Assessment

Although Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–Fifth edition requires that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms are apparent across settings, assessed by multiple informants, there remains no standardized approach to integration of multiple sources in adult ADHD diagnosis. The goal of the study was to evaluate informant effects on adult ADHD symptom ratings. Participants were 406 adults, ages 18 to 37, and identified second reporters, recruited from the community, and completing a comprehensive diagnostic and cognitive assessment, including a clinician-administered diagnostic interview and self- and other-report questionnaires of ADHD symptoms. Structural equation modeling indicated good fit for a trifactor model of ADHD, including general ADHD, specific inattention and hyperactivity–impulsivity, and self- and other-perspective factors. Yet there were a number of symptoms on the specific hyperactive–impulsive and self-factors that exhibited nonsignificant loadings. Significant differential item functioning across self-ratings and informant ratings was also noted. The external validation indices of laboratory executive function and diagnostic team-rated impairment was significantly correlated with the specific inattentive factor. While executive function was marginally significantly correlated with the other perspective factor, impairment was associated with the self-perspective factor. Overall, inattentive symptoms may be more sensitive measures of adult ADHD, and other and self-ratings may provide different information in relation to external criteria.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a chronic disorder that afflicts individuals into adulthood. The field continues to refine diagnostic standards for ADHD in adults, complicated by the disorder’s heterogeneous presentation, subjective symptoms, and overlap with other disorders. Two key diagnostic questions are from whom to collect diagnostic information and which symptoms should be contained on an adult diagnostic checklist. Using a trifactor model, Martel et al. examine these questions in a sample of adults with and without self-identified ADHD symptoms. In this response, we highlight the importance of their finding that self and informant symptom reports differ in a sample of adults who acknowledge ADHD symptoms. We also review issues that continue to face the field related to model specification, evaluating symptom utility, and sample composition, discussing how these issues influence conclusions that may be drawn from Martel et al. and similar investigations. We conclude that the article makes an important research contribution about the nature of self and informant ADHD symptom reports but emphasize that symptom checklist refinement must occur through a broad lens that considers work from a range of sample types and clinically informative analytic strategies.

Sibley, Coxe, and Molina provide a thoughtful discussion of the implications of our study and highlight important future directions in this line of work. They helpfully amplify several themes that space did not allow discussion of in our article. In particular, they correctly emphasize the importance of theoretical as well as statistical considerations in model selection. We also agree that clinical tests of sensitivity and specificity, taking into account different base rates and types of samples, are essential before a final algorithm would be ready for dissemination. However, we are not convinced that such tests should be limited to populations of individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Rather, they should include those with and without diagnosed ADHD in order to provide comprehensive tests of reporter sensitivity and specificity across the entire continuum of ADHD symptomatology and in relation to different populations, including other disorders and typically developing populations.

This study examined the accuracy of depression cross-walk tables in a sample of people with multiple sclerosis (MS). The tables link scores of two commonly used depression measures to the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Depression (PROMIS-D) scale metric. We administered the 8-item PROMIS-D (Short-Form 8b; PROMIS-D-8), the 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-20), and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) to 459 survey participants with MS. We examined correlations between actual PROMIS-D-8 scores and the scores predicted by cross-walks based on PHQ-9 and CESD-20 scores. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess correspondence. Consistency in severity classification was also calculated. Finally, we used Bland–Altman plots to graphically examine the levels of agreement. The correlations between actual and cross-walked PROMIS-D-8 scores were strong (CESD-20 = .82; PHQ-9 = .74). The intraclass correlation was moderate (.77). Participants were consistently classified as having or not having at least moderate depressive symptoms by both actual and cross-walked scores derived from the CESD-20 (90%) and PHQ-9 (85%). Bland–Altman plots suggested the smaller differences between actual and cross-walked scores with greater-than-average depression severity. PROMIS cross-walk tables can be used to translate depression scores of people with MS to the PROMIS-D metric, promoting continuity with previous research.

The psychometric properties of the 64-item Self-Report Psychopathy Scale–III (SRP-III) and its abbreviated 28-item SRP–Short Form (SRP-SF) seem promising. Still, cross-cultural evidence for its construct validity in heterogeneous community samples remains relatively scarce. Moreover, little is known about the interchangeability of both instruments. The present study addresses these research gaps by comparing the SRP-III and SRP-SF factorial construct validity and nomological network in a Belgian community sample. The four-factor model of psychopathy was evaluated (N = 1,510) and the SRP scales’ relationship with various external correlates (i.e., attachment, bullying and victimization, right-wing attitudes, right-wing authoritarianism, and response styles) was examined (n = 210). Both SRP versions demonstrated a good fit for the four-factor model and a considerable overlap with the nomological network of psychopathy. The results suggested that the SRP-SF provides a viable alternative to the SRP-III for assessment in the community. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) measures the trait part (Criterion B) of the alternative model for personality disorders proposed in Section III of DSM-5. Although its psychometric properties have proven adequate thus far, evidence is limited in other languages and in clinical samples. The Spanish PID-5 was examined in two samples comprising 446 clinical and 1,036 community subjects. Facet scales showed good internal consistency in both samples (median α = .86 and .79) and were unidimensional under exploratory and confirmatory approaches. They were also able to distinguish between clinical and community subjects with a mean standardized difference of z = 0.81. All facets except for Risk Taking were unipolar, such that the upper poles indicated pathology and the lower poles reflected normality, rather than the opposite pole of abnormality. The entire PID-5 hierarchical structure, from one to five factors, was confirmed in both samples with Tucker’s congruence coefficients over .95.

