Evaluating the Criterion Validity of Hierarchical Psychopathology Dimensions Across Models: Familial Aggregation and Associations with Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) (Sub)constructs

Abstract

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 semi-structured 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.

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Is Not an Improvement Over the DSM

“…In contrast, HiTOP does not have many of the features found in a useful taxonomy, and the simple-structure statistical approach does not lend itself to falsification (e.g., positive manifold guarantees a general factor; factor solutions do not require the existence of latent variables; there are infinite well-fitting models; it cannot correct for equifinality and multifinality because it misses these cases). In sum, HiTOP is “not reflective of the ‘true’ complexity of psychopathological processes” (Wittchen et al, 2009, p. 201; Wittchen & Beesdo-Baum, 2018) and may contribute to incomplete and inaccurate understandings of the nature of mental illness (e.g., Achenbach, 2020; Eronen, 2021; Fisher et al, 2018; Funkhouser et al, 2021; Haywood et al, 2021; Kerridge et al, 2013; Witte et al, 2017).…”

Associations Between Repetitive Negative Thinking and Habituation of Defensive Responding Within and Between Sessions

“…Individuals with internalizing psychopathology also consistently exhibit altered responding to negative or aversive information (Funkhouser et al, 2021;Michelini et al, 2021).…”