ArticlePublisher preview available

Factor Structure of Teacher Ratings of the ODD Symptoms in Children

Authors:
Rapson Gomez at Federation University Australia
Rapson Gomez
Vasilis Stavropoulos at RMIT University
Vasilis Stavropoulos
George Van Doorn at Federation University Australia
George Van Doorn
Read publisher preview
Download citation
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

This study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to determine the best model for Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms in children aged 3 to 15 years, as presented in the Disruptive Behavior Rating Scale. Teachers’ ratings of the ODD symptoms of 213 children from general community schools in Australia were obtained. The findings provided most support for a bifactor model based on Stringaris and Goodman’s [1] three-factor model (primary factors for irritable, hurtful, and headstrong). The general factor, but not the group factors in the model, showed high omega hierarchical and explained common variance. Thus, only the general factor in this model can be meaningfully interpreted. Also, the general factor was supported with regard to external validity. Specifically, this factor, but not the group factors, correlated strongly with ADHD inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity symptom groups, and other measures of behavioural and emotional problems. The taxonomic, diagnostic, practical, and research implications of the findings are discussed.
A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Learn more
Content available from Psychiatric Quarterly
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
ORIGINAL PAPER
Factor Structure of Teacher Ratings of the ODD
Symptoms in Children
Rapson Gomez
1
&Vasileios Stavropoulos
1,2
&
George Van Doorn
1
Published online: 15 August 2017
#Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017
Abstract This study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to determine the best model for
Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms in children aged 3 to 15 years, as presented
in the Disruptive Behavior Rating Scale. Teachers’ratings of the ODD symptoms of 213
children from general community schools in Australia were obtained. The findings provided
most support for a bifactor model based on Stringaris and Goodman’s[1]three-factormodel
(primary factors for irritable, hurtful, and headstrong). The general factor, but not the group
factors in the model, showed high omega hierarchical and explained common variance. Thus,
only the general factor in this model can be meaningfully interpreted. Also, the general factor
was supported with regard to external validity. Specifically, this factor, but not the group
factors, correlated strongly with ADHD inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity symptom
groups, and other measures of behavioural and emotional problems. The taxonomic, diagnos-
tic, practical, and research implications of the findings are discussed.
Keywords Oppositional defiant disorder .Confirmatory factor analysis .Community sample .
Teacher ratings, bifactor model
Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) is a common childhood disorder (American Psychiatric
Association [APA], [2]), and refers to a recurrent pattern of negativistic, defiant, disobedient,
and hostile behavior toward authority figures that persists for at least six months (APA, [2]).
For diagnosis, the DSM-IV (APA, [3]) and the DSM-IV-TR (APA, [4]) have eight ODD
symptoms (see Fig. 1for description of symptoms) organised together under one group,
thereby implying support for a unidimensional or one-factor model for these symptoms. With
Psychiatr Q (2018) 89:219–234
DOI 10.1007/s11126-017-9527-6
*Vasileios Stavropoulos
vasilisstavropoylos80@gmail.com
1
School of Health Sciences and Psychology, Federation University Australia, University Drive, Mt
Helen, PO Box 663, Ballarat, VIC 3353, Australia
2
University of Athens, Athens, Greece
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
... Generally, no support has been found for the one-factor model. At least adequate fit has been found for the two-and three-factor models (e.g., Davis et al., 2011;Gibbins et al., 2012;Gomez, 2016;Gomez, 2014;Gomez et al., 2018;Park et al., 2018;Martel et al., 2012;Morin et al., 2016;Proctor & Prevatt, 2009;Span et al., 2002;Stanton et al., 2018), with the three-factor models showing better fit than the two-factor model (Gomez, 2014(Gomez, , 2016Proctor & Prevatt, 2009;Span et al., 2002). Also for three-factor models, the model based on ICD-10 symptom configuration has shown better fit than the model based on DSM-5 configuration (Gomez & Stavropoulos, 2020;Gomez, 2016;Stanton et al., 2018). ...
... Error variances were unconstrained and error co-variances constrained to zero. Arias et al. (2016) reviewed 18 studies, of which six papers (Gibbins et al., 2012;Gomez, 2014;Gomez et al., 2018;Martel et al., 2012;Morin et al., 2016;Park et al., 2018) utilized adult community samples, with data collected using a range of psychometric scales, including the ADHD Rating Scale-Fourth Edition (DuPaul et al., 1998), Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale Symptom Checklist (Kessler et al., 2005), and Current Symptom Scale (Barkley & Murphy, 1998). Their review concluded that bi-factor models demonstrate better fit when contrasted with first-order CFA models. ...
