Mouse Chromosome 11

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/46996/1/335_2004_Article_BF00648429.pd

The affiliative role of empathy in everyday interpersonal interactions

Empathy theoretically serves an affiliative interpersonal function. Accordingly, empathy is expected to vary depending on the situation. Inconsistent empirical support for empathy’s prosocial role may be due to methodology focused on individual differences in empathy or differences between controlled experimental conditions, which fail to capture its dynamic and personal nature. To address these shortcomings, we used ecological momentary assessment to establish typical patterns of empathy across everyday interactions. Associations among empathy, affect, and interpersonal behavior of self and interaction partner were examined in a student sample (N=330), then replicated in a pre-registered community sample (N=279). Multi-level structural equation modeling was used to distinguish individual differences in empathy from interaction-level effects. Results show people are more empathetic during positively-valanced interactions with others perceived as warm and when expressing warmth. By confirming the typically affiliative role of empathy, existing research to the contrary can be best understood as exceptions to the norm

Measuring Multidimensional Hierarchies of Psychopathology in Daily Life

Background: There is an increasing interest in conceptualizing psychopathology in terms of transdiagnostic dimensions and processes. These can be organized hierarchically, for instance, aggression and harmful substance use are specific manifestations of externalizing psychopathology. However, most of this work is cross-sectional and focuses on individual (i.e., between-person) differences despite psychopathological processes being conceptualized at the within-person level. This lack of within-person research complicates efforts to conceptualize psychopathology as a complex system of interacting domains. To address this limitation, we have developed an inventory of self-report items that provide broad coverage of psychopathology suitable for assessing and studying within-person processes of psychopathology in daily life as well as individual differences in those processes. Methods: In the current study, we evaluate the individual items as indicators of narrow (i.e., facets) and broad (i.e., domains) psychopathology constructs using multilevel factor analytic techniques, including confirmatory and exploratory approaches in a sample (Person N = 300) of mixed community and outpatient participants who provided daily ratings (Total Day N = 3,883; Mean Day N = 12.9). Results: We report on the reliability, validity, and structure of 27 facet scales intended to mark key domains of psychopathology (Internalizing, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Anankastia) and develop a brief measure of these higher-order domains using ant colony optimization. Conclusion: The current scales are suitable for studying psychopathology dimensionally and hierarchically in intensive longitudinal studies. We make all data and code freely available (https://osf.io/su3gf/) to allow others to pilot these items or develop alternative brief measures to meet specific needs

Meta-analysis of structural evidence for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) model

Background: The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a classification system that seeks to organize psychopathology using quantitative evidence—yet the current model was established by narrative review. This meta-analysis provides a quantitative synthesis of literature on transdiagnostic dimensions of psychopathology to evaluate the validity of the HiTOP framework. Methods: Published studies estimating factor-analytic models from DSM diagnoses were screened. A total of 120,596 participants from 35 studies assessing twenty-three DSM diagnoses were included in the meta-analytic models. Data were pooled into a meta-analytic correlation matrix using a random effects model. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted using the pooled correlation matrix. A hierarchical structure was estimated by extracting one to five factors representing levels of the HiTOP framework, then calculating congruence coefficients between factors at sequential levels. Results: Five transdiagnostic dimensions fit the DSM diagnoses well (comparative fit index [CFI] = .92, root mean square-error of approximation [RMSEA] = .07, and standardized root-mean-square residual [SRMR] = .03). Most diagnoses had factor loadings > |.30| on the expected factors, and congruence coefficients between factors indicated a hierarchical structure consistent with the HiTOP framework. Conclusions: A model closely resembling the HiTOP framework fit the data well and placement of DSM diagnoses within transdiagnostic dimensions were largely confirmed, supporting it as valid structure for conceptualizing and organizing psychopathology. Results also suggest transdiagnostic research should 1) use traits, narrow symptoms, and dimensional measures of psychopathology instead of DSM diagnoses, 2) assess a broader array of constructs, and 3) increase focus on understudied pathologies

Meta-analytic Tests of Measurement Invariance of Internalizing and Externalizing Psychopathology Across Common Methodological Characteristics

Factor analytic models of common mental disorders have been hypothesized to be affected by various methodological features, which could undermine the assumption that Internalizing and Externalizing reflect part of the natural structure of psychopathology. In this study, we addressed this issue by testing whether and how methodological features affect the empirical structure of psychopathology using meta-analytic measurement invariance models of Internalizing and Externalizing across multiple sample characteristics. Published studies estimating factor analytic models from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnoses were screened. A total of 47 samples (N = 118,966) were included in the meta-analysis. Data were pooled into meta-analytic correlation matrices using random effects models that accounted for sampling variability. Multi-group confirmatory factor analytic models of Internalizing and Externalizing were fit to the pooled matrix of DSM diagnoses to test invariance of the structure, factor loadings, and factor covariance. Results supported partial or full invariance across (1) samples selected vs. not selected for psychopathology, (2) diagnoses defined by binary DSM thresholds vs. dimensional symptoms counts, and (3) diagnoses based on lifetime vs. current symptoms. Tentative analyses indicated non-invariance across samples that made diagnoses using hierarchical exclusion rules vs. those that did not. Our study suggests that the Internalizing and Externalizing structure is largely robust to common methodological characteristics thought to impact factor analytic models

Transdiagnostic associations with interpersonal and affective variability in borderline personality pathology

Emotional and behavioral variability are unifying characteristics of borderline personality disorder (BPD). Ambulatory assessment (AA) has been used to assess and quantify this variability in terms of the categorical BPD diagnosis, but growing evidence suggests that BPD instead reflects general personality pathology. This study aimed to clarify the conceptualization of BPD by mapping indices of variability in affect, interpersonal behavior, and perceptions of others onto general and specific dimensions of personality pathology. We studied a sample of participants that met diagnostic criteria for BPD (n=129) and healthy controls (n=47) who reported on their interactions throughout the day during a 21-day AA protocol. Multi-level structural equation modeling was used to examine associations between shared and specific variance in maladaptive traits with dynamic patterns of interpersonal functioning. We found that variability is an indicator of shared trait variance, not specific traits, reinforcing the idea BPD is best understood as general personality pathology

Personality (Dys)Function and General Instability

Humans adapt to a dynamic environment while maintaining psychological equilibrium. Systems theories of personality hold that generalized processes control stability by regulating how strongly a person reacts to various situations. Research shows there are higher-order traits of general personality function (Stability) and dysfunction (general personality pathology; GPP), but whether or not they capture individual differences in reactivity is largely theoretical. We tested this hypothesis by examining how general personality functioning manifests in everyday life in two samples (Ns=205; 342 participants and 24,920; 17,761 observations) that completed an ambulatory assessment protocol. Consistent with systems theories, we found (1) there is a general factor reflecting reactivity across major domains of functioning, and (2) reactivity is strongly associated with Stability and GPP. Results provide insight into how people fundamentally adapt (or not) to their environments, and lays the foundation for more practical, empirical models of human functioning