This study explored the longitudinal measurement invariance in the Beck Depression Inventory–II (BDI-II) in early adolescents (junior high school students). The participants were 730 early adolescents (330 boys and 400 girls), who were followed up over 3 years (in six waves). To reduce the size of longitudinal model and verify the stability of the findings, the Fall and Spring series data sets were analyzed separately. Each series includes three waves of data with about 1-year apart. It was found that the three-factor model (Negative Attitude, Performance Difficulty, and Somatic Elements) best fitted the data. Results of both data sets provided support for the longitudinal measurement invariance (threshold invariance) of the three-factor model, suggesting that the BDI-II measured the same construct over 3 years. The study also examined the category function of the BDI-II on the basis of the pattern of threshold estimates. Finally, the implications of the findings on the continuing use of the BDI-II are discussed.

It has been evident for some time that the Boredom Proneness Scale (BPS), a commonly used measure of trait boredom, does not constitute a single scale. Factor analytic studies have identified anything from two to seven factors, prompting Vodanovich and colleagues to propose an alternative two factor, short form version Boredom Proneness Scale–Short Form (BPS-SR). The present study further investigates the factor structure and validity of both the BPS and the BPS-SR. The two-factor solution obtained for the BPS-SR appears to be an artifact of item wording of reverse-scored items. These same items may also have contributed to the earlier complexity and inconsistency of results for the full BPS. An eight-item scale of only consistently worded items (i.e., those not requiring reverse scoring) was developed. This new scale demonstrated unidimensionality and the scale score had good internal consistency and construct validity comparable to the original BPS score.

The Interpersonal Dependency Inventory (IDI) is a frequently used, 48-item measure of maladaptive dependency. Our goal was to develop and psychometrically evaluate a very brief version of the IDI. An exploratory factor analysis of the IDI in Study 1 (N = 838) yielded a six-item IDI (IDI-6), with three items loading on an emotional dependency factor (IDI-6-ED), and the other three items loading on a functional dependency factor (IDI-6-FD). This factor solution was validated by confirmatory factor analysis in Study 2 (N = 916). The IDI-6-ED and IDI-6-FD demonstrated good convergent and divergent validity in Study 3 (N = 100). In Study 4 (N = 22-43), the IDI-6-ED and IDI-6-FD were generally stable over 4-week and 8-week intervals and were found to be responsive to the effects of psychological treatment. These results have implications for dependency conceptualizations and support the IDI-6 as a brief, psychometrically sound instrument.

This study presents a Rasch-derived short form of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale for use as a screening tool in the general population. Data from 2,005 18- to 69-year-olds revealed problematic discrimination at specific thresholds. Estimation of model fit also deviated from Rasch model expectations. Following deletion of 4 items, the 10 remaining items indicated the data fitted the model. No items showed differential item functioning, thereby making comparisons of overall positive mental well-being for the different age, gender, and income groups valid and accurate. Cronbach’s alpha and Rasch Person Separation Index indicated a strong degree of reliability. Overall, the 10-item scale challenges researchers and clinicians to reconsider the assessment of positive mental well-being.

The Mindful Attention Awareness Scale was developed to measure individual differences in the tendency to be mindful. The current study examined the psychometric properties of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale in a heterogeneous sample of 565 nonmeditators and 612 meditators using the polytomous Rasch model. The results showed that some items did not function the same way for these two groups. Overall, meditators had higher mean estimates than nonmeditators. The analysis identified a group of items as highly discriminating. Using a different model, Van Dam, Earleywine, and Borders in 2010 identified the same group of items as highly discriminating, and concluded that they were the items with the most information. Multiple pieces of evidence from the Rasch analysis showed that these items discriminate highly because of local dependence, hence do not supply independent information. We discussed how these different conclusions, based on similar findings, result from two very different paradigms in measurement.

The utility of a narrative approach to identity and its role in psychological functioning are becoming increasingly recognized across various fields of inquiry. The current study aimed to develop a quantitative, self-report measure of the awareness of narrative identity and how globally coherent one’s autobiographical memories are perceived to be, specifically, in terms of temporal ordering, causal associations, and the perception of unifying themes. The construct validity and reliability of the Awareness of Narrative Identity Questionnaire (ANIQ) were assessed across three studies. In the first study, exploratory factor analysis of the responses of a large sample (N = 441, M [age in years] = 33.1, SD = 15.2) to an initial item pool resulted in a 20-item four-factor structure congruent with the proposed subscales, and convergent and divergent validity were established. In the second study, and with a different sample (N = 320, M [age in years] = 26.2, SD = 4.0), further evidence for the factor structure was provided through confirmatory factor analysis. Validity findings from Study 1 were replicated and extended on, and test–retest reliabilities were found to be high (r = .72-.79). Importantly, in the third study (N = 71, M [age in years] = 24.9, SD = 6.9), criterion validity was established, whereby the ANIQ subscales were demonstrated to be associated with dimensions of narrative coherence coded from written turning-point narratives. Across all studies, the internal reliabilities for the subscales were high (α = .86-.96). The ANIQ represents a valid, psychometrically sound, and novel method of assessing the awareness of narrative identity and autobiographical memory coherence.