... Existing data also indicate that ADHD, especially the HY symptoms, is positively associated with interpersonal behavior problems (Brod et al., 2005;Prada et al., 2014;Schütte & Petermann, 2006). Positive associations for ODD and its dimensions with ADHD have also been previously demonstrated (e.g., Angold et al., 1999;Biederman et al., 1991;Gomez et al., 2018;Krieger et al., 2013;Stringaris & Goodman, 2009). ...
ADHD symptoms, the current symptom scale, and exploratory structural equation modeling: A psychometric study
Article
  • Apr 2021
  • RES DEV DISABIL
The aim of the study was to use exploratory structural equation modelling (ESEM) to investigate support for an ADHD factor model with group factors for inattention (IA), hyperactivity (HY), and impulsivity (IM), as proposed in in ICD-10. A total of 202 adults (121 females and 81 males), aged between 18 and 35 years, from the general community, completed the Current Symptoms Scale (CSS). The results for the model showed good global fit, good convergent and divergent validities. However, the IA and IM factors, but not the HY factor, were clearly defined and demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. Taken together, these finding indicate that a revised ESEM model without the HY factor (i.e. with only the IA and IM symptoms) is an appropriate structure for modeling adult ratings of the ADHD behaviors described in the CSS. The taxonomic, theoretical and clinical implications of the findings for ADHD in general are discussed.
View
... As shown in the table, both two- [5,6] and three-factor [7,8] models have been proposed. Reviewing these models, Gomez et al. [9] concluded that while there is some agreement for distinct factors for irritable/negative affect and headstrong/spiteful (or oppositional), there is a lack of agreement on the best factor structure for ODD, and the composition of the symptoms in the comparable primary factors in the different models. ...
Network analyses of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms in children
Article
Full-text available
  • Apr 2022
  • BMC PSYCHIATRY
Based on parent and teacher ratings of their children, this study used regularized partial correlation network analysis (EBIC glasso) to examine the structure of DSM-5 Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms. Parent and teachers (N = 934) from the general community in Malaysia completed questionnaires covering DSM-5 ODD symptoms. The most central ODD symptom for parent ratings was anger, followed by argue. For teacher ratings, it was anger, followed by defy. For both parent and teacher ratings, the networks revealed at least medium effect size connections for temper and argue, defy, and argue, blames others, and annoy, and spiteful and angry. Overall, the findings were highly comparable across parent and teacher ratings, and they showed a novel understanding of the structure of the ODD symptoms. The clinical implications of the findings for assessment and treatment of ODD are discussed.
View
View
Network Analyses of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) Symptoms in Children
Preprint
Full-text available
  • Jul 2021
Based on parent and teacher ratings of their children, this study used regularized partial correlation network analysis (EBIC glasso) to examine the structure of DSM-5 Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) symptoms. Parent and teachers (N = 934) from the general community in Malaysia completed questionnaires covering DSM-5 ODD symptoms. The most central ODD symptom for parent ratings was anger, followed by argue. For teacher ratings, it was anger, followed by defy. For both parent and teacher ratings, the networks revealed at least medium effect size connections for temper and argue, defy and argue, blames others and annoy, and spiteful and angry. Overall, the findings were highly comparable across parent and teacher ratings, and they showed a novel understanding of the structure of the ODD symptoms. The clinical implications of the findings for assessment and treatment of ODD are discussed.
View
Applying Bifactor Statistical Indices in the Evaluation of Psychological Measures
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this study was to apply a set of rarely reported psychometric indices that, nevertheless, are important to consider when evaluating psychological measures. All can be derived from a standardized loading matrix in a confirmatory bifactor model: omega reliability coefficients, factor determinacy, construct replicability, explained common variance, and percentage of uncontaminated correlations. We calculated these indices and extended the findings of 50 recent bifactor model estimation studies published in psychopathology, personality, and assessment journals. These bifactor derived indices (most not presented in the articles) provided a clearer and more complete picture of the psychometric properties of the assessment instruments. We reached 2 firm conclusions. First, although all measures had been tagged "multidimensional," unit-weighted total scores overwhelmingly reflected variance due to a single latent variable. Second, unit-weighted subscale scores often have ambiguous interpretations because their variance mostly reflects the general, not the specific, trait. Finally, we review the implications of our evaluations and consider the limits of inferences drawn from a bifactor modeling approach.
