What I see, what you say: How cross-method variation sharpens characterization of irritability in early childhood.

OBJECTIVES: Identification of clinically significant irritability in preschool age is important to implement effective interventions. However, varying informant and measurement methods display distinct patterns. These patterns are associated with concurrent and future mental health concerns. Patterns across multi-informant methods in early-childhood irritability may have clinical utility, identifying risk for impaired psychosocial functioning. METHODS: Using data from the Multidimensional Assessment of Preschoolers Study (N = 425), latent profile analysis identified irritability patterns through the parent-reported Multidimensional Assessment Profile Scales-Temper Loss (MAPS-TL), parent-reported interviewer-rated Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA), and observer-rated Disruptive Behavior Diagnostic Observation Schedule (DB-DOS). These profiles were characterized on protective factors, global functioning, and mental health syndromes, concurrently and at early school age and preadolescent follow-up. RESULTS: Fit indices favored a five-class model: Low All, High Observation with Examiner (high DB-DOS Examiner Context), High All, High Parent Report (high MAPS-TL/PAPA), and Very High Parent Report (very high MAPS-TL/PAPA). Whereas Low All and High Observation with Examiner exhibited strong psychosocial functioning, remaining profiles showed impaired psychosocial functioning, with the Very High Parent Report group showing higher impairment at follow-ups, ds = 0.37-1.25. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-informant measurements of irritability may have utility for clinical prediction, and future studies should test utility for diagnostic precision.

Negative Mood Dysregulation Loads Strongly Onto Common Factors With Many Forms of Psychopathology: Considerations for Assessing Nonspecific Symptoms.

There have been proposals to expand definitions for categorical disorders and dimensionally conceptualized syndromes (e.g., psychopathy) to include negative mood lability and dysregulation (NMD). Factor analytic results are often presented in support of these proposals, and we provide factor analytic demonstrations across clinically oriented samples showing that NMD indicators load strongly onto factors with a range of psychopathology. This is unsurprising from a transdiagnostic perspective but shows that factor analysis could potentially be used to justify expanding definitions for specific constructs even though NMD indicators show strong, nonspecific loadings on psychopathology factors ranging widely in nature. Expanding construct definitions and assessment approaches to emphasize NMD also may negatively impact discriminant validity. We agree that targeting NMD is essential for comprehensive assessment, but our demonstrative analyses highlight a need for using factor analysis and other statistical methods in a careful, theoretically driven manner when evaluating psychopathology structure and developing measures.