Assessing structural models of neighborhood and family sociodemographic characteristics and their relations with externalizing psychopathology.

Externalizing psychopathology has been found to have small to moderate associations with neighborhood and family sociodemographic characteristics. However, prior studies may have used suboptimal operationalizations of neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics and externalizing psychopathology, potentially misestimating relations between these constructs. To address these limitations, in the current study we test different measurement models of these constructs and assess the structural relations between them. Using a population-representative sample of 2,195 twins and siblings from the Georgia Twin Study and data from the National Neighborhood Data Archive and 2000 U.S. Census, we assessed the fit of competing measurement models for family sociodemographic, neighborhood sociodemographic, and neighborhood environment characteristics. In structural models, we regressed a general externalizing dimension on different operationalizations of these variables separately and then simultaneously in a final model. Latent variable operationalizations of family sociodemographic, neighborhood sociodemographic, and neighborhood environment characteristics explained no more variance in broad externalizing psychopathology than other operationalizations. In an omnibus model, family sociodemographic characteristics showed a small association with externalizing psychopathology, while neighborhood sociodemographic and environmental characteristics did not. Family sociodemographic characteristics showed small associations with neighborhood sociodemographic and environmental characteristics, and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics were moderately associated with neighborhood environment. These findings suggest that family sociodemographic characteristics are more associated with the development of broad externalizing psychopathology in youth than neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics and neighborhood environment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Principles and procedures for revising the hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology.

Quantitative, empirical approaches to establishing the structure of psychopathology hold promise to improve on traditional psychiatric classification systems. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a framework that summarizes the substantial and growing body of quantitative evidence on the structure of psychopathology. To achieve its aims, HiTOP must incorporate emerging research in a systematic, ongoing fashion. In this article, we describe the historical context and grounding of the principles and procedures for revising the HiTOP framework. Informed by strengths and shortcomings of previous classification systems, the proposed revisions protocol is a formalized system focused around three pillars: (a) prioritizing systematic evaluation of quantitative evidence by a set of transparent criteria and processes, (b) balancing stability with flexibility, and (c) promoting inclusion over gatekeeping in all aspects of the process. We detail how the revisions protocol will be applied in practice, including the scientific and administrative aspects of the process. Additionally, we describe areas of the HiTOP structure that will be a focus of early revisions and outline challenges for the revisions protocol moving forward. The proposed revisions protocol is designed to ensure that the HiTOP framework reflects the current state of scientific knowledge on the structure of psychopathology and fulfils its potential to advance clinical research and practice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Evaluating alternative models of youth externalizing using quantitative genetic analyses.

Interest has increased in the recent literature on characterizing psychopathology dimensionally in hierarchical models. One dimension of psychopathology that has received considerable attention is externalizing. Although extensively studied and well-characterized in late adolescents and adults, delineation of the externalizing spectrum in youth has lagged behind. As a complement to structural analyses of externalizing, in this study, we use quantitative genetic analyses of twin data to adjudicate among alternative models of youth externalizing that differ in granularity. Specifically, we compared model fit, estimates of genetic and environmental influences on the externalizing dimension, and the average, variability, and precision of genetic and environmental influences on individual symptoms due to the externalizing dimension, specific symptom dimensions, and unique etiological influences. Given that none of these criteria are definitive on their own, we looked to the confluence of these criteria to exclude particular models while highlighting others as leading contenders. We analyzed parent-report data on 38 externalizing symptoms from a population-representative, ethnically diverse sample of 883 youth twin pairs (51% female), who were on average 8.5 years old. Although models including an externalizing composite and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and conduct disorder diagnoses and symptom dimensions showed similar heritability to latent variable models of externalizing, models that included latent dimensions of externalizing and more fine-grained symptom dimensions fit better and were more balanced in the magnitude of genetic and environmental influences on individual symptoms due to the externalizing dimension and specific symptom dimensions. Pending replication, these more granular and elaborated model(s) can be useful for advancing research on causes and outcomes of youth externalizing and its fine-grained specific components. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Guidelines for Evaluating the Comparability of Down-Sampled GWAS Summary Statistics.

