P-Factor(s) for Youth Psychopathology Across Informants and Models in 24 Societies.

OBJECTIVE: Although the significance of the general factor of psychopathology (p) is being increasingly recognized, it remains unclear how to best operationalize and measure p. To test variations in the operationalizations of p and make practical recommendations for its assessment, we compared p-factor scores derived from four models. METHODS: We compared p scores derived from principal axis (Model 1), hierarchical factor (Model 2), and bifactor (Model 3) analyses, plus a Total Problem score (sum of unit-weighted ratings of all problem items; Model 4) for parent- and self-rated youth psychopathology from 24 societies. Separately for each sample, we fitted the models to parent-ratings on the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 6-18 (CBCL/6-18) and self-ratings on the Youth Self-Report (YSR) for 25,643 11-18-year-olds. Separately for each sample, we computed correlations between p-scores obtained for each pair of models, cross-informant correlations between p-scores for each model, and Q-correlations between mean item x p-score correlations for each pair of models. RESULTS: Results were similar for all models, as indicated by correlations of .973-.994 between p-scores for Models 1-4, plus similar cross-informant correlations between CBCL/6-18 and YSR Model 1-4 p-scores. Item x p correlations had similar rank orders between Models 1-4, as indicated by Q correlations of .957-.993. CONCLUSIONS: The similar results obtained for Models 1-4 argue for using the simplest model - the unit-weighted Total Problem score - to measure p for clinical and research assessment of youth psychopathology. Practical methods for measuring p may advance the field toward transdiagnostic patterns of problems.

Cultural contributions to adults' self-rated mental health problems and strengths: 7 culture clusters, 28 societies, 16 906 adults.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown how much variation in adult mental health problems is associated with differences between societal/cultural groups, over and above differences between individuals. METHODS: To test these relative contributions, a consortium of indigenous researchers collected Adult Self-Report (ASR) ratings from 16 906 18- to 59-year-olds in 28 societies that represented seven culture clusters identified in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness study (e.g. Confucian, Anglo). The ASR is scored on 17 problem scales, plus a personal strengths scale. Hierarchical linear modeling estimated variance accounted for by individual differences (including measurement error), society, and culture cluster. Multi-level analyses of covariance tested age and gender effects. RESULTS: Across the 17 problem scales, the variance accounted for by individual differences ranged from 80.3% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems to 95.2% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality (mean = 90.7%); by society: 3.2% for DSM-oriented somatic problems to 8.0% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 6.3%); and by culture cluster: 0.0% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality to 11.6% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 3.0%). For strengths, individual differences accounted for 80.8% of variance, societal differences 10.5%, and cultural differences 8.7%. Age and gender had very small effects. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, adults' self-ratings of mental health problems and strengths were associated much more with individual differences than societal/cultural differences, although this varied across scales. These findings support cross-cultural use of standardized measures to assess mental health problems, but urge caution in assessment of personal strengths.

A reliable instrument for making use of an overly neglected source of information on personality: The French adaptation of the Big Five Inventory-2 (Bfi-2) informant-report form.

OBJECTIVES: The assessment of personality traits is most often based on self-report. However, a growing body of research has shown that informant-report is a valuable and too often overlooked source of unique information. The aim of this study was to validate the French version of the informant-report form of the Big Five Inventory-2 (BFI-2) which assesses 15 facet traits in addition to the five major trait domains. METHODS: We asked 699 psychology and sports science and technology students to describe a person they knew well using the BFI-2 and obtained 661 valid records with demographic information. The data were analyzed using a bi-factor exploratory structural equation model with five bifactors corresponding to the Big Five domains, and three group factors (facets) each. RESULTS: This model had an excellent overall fit. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the five domains were very satisfactory and the McDonald's omega coefficients were even better. The scales that measured the five major factors were therefore highly reliable, although Extraversion was somewhat less so. The scales measuring facets all had high reliability as measures of the whole formed by the major factor and the group factor. In addition, ten of them were reliable measures of their specific factor, and the remaining five appeared to be pure measures of the five domains. CONCLUSIONS: The informant-report form of the BFI-2 is a reliable instrument which is easy and quick to administer. These qualities should enable clinicians and researchers to exploit the much-neglected source of original information provided by informant-reports.

