Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31556632›Full record

ArticleJournal of abnormal psychology2019

The latent structure of interpersonal problems: Validity of dimensional, categorical, and hybrid models.

Leon P Wendt, Aidan G C Wright, Paul A Pilkonis, Tobias Nolte, Peter Fonagy, P Read Montague, Cord Benecke, Tobias Krieger, Johannes Zimmermann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of abnormal psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Leon P WendtPsychologische Hochschule Berlin.ORCID 0000-0003-2229-2860
Aidan G C WrightDepartment of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh.
Paul A PilkonisDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.
Tobias NolteAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families.
Peter FonagyAnna Freud National Centre for Children and Families.ORCID 0000-0003-0229-0091
P Read MontagueResearch Department of Clinical, Educational, and Health Psychology, University College London.
Cord BeneckeDepartment of Psychology, University of Kassel.
Tobias KriegerDepartment of Psychology, University of Bern.
Johannes ZimmermannPsychologische Hochschule Berlin.

Funding

National Institute for Health ResearchNIH HHSWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interpersonal problems are key transdiagnostic constructs in psychopathology. In the past, investigators have neglected the importance of operationalizing interpersonal problems according to their latent structure by using divergent representations of the construct: (a) computing scores for severity, agency, and communion ("dimensional approach"), (b) classifying persons into subgroups with respect to their interpersonal profile ("categorical approach"). This hinders cumulative research on interpersonal problems, because findings cannot be integrated both from a conceptual and a statistical point of view. We provide a comprehensive evaluation of interpersonal problems by enlisting several large samples (Ns = 5,400, 491, 656, and 712) to estimate a set of latent variable candidate models, covering the spectrum of purely dimensional (i.e., confirmatory factor analysis using Gaussian and nonnormal latent t-distributions), hybrid (i.e., semiparametric factor analysis), and purely categorical approaches (latent class analysis). Statistical models were compared with regard to their structural validity, as evaluated by model fit (corrected Akaike's information criterion and the Bayesian information criterion), and their concurrent validity, as defined by the models' ability to predict relevant external variables. Across samples, the fully dimensional model performed best in terms of model fit, prediction, robustness, and parsimony. We found scant evidence that categorical and hybrid models provide incremental value for understanding interpersonal problems. Our results indicate that the latent structure of interpersonal problems is best represented by continuous dimensions, especially when one allows for nonnormal latent distributions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Conflict, PsychologicalInterpersonal RelationsAdolescentAdultBayes TheoremFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleModels, StatisticalReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID31556632
PMCPMC6816327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.