Proprietary genetic datasets are valuable for boosting the statistical power of genome-wide association studies (GWASs), but their use can restrict investigators from publicly sharing the resulting summary statistics. Although researchers can resort to sharing down-sampled versions that exclude restricted data, down-sampling reduces power and might change the genetic etiology of the phenotype being studied. These problems are further complicated when using multivariate GWAS methods, such as genomic structural equation modeling (Genomic SEM), that model genetic correlations across multiple traits. Here, we propose a systematic approach to assess the comparability of GWAS summary statistics that include versus exclude restricted data. Illustrating this approach with a multivariate GWAS of an externalizing factor, we assessed the impact of down-sampling on (1) the strength of the genetic signal in univariate GWASs, (2) the factor loadings and model fit in multivariate Genomic SEM, (3) the strength of the genetic signal at the factor level, (4) insights from gene-property analyses, (5) the pattern of genetic correlations with other traits, and (6) polygenic score analyses in independent samples. For the externalizing GWAS, although down-sampling resulted in a loss of genetic signal and fewer genome-wide significant loci; the factor loadings and model fit, gene-property analyses, genetic correlations, and polygenic score analyses were found robust. Given the importance of data sharing for the advancement of open science, we recommend that investigators who generate and share down-sampled summary statistics report these analyses as accompanying documentation to support other researchers' use of the summary statistics.

A multivariate approach to understanding the genetic overlap between externalizing phenotypes and substance use disorders.

Substance use disorders (SUDs) are phenotypically and genetically correlated with each other and with other psychological traits characterized by behavioural under-control, termed externalizing phenotypes. In this study, we used genomic structural equation modelling to explore the shared genetic architecture among six externalizing phenotypes and four SUDs used in two previous multivariate genome-wide association studies of an externalizing and an addiction risk factor, respectively. We first evaluated five confirmatory factor analytic models, including a common factor model, alternative parameterizations of two-factor structures and a bifactor model. We next explored the genetic correlations between factors identified in these models and other relevant psychological traits. Finally, we quantified the degree of polygenic overlap between externalizing and addiction risk using MiXeR. We found that the common and two-factor structures provided the best fit to the data, evidenced by high factor loadings, good factor reliability and no evidence of concerning model characteristics. The two-factor models yielded high genetic correlations between factors (rg s ≥ 0.87), and between the effect sizes of genetic correlations with external traits (rg  ≥ 0.95). Nevertheless, 21 of the 84 correlations with external criteria showed small, significant differences between externalizing and addiction risk factors. MiXer results showed that approximately 81% of influential externalizing variants were shared with addiction risk, whereas addiction risk shared 56% of its influential variants with externalizing. These results suggest that externalizing and addiction genetic risk are largely shared, though both constructs also retain meaningful unshared genetic variance. These results can inform future efforts to identify specific genetic influences on externalizing and SUDs.

Dimensional and transdiagnostic phenotypes in psychiatric genome-wide association studies.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) provide biological insights into disease onset and progression and have potential to produce clinically useful biomarkers. A growing body of GWAS focuses on quantitative and transdiagnostic phenotypic targets, such as symptom severity or biological markers, to enhance gene discovery and the translational utility of genetic findings. The current review discusses such phenotypic approaches in GWAS across major psychiatric disorders. We identify themes and recommendations that emerge from the literature to date, including issues of sample size, reliability, convergent validity, sources of phenotypic information, phenotypes based on biological and behavioral markers such as neuroimaging and chronotype, and longitudinal phenotypes. We also discuss insights from multi-trait methods such as genomic structural equation modelling. These provide insight into how hierarchical 'splitting' and 'lumping' approaches can be applied to both diagnostic and dimensional phenotypes to model clinical heterogeneity and comorbidity. Overall, dimensional and transdiagnostic phenotypes have enhanced gene discovery in many psychiatric conditions and promises to yield fruitful GWAS targets in the years to come.