Effects of individual differences, society, and culture on youth-rated problems and strengths in 38 societies.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians increasingly serve youths from societal/cultural backgrounds different from their own. This raises questions about how to interpret what such youths report. Rescorla et al. (2019, European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 1107) found that much more variance in 72,493 parents' ratings of their offspring's mental health problems was accounted for by individual differences than by societal or cultural differences. Although parents' reports are essential for clinical assessment of their offspring, they reflect parents' perceptions of the offspring. Consequently, clinical assessment also requires self-reports from the offspring themselves. To test effects of individual differences, society, and culture on youths' self-ratings of their problems and strengths, we analyzed Youth Self-Report (YSR) scores for 39,849 11-17 year olds in 38 societies. METHODS: Indigenous researchers obtained YSR self-ratings from population samples of youths in 38 societies representing 10 culture cluster identified in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness study. Hierarchical linear modeling of scores on 17 problem scales and one strengths scale estimated the percent of variance accounted for by individual differences (including measurement error), society, and culture cluster. ANOVAs tested age and gender effects. RESULTS: Averaged across the 17 problem scales, individual differences accounted for 92.5% of variance, societal differences 6.0%, and cultural differences 1.5%. For strengths, individual differences accounted for 83.4% of variance, societal differences 10.1%, and cultural differences 6.5%. Age and gender had very small effects. CONCLUSIONS: Like parents' ratings, youths' self-ratings of problems were affected much more by individual differences than societal/cultural differences. Most variance in self-rated strengths also reflected individual differences, but societal/cultural effects were larger than for problems, suggesting greater influence of social desirability. The clinical significance of individual differences in youths' self-reports should thus not be minimized by societal/cultural differences, which-while important-can be taken into account with appropriate norms, as can gender and age differences.

The structure of the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised: Global distress, Somatization, Hostility, and Phobic Anxiety scales are reliable and robust across community and clinical samples from four European countries.

While the reliability of SCL-90-R subscales is often questioned, five relatively recent European studies have examined the factor structure of SCL-90-R using a bifactor model and concluded that most of these subscales are reliable. However, examination of their results shows that three subscales, Somatization, Hostility, and Phobic Anxiety, consistently had significantly higher reliability than the other six across clinical and community samples recruited in three very different European countries, Greece, Hungary, and the Netherlands. The objective of this study was to examine whether this "top-3″ would be found in a sample from a fourth European country, France. To do this, we had 696 university students (387 women, 56 %) complete the SCL-90-R and we examined the reliability of the scales of this questionnaire by testing a bifactor model using Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM). Our results confirmed that, in our sample, the three scales presented a higher reliability than the other six scales. It therefore seems that there exists, at least in the European cultural area, a stable structure of the SCL-90-R comprising a global distress factor and three reliable and robust specific factors: Somatization, Hostility, and Phobic Anxiety.

Cross-informant agreement between parent-reported and adolescent self-reported problems in 25 societies.

We used population sample data from 25 societies to answer the following questions: (a) How consistently across societies do adolescents report more problems than their parents report about them? (b) Do levels of parent-adolescent agreement vary among societies for different kinds of problems? (c) How well do parents and adolescents in different societies agree on problem item ratings? (d) How much do parent-adolescent dyads within each society vary in agreement on item ratings? (e) How well do parent-adolescent dyads within each society agree on the adolescent's deviance status? We used five methods to test cross-informant agreement for ratings obtained from 27,861 adolescents ages 11 to 18 and their parents. Youth Self-Report (YSR) mean scores were significantly higher than Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) mean scores for all problem scales in almost all societies, but the magnitude of the YSR-CBCL discrepancy varied across societies. Cross-informant correlations for problem scale scores varied more across societies than across types of problems. Across societies, parents and adolescents tended to rate the same items as low, medium, or high, but within-dyad parent-adolescent item agreement varied widely in every society. In all societies, both parental noncorroboration of self-reported deviance and adolescent noncorroboration of parent-reported deviance were common. Results indicated many multicultural consistencies but also some important differences in parent-adolescent cross-informant agreement. Our findings provide valuable normative baselines against which to compare multicultural findings for clinical samples.

Agreement between parent- and self-reports of Algerian adolescents' behavioral and emotional problems.

