Interpretational issues with the bifactor model: A commentary on 'Defining the p-Factor: An Empirical Test of Five Leading Theories' by Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro

Conor V. Dolan*, Denny Borsboom

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro (2022, Psychological Medicine) conducted an ambitious investigation aimed at determining the nature of the general p factor of psychopathology by considering the correlation between the p factor and five candidate constructs. Generally, in this area of research, the bifactor model is preferred to the second order common factor model. In this commentary, we identify several interpretational issues concerning the bifactor model, which are based on a realistic psychometric view of latent variables. These issues may hamper the study of the nature of p factor model using the bifactor model.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2744-2747
Number of pages4
JournalPsychological Medicine
Volume53
Issue number7
Early online date11 Apr 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press.

Keywords

  • Bifactor model
  • interpretation
  • p factor
  • second order factor model

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Interpretational issues with the bifactor model: A commentary on 'Defining the p-Factor: An Empirical Test of Five Leading Theories' by Southward, Cheavens, and Coccaro'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this