Guidelines for Evaluating the Comparability of Down-Sampled GWAS Summary Statistics.

Proprietary genetic datasets are valuable for boosting the statistical power of genome-wide association studies (GWASs), but their use can restrict investigators from publicly sharing the resulting summary statistics. Although researchers can resort to sharing down-sampled versions that exclude restricted data, down-sampling reduces power and might change the genetic etiology of the phenotype being studied. These problems are further complicated when using multivariate GWAS methods, such as genomic structural equation modeling (Genomic SEM), that model genetic correlations across multiple traits. Here, we propose a systematic approach to assess the comparability of GWAS summary statistics that include versus exclude restricted data. Illustrating this approach with a multivariate GWAS of an externalizing factor, we assessed the impact of down-sampling on (1) the strength of the genetic signal in univariate GWASs, (2) the factor loadings and model fit in multivariate Genomic SEM, (3) the strength of the genetic signal at the factor level, (4) insights from gene-property analyses, (5) the pattern of genetic correlations with other traits, and (6) polygenic score analyses in independent samples. For the externalizing GWAS, down-sampling resulted in a loss of genetic signal and fewer genome-wide significant loci, while the factor loadings and model fit, gene-property analyses, genetic correlations, and polygenic score analyses are robust. Given the importance of data sharing for the advancement of open science, we recommend that investigators who share down-sampled summary statistics report these analyses as accompanying documentation to support other researchers' use of the summary statistics.

A broad internalizing dimension accounts for the genetic associations between personality and individual internalizing disorders.

Much research has demonstrated that psychopathology can be described in terms of broad dimensions, representing liability for multiple psychiatric disorders. Broad spectra of psychopathology (e.g., internalizing and externalizing) are increasingly used as targets for research investigating the development, etiology, and course of psychopathology because they account for patterns of relatedness among disorders that were once presumed distinct. Thus, these spectra represent alluring targets due to their comprehensive and parsimonious nature. Nevertheless, little research has established the role of individual disorders over and above broad dimensions in the study of psychopathology. In the current study, we investigate whether there are unique etiological associations between individual internalizing disorders and personality traits after accounting for their etiological associations with a broad internalizing dimension. We used a community sample of twins (Npairs = 448) ages 4 to 19 to examine the etiological associations between internalizing psychopathology and Big Five personality dimensions. In terms of genetic covariation, a broad internalizing dimension was positively associated with neuroticism and negatively associated with extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Moreover, internalizing accounted for most of the genetic variance shared between individual internalizing disorders and personality traits. Nevertheless, there were unique genetic associations between the following pairs of personality traits and disorders: neuroticism and social anxiety, extraversion and social anxiety, agreeableness and depression, and conscientiousness and compulsions. There was little evidence of environmental influences shared between internalizing and personality. In sum, a broad internalizing dimension adequately accounted for almost all of the etiologic covariation between internalizing disorders and personality, with several interesting exceptions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Parsing genetically influenced risk pathways: genetic loci impact problematic alcohol use via externalizing and specific risk.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) identify genetic variants associated with a trait, regardless of how those variants are associated with the outcome. Characterizing whether variants for psychiatric outcomes operate via specific versus general pathways provides more informative measures of genetic risk. In the current analysis, we used multivariate GWAS to tease apart variants associated with problematic alcohol use (ALCP-total) through either a shared risk for externalizing (EXT) or a problematic alcohol use-specific risk (ALCP-specific). SNPs associated with ALCP-specific were primarily related to alcohol metabolism. Genetic correlations showed ALCP-specific was predominantly associated with alcohol use and other forms of psychopathology, but not other forms of substance use. Polygenic scores for ALCP-total were associated with multiple forms of substance use, but polygenic scores for ALCP-specific were only associated with alcohol phenotypes. Polygenic scores for both ALCP-specific and EXT show different patterns of associations with alcohol misuse across development. Our results demonstrate that focusing on both shared and specific risk can better characterize pathways of risk for substance use disorders. Parsing risk pathways will become increasingly relevant as genetic information is incorporated into clinical practice.