The present study examined agreement between scores obtained from self-reports of behavioral and emotional problems obtained from 513 Algerian adolescents on the Youth Self-Report (YSR) with scores obtained from reports provided by their parents on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). The correlations between self- and parent-report were larger than those observed in many other cultures (e.g., intraclass correlation coefficient=0.60 and Pearson r=0.65 for Total Problems). On the whole, cross-informant agreement did not vary significantly as a function of problem type, identity of the parental informant, gender and age of the adolescent. Similar to all studied cultures, adolescents on average reported more problems than their parents reported about them, but the discrepancies were smaller than in all previous societies. Mean YSR/CBCL score discrepancies indicated higher YSR scores for several scales, but variability across dyads was large, and many dyads showed the opposite pattern.

Syndromes of collateral-reported psychopathology for ages 18-59 in 18 Societies.

The purpose was to advance research and clinical methodology for assessing psychopathology by testing the international generalizability of an 8-syndrome model derived from collateral ratings of adult behavioral, emotional, social, and thought problems. Collateral informants rated 8,582 18-59-year-old residents of 18 societies on the Adult Behavior Checklist (ABCL). Confirmatory factor analyses tested the fit of the 8-syndrome model to ratings from each society. The primary model fit index (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) showed good model fit for all societies, while secondary indices (Tucker Lewis Index, Comparative Fit Index) showed acceptable to good fit for 17 societies. Factor loadings were robust across societies and items. Of the 5,007 estimated parameters, 4 (0.08%) were outside the admissible parameter space, but 95% confidence intervals included the admissible space, indicating that the 4 deviant parameters could be due to sampling fluctuations. The findings are consistent with previous evidence for the generalizability of the 8-syndrome model in self-ratings from 29 societies, and support the 8-syndrome model for operationalizing phenotypes of adult psychopathology from multi-informant ratings in diverse societies.

Syndromes of Self-Reported Psychopathology for Ages 18-59 in 29 Societies.

This study tested the multi-society generalizability of an eight-syndrome assessment model derived from factor analyses of American adults' self-ratings of 120 behavioral, emotional, and social problems. The Adult Self-Report (ASR; Achenbach and Rescorla 2003) was completed by 17,152 18-59-year-olds in 29 societies. Confirmatory factor analyses tested the fit of self-ratings in each sample to the eight-syndrome model. The primary model fit index (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) showed good model fit for all samples, while secondary indices showed acceptable to good fit. Only 5 (0.06%) of the 8,598 estimated parameters were outside the admissible parameter space. Confidence intervals indicated that sampling fluctuations could account for the deviant parameters. Results thus supported the tested model in societies differing widely in social, political, and economic systems, languages, ethnicities, religions, and geographical regions. Although other items, societies, and analytic methods might yield different results, the findings indicate that adults in very diverse societies were willing and able to rate themselves on the same standardized set of 120 problem items. Moreover, their self-ratings fit an eight-syndrome model previously derived from self-ratings by American adults. The support for the statistically derived syndrome model is consistent with previous findings for parent, teacher, and self-ratings of 1½-18-year-olds in many societies. The ASR and its parallel collateral-report instrument, the Adult Behavior Checklist (ABCL), may offer mental health professionals practical tools for the multi-informant assessment of clinical constructs of adult psychopathology that appear to be meaningful across diverse societies.

Behavioral and emotional problems of Algerian children and adolescents as reported by parents.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of behavioral and emotional problems among a sample of Algerian children and adolescents aged 6-18 years living in Algiers. METHOD: A school-based sample of 1,405 children and adolescents was recruited; problems were assessed with the Child Behavior Checklist filled out by parents or surrogates. RESULTS: The scores varied with age, gender, and socioeconomic status (SES). Contrary to findings in other samples, most Problem scores increased with age. As found in many other cultures, girls scored higher than boys on the Internalizing scales, but lower on Externalizing scales. Youths from lower socioeconomic families tended to score higher on some Problem scales. But, above all, Algerian children and adolescents had raw scores on all Problem scales much higher than those yielded by most previous cross-cultural studies. CONCLUSIONS: The high level of problems may be attributable to traumatic environmental factors (terrorism and natural catastrophes), but the lack of data from countries that have similar geographic and cultural environments makes it hard to exclude explanations based on cultural factors.