+<239::aid-jclp2270280302>3.0.co;2-y

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Psychologists have long studied the complex associations between mental disorders and traits of temperament and personality (Carey & DiLalla, 1994; Cattell, Bjersted, & Schmidt, 1972; Clark, Watson, & Mineka, 1994; S. B. G. Eysenck, White, & Eysenck, 1976). In this section, we use some of what is known about such traits to further our understanding of the heterogeneous causal structure of psychopathology.…”

Section: Dispositional Constructs and The Causal Structure Of Psychopmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hierarchical causal taxonomy of psychopathology across the life span.

Lahey¹,

Krueger²,

Rathouz³

et al. 2017

Psychological Bulletin

373

397

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a taxonomy of psychopathology based on patterns of shared causal influences identified in a review of multivariate behavior genetic studies that distinguish genetic and environmental influences that are either common to multiple dimensions of psychopathology or unique to each dimension. At the phenotypic level, first-order dimensions are defined by correlations among symptoms; correlations among first-order dimensions similarly define higher-order domains (e.g., internalizing or externalizing psychopathology). We hypothesize that the robust phenotypic correlations among first-order dimensions reflect a hierarchy of increasingly specific etiologic influences. Some nonspecific etiologic factors increase risk for all first-order dimensions of psychopathology to varying degrees through a general factor of psychopathology. Other nonspecific etiologic factors increase risk only for all first-order dimensions within a more specific higher-order domain. Furthermore, each first-order dimension has its own unique causal influences. Genetic and environmental influences common to family members tend to be nonspecific, whereas environmental influences unique to each individual are more dimension-specific. We posit that these causal influences on psychopathology are moderated by sex and developmental processes. This causal taxonomy also provides a novel framework for understanding the heterogeneity of each first-order dimension: Different persons exhibiting similar symptoms may be influenced by different combinations of etiologic influences from each of the three levels of the etiologic hierarchy. Furthermore, we relate the proposed causal taxonomy to transdimensional psychobiological processes, which also impact the heterogeneity of each psychopathology dimension. This causal taxonomy implies the need for changes in strategies for studying the etiology, psychobiology, prevention, and treatment of psychopathology.

show abstract

Section: Dispositional Constructs and The Causal Structure Of Psychopmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hierarchical causal taxonomy of psychopathology across the life span.

Lahey¹,

Krueger²,

Rathouz³

et al. 2017

Psychological Bulletin

373

397

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…30. Indeed, because Cattell et al (1972) found the psychotic depressives (especially involutional) in general low on U.I. 30, while they agreed with us that neurotic depressives are above normal on U.I.…”

Section: Discussioxmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…From the broad exploratory sweep by Cattell et al (1972), the present study selected four factors whose multiple regression weights best separated patients specifically with a depressive syndrome. We used essentially the standard O-A Battery (Cattell & Schuerger, 1978) though with a few additional marker subtests designed to give a more in-depth check on the theories that cover the nature of these factors.…”

Section: Choice Of Source Trait Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of clinical depression on four source trait dimensions — U. I. 19, U. I. 20, U. I. 25, and U. I. 30-from the O. A. Kit

1981

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Describe four personality factors with preliminary indications of distinguishing depressed patients from normals, namely those indexed in the O‐A Kit as U. I. 19, U. I. 20, U. I. 25 and U. I. 30. Thirty‐one clinically depressed Ss‐22 inpatients and 9 outpatients‐were administered the O‐A (Objective‐Analytic) battery for these four and the scores compared with those of 30 demographically matched controls. From earlier research and the general psychological theory that concerned these source traits it was hypothesized that depressed Ss would deviate negatively on U. I. 19 and U. I. 25 and positively on U. I. 20 and U. I. 30. A comparison of means that used a one‐tailed t‐test showed significant differences on two of the factors, U. I. 19 and U. I. 20, at p < 0.01 level of significance, and on U. I. 25 and U. I. 30 at p < 0.05 significance level. Thus, the clinical sample showed the hypothesized directions of divergence from the control sample on all four of the factors. Later use of a discriminant function on this pattern of deviations shows a high degree of patient‐control separation (Price, Cattell, & Patrick, Note 1).

show abstract

“…An objective set of tests supposedly related to neuroticism, the Objective-Analytic (0-A) Personality Test Battery, was developed by Cattell, et al (1955), utilizing factor analytic procedures. Objective, in this case, refers to a miniature situation in which acts and responses are both observed and measured, but the subject is unaware of the meaning of the performance evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…23, measured by tests in this battery is regarded by Cattell as similar to although not identical with neuroticism (Cattell, 1957). Neurotics have been found to be significantly lower than normals on this factor in clinical studies Cattell, 1961 The primary aim of this research was to provide information on the construct validity of these various putative measures of neuroticism. A second objective was to investigate the intercorrelations among these measures in a sample comprising neurotic inpatients, neurotic outpatients, and non-neurotic hospital patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%