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) in psychiatric practice and research.

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) has emerged out of the quantitative approach to psychiatric nosology. This approach identifies psychopathology constructs based on patterns of co-variation among signs and symptoms. The initial HiTOP model, which was published in 2017, is based on a large literature that spans decades of research. HiTOP is a living model that undergoes revision as new data become available. Here we discuss advantages and practical considerations of using this system in psychiatric practice and research. We especially highlight limitations of HiTOP and ongoing efforts to address them. We describe differences and similarities between HiTOP and existing diagnostic systems. Next, we review the types of evidence that informed development of HiTOP, including populations in which it has been studied and data on its validity. The paper also describes how HiTOP can facilitate research on genetic and environmental causes of psychopathology as well as the search for neurobiologic mechanisms and novel treatments. Furthermore, we consider implications for public health programs and prevention of mental disorders. We also review data on clinical utility and illustrate clinical application of HiTOP. Importantly, the model is based on measures and practices that are already used widely in clinical settings. HiTOP offers a way to organize and formalize these techniques. This model already can contribute to progress in psychiatry and complement traditional nosologies. Moreover, HiTOP seeks to facilitate research on linkages between phenotypes and biological processes, which may enable construction of a system that encompasses both biomarkers and precise clinical description.

Answering questions about the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): Analogies to whales and sharks miss the boat.

This commentary discusses questions and misconceptions about HiTOP raised by Haeffel et al. (2021). We explain what the system classifies and why it is descriptive and atheoretical, highlighting benefits and limitations of this approach. We clarify why the system is organized according to patterns of covariation or comorbidity among signs and symptoms of psychopathology, and we discuss how it is designed to be falsifiable and revised in a manner that is responsive to data. We refer to the body of evidence for HiTOP's external validity and for its scientific and clinical utility. We further describe how the system is currently used in clinics. In sum, many of Haeffel et al.'s concerns about HiTOP are unwarranted, and for those concerns that reflect real current limitations of HiTOP, our consortium is working to address them, with the aim of creating a nosology that is comprehensive and useful to both scientists and clinicians.

Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism has been the subject of scientific inquiry for nearly a century, yet the vast majority of authoritarianism research has focused on right-wing authoritarianism. In the present studies, we investigate the nature, structure, and nomological network of left-wing authoritarianism (LWA), a construct famously known as "the Loch Ness Monster" of political psychology. We iteratively construct a measure and data-driven conceptualization of LWA across six samples (N = 7,258) and conduct quantitative tests of LWA's relations with more than 60 authoritarianism-related variables. We find that LWA, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation reflect a shared constellation of personality traits, cognitive features, beliefs, and motivational values that might be considered the "heart" of authoritarianism. Relative to right-wing authoritarians, left-wing authoritarians were lower in dogmatism and cognitive rigidity, higher in negative emotionality, and expressed stronger support for a political system with substantial centralized state control. Our results also indicate that LWA powerfully predicts behavioral aggression and is strongly correlated with participation in political violence. We conclude that a movement away from exclusively right-wing conceptualizations of authoritarianism may be required to illuminate authoritarianism's central features, conceptual breadth, and psychological appeal. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Multivariate analysis of 1.5 million people identifies genetic associations with traits related to self-regulation and addiction.

Behaviors and disorders related to self-regulation, such as substance use, antisocial behavior and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, are collectively referred to as externalizing and have shared genetic liability. We applied a multivariate approach that leverages genetic correlations among externalizing traits for genome-wide association analyses. By pooling data from ~1.5 million people, our approach is statistically more powerful than single-trait analyses and identifies more than 500 genetic loci. The loci were enriched for genes expressed in the brain and related to nervous system development. A polygenic score constructed from our results predicts a range of behavioral and medical outcomes that were not part of genome-wide analyses, including traits that until now lacked well-performing polygenic scores, such as opioid use disorder, suicide, HIV infections, criminal convictions and unemployment. Our findings are consistent with the idea that persistent difficulties in self-regulation can be conceptualized as a neurodevelopmental trait with complex and far-reaching social and health correlates.

