General Psychopathology and Dysregulation Profile in a Longitudinal Community Sample: Stability, Antecedents and Outcomes
- 235 Downloads
The general factor of psychopathology (GP, or p factor) and the Dysregulation Profile (DP) are two conceptually similar, but independently developed approaches to understand psychopathology. GP and DP models and their stability, antecedents and outcomes are studied in a longitudinal sample of 1073 children (49.8% female). GP and DP models were estimated at ages 8 and 14 years using the parent-reported Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Youth Self Report (YSR). Early childhood antecedents and adolescent outcomes were derived using a multi-method multi-informant approach. Results showed that the general GP and DP had similar key symptoms and were similarly related to early-childhood antecedents (e.g., lower effortful control, higher maternal depression) and adolescent outcomes (e.g., reduced academic functioning, poorer mental health). This study demonstrates that GP and DP are highly similar constructs in middle childhood and adolescence, both describing a general vulnerability for psychopathology with (emotional) dysregulation at its core. Scientific integration of these approaches could lead to a better understanding of the structure, antecedents and outcomes of psychopathology.
Keywordsp factor Dysregulation Comorbidity Bifactor model Child Behavior Checklist
Sanne Geeraerts is affiliated with the Consortium on Individual Development (CID), which is funded through the Gravitation program of the Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO Grant Number 024.001.003).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 9.Laceulle OM, Vollebergh WAM, Ormel J (2015) The structure of psychopathology in adolescence. Clin Psychol Sci 3(6):850–860Google Scholar
- 22.Bonifay W, Lane SP, Reise SP (2017) Three concerns with applying a bifactor model as a structure of psychopathology. Clin Psychol Sci 5(1):184–186Google Scholar
- 29.Achenbach TM, Rescorla LA (2001) Manual for the ASEBA school-age forms & profiles. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
- 30.Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2012) Mplus Version 7 user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
- 31.Lt Hu, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55Google Scholar
- 32.Cheung GW, Rensvold RB (2002) Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equ Model 9(2):233–255Google Scholar
- 34.Caspi A, Moffitt TE (2018) All for one and one for all: mental disorders in one dimension. Am J Psychiatry 17(5):831–844Google Scholar
- 41.DeLisi M, Vaughn MG (2014) Foundation for a temperament-based theory of antisocial behavior and criminal justice system involvement. J Crim Justice 42:10–25Google Scholar
- 48.Johnston DW, Propper C, Pudney SE, Shields MA (2014) The income gradient in childhood mental health: all in the eye of the beholder? J R Stat Soc 177(4):807–827Google Scholar
- 51.Hyde LW, Shaw DS, Harri AR (2013) Understanding youth antisocial behavior using neuroscience through a developmental psychopathology lens: review, integration and directions for research. Biol Psychiatry 58:562568Google Scholar
- 54.Reise SP (2012) The rediscovery of bifactor measurement models. Multivar Behav Res 47(5):667–696Google Scholar