Les progrès dans la réalisation de la classification quantitative de la psychopathologie.

Shortcomings of approaches to classifying psychopathology based on expert consensus have given rise to contemporary efforts to classify psychopathology quantitatively. In this paper, we review progress in achieving a quantitative and empirical classification of psychopathology. A substantial empirical literature indicates that psychopathology is generally more dimensional than categorical. When the discreteness versus continuity of psychopathology is treated as a research question, as opposed to being decided as a matter of tradition, the evidence clearly supports the hypothesis of continuity. In addition, a related body of literature shows how psychopathology dimensions can be arranged in a hierarchy, ranging from very broad "spectrum level" dimensions, to specific and narrow clusters of symptoms. In this way, a quantitative approach solves the "problem of comorbidity" by explicitly modeling patterns of co-occurrence among signs and symptoms within a detailed and variegated hierarchy of dimensional concepts with direct clinical utility. Indeed, extensive evidence pertaining to the dimensional and hierarchical structure of psychopathology has led to the formation of the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) Consortium. This is a group of 70 investigators working together to study empirical classification of psychopathology. In this paper, we describe the aims and current foci of the HiTOP Consortium. These aims pertain to continued research on the empirical organization of psychopathology; the connection between personality and psychopathology; the utility of empirically based psychopathology constructs in both research and the clinic; and the development of novel and comprehensive models and corresponding assessment instruments for psychopathology constructs derived from an empirical approach.

Three recommendations based on a comparison of the reliability and validity of the predominant models used in research on the empirical structure of psychopathology.

The present study compared the primary models used in research on the structure of psychopathology (i.e., correlated factor, higher-order, and bifactor models) in terms of structural validity (model fit and factor reliability), longitudinal measurement invariance, concurrent and prospective predictive validity in relation to important outcomes, and longitudinal consistency in individuals' factor score profiles. Two simpler operationalizations of a general factor of psychopathology were also examined-a single-factor model and a count of diagnoses. Models were estimated based on structured clinical interview diagnoses in two longitudinal waves of nationally representative data from the United States (n = 43,093 and n = 34,653). Models that included narrower factors (fear, distress, and externalizing) were needed to capture the observed multidimensionality of the data. In the correlated factor and higher-order models these narrower factors were reliable, largely invariant over time, had consistent associations with indicators of adaptive functioning, and had moderate stability within individuals over time. By contrast, the fear- and distress-specific factors in the bifactor model did not show good reliability or validity throughout the analyses. Notably, the general factor of psychopathology (p factor) performed similarly well across tests of reliability and validity regardless of whether the higher-order or bifactor model was used; the simplest (single factor) model was also comparable across most tests, with the exception of model fit. Given the limitations of categorical diagnoses, it will be important to repeat these analyses using dimensional measures. We conclude that when aiming to understand the structure and correlates of psychopathology it is important to (a) look beyond model fit indices to choose between different models, (b) examine the reliability of latent variables directly, and (c) be cautious when isolating and interpreting the unique effects of specific psychopathology factors, regardless of which model is used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Quantitative Nosology Based on Consensus of Evidence.

Traditional diagnostic systems went beyond empirical evidence on the structure of mental health. Consequently, these diagnoses do not depict psychopathology accurately, and their validity in research and utility in clinicalpractice are therefore limited. The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) consortium proposed a model based on structural evidence. It addresses problems of diagnostic heterogeneity, comorbidity, and unreliability. We review the HiTOP model, supporting evidence, and conceptualization of psychopathology in this hierarchical dimensional framework. The system is not yet comprehensive, and we describe the processes for improving and expanding it. We summarize data on the ability of HiTOP to predict and explain etiology (genetic, environmental, and neurobiological), risk factors, outcomes, and treatment response. We describe progress in the development of HiTOP-based measures and in clinical implementation of the system. Finally, we review outstanding challenges and the research agenda. HiTOP is of practical utility already, and its ongoing development will produce a transformative map of psychopathology.

Risk variants and polygenic architecture of disruptive behavior disorders in the context of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a childhood psychiatric disorder often comorbid with disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs). Here, we report a GWAS meta-analysis of ADHD comorbid with DBDs (ADHD + DBDs) including 3802 cases and 31,305 controls. We identify three genome-wide significant loci on chromosomes 1, 7, and 11. A meta-analysis including a Chinese cohort supports that the locus on chromosome 11 is a strong risk locus for ADHD + DBDs across European and Chinese ancestries (rs7118422, P = 3.15×10-10, OR = 1.17). We find a higher SNP heritability for ADHD + DBDs (h2SNP = 0.34) when compared to ADHD without DBDs (h2SNP = 0.20), high genetic correlations between ADHD + DBDs and aggressive (rg = 0.81) and anti-social behaviors (rg = 0.82), and an increased burden (polygenic score) of variants associated with ADHD and aggression in ADHD + DBDs compared to ADHD without DBDs. Our results suggest an increased load of common risk variants in ADHD + DBDs compared to ADHD without DBDs, which in part can be explained by variants associated with aggressive behavior.

External validation of a bifactor model of oppositional defiant disorder.

Dimensions of irritability and defiant behavior, though correlated within the structure of ODD, convey separable developmental risks through adolescence and adulthood. Irritability predicts depression and anxiety, whereas defiant behavior is a precursor to antisocial outcomes. Previously we demonstrated that a bifactor model comprising irritability and defiant behavior dimensions, in addition to a general factor, provided the best-fitting structure of ODD symptoms in five large datasets. Herein we extend our previous work by externally validating the bifactor model of ODD using multiple regression and multivariate behavior genetic analyses. We used parent ratings of DSM IV ODD symptoms, and symptom dimensions for ADHD (i.e., inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity), conduct disorder (CD), depression/dysthymia, and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) from 846 6-18-year-old twin pairs. We found that the ODD irritability factor was associated only with depression/dysthymia and GAD and the ODD defiant behavior factor was associated only with inattention, hyperactivity-impulsivity, and CD, whereas the ODD general factor was associated with all five symptom dimensions. Multivariate behavior genetic analyses found all five symptom dimensions shared genetic influences in common with the ODD general, irritability, and defiant behavior factors. In contrast, the defiant behavior factor shared genetic influences uniquely with inattention and hyperactivity-impulsivity, whereas the irritability factor shared genetic influences uniquely with depression/dysthymia and GAD, but not vice versa. This suggests that genes that influence irritability in early childhood also predispose to depression and anxiety in adolescence and adulthood. These multivariate genetic findings also support the external validity of the three ODD dimensions at the etiological level. Our study provides additional support for subtyping ODD based on these symptom dimensions, as in the revisions in the ICD-11, and suggests potential mechanisms underlying the development from ODD to behavioral or affective disorders.

Testing structural models of psychopathology at the genomic level.

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have revealed hundreds of genetic loci associated with the vulnerability to major psychiatric disorders, and post-GWAS analyses have shown substantial genetic correlations among these disorders. This evidence supports the existence of a higher-order structure of psychopathology at both the genetic and phenotypic levels. Despite recent efforts by collaborative consortia such as the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP), this structure remains unclear. In this study, we tested multiple alternative structural models of psychopathology at the genomic level, using the genetic correlations among fourteen psychiatric disorders and related psychological traits estimated from GWAS summary statistics. The best-fitting model included four correlated higher-order factors - externalizing, internalizing, thought problems, and neurodevelopmental disorders - which showed distinct patterns of genetic correlations with external validity variables and accounted for substantial genetic variance in their constituent disorders. A bifactor model including a general factor of psychopathology as well as the four specific factors fit worse than the above model. Several model modifications were tested to explore the placement of some disorders - such as bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and eating disorders - within the broader psychopathology structure. The best-fitting model indicated that eating disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorder, on the one hand, and bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, on the other, load together on the same thought problems factor. These findings provide support for several of the HiTOP higher-order dimensions and suggest a similar structure of psychopathology at the genomic and phenotypic levels.