View
When Are Multidimensional Data Unidimensional Enough for Structural Equation Modeling? An Evaluation of the DETECT Multidimensionality Index
Article
Full-text available
  • Apr 2015
In structural equation modeling (SEM), researchers need to evaluate whether item response data, which are often multidimensional, can be modeled with a unidimensional measurement model without seriously biasing the parameter estimates. This issue is commonly addressed through testing the fit of a unidimensional model specification, a strategy previously determined to be problematic. As an alternative to the use of fit indexes, we considered the utility of a statistical tool that was expressly designed to assess the degree of departure from unidimensionality in a data set. Specifically, we evaluated the ability of the DETECT “essential unidimensionality” index to predict the bias in parameter estimates that results from misspecifying a unidimensional model when the data are multidimensional. We generated multidimensional data from bifactor structures that varied in general factor strength, number of group factors, and items per group factor; a unidimensional measurement model was then fit and parameter bias recorded. Although DETECT index values were generally predictive of parameter bias, in many cases, the degree of bias was small even though DETECT indicated significant multidimensionality. Thus we do not recommend the stand-alone use of DETECT benchmark values to either accept or reject a unidimensional measurement model. However, when DETECT was used in combination with additional indexes of general factor strength and group factor structure, parameter bias was highly predictable. Recommendations for judging the severity of potential model misspecifications in practice are provided.
View
Identifying the Irritability Dimension of ODD: Application of a Modified Bifactor Model Across Five Large Community Samples of Children
Article
Full-text available
  • Oct 2014
The importance of irritability, as measured among the symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), has dramatically come to the fore in recent years. New diagnostic categories rely on the distinct clinical utility of irritability, and models of psychopathology suggest it plays a key role in explaining developmental pathways within and between disorders into adulthood. However, only a few studies have tested multidimensional models of ODD, and the results have been conflicting. Further, consensus has not been reached regarding which symptoms best identify irritability. The present analyses use 5 large community data sets with 5 different measures of parent-reported ODD, comprising 16,280 youth in total, to help resolve these questions. Across the samples, ages ranged from 5 to 18, and included both boys and girls. Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that a modified bifactor model showed the best fit in each data set. The structure of the model included 2 correlated specific factors (irritability and oppositional behavior) in addition to a general ODD factor. In 4 models, the best fit was obtained using the items "being touchy," "angry," and "often losing temper" as indicators of irritability. Given the structure of the models and the generally high correlation between the specific dimensions, the results suggest that irritability may not be sufficiently distinct from oppositional behavior to support an entirely independent diagnosis. Rather, irritability may be better understood as a dimension of psychopathology that can be distinguished within ODD, and which may be related to particular forms of psychopathology apart from ODD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
View
Factor Structure of Parent and Teacher Ratings of the ODD Symptoms for Malaysian Primary School Children
Article
  • Oct 2016
This present study used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine the applicability of one-, two- three- and second order Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) factor models, proposed in previous studies, in a group of Malaysian primary school children. These models were primarily based on parent reports. In the current study, parent and teacher ratings of the ODD symptoms were obtained for 934 children. For both groups of respondents, the findings showing some support for all models examined, with most support for a second order model with Burke et al. (2010) three factors (oppositional, antagonistic, and negative affect) as the primary factors. The diagnostic implications of the findings are discussed.
View
View
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a pilot study on the validity of the self-report version
Article
  • Jan 1999
The self-report version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was administered to two samples of 11-16 year olds: 83 young people in the community and 116 young people attending a mental health clinic. The questionnaire discriminated satisfactorily between the two samples. For example, the clinic mean for the total difficulties score was 1.4 standard deviations above the community mean, with clinic cases being over six times more likely to have a score in the abnormal range. The correlations between self-report SDQ scores and teacher- or parent-rated SDQ scores compared favourably with the average cross-informant correlations in previous studies of a range of measures. The self-report SDQ appears promising and warrants further evaluation.
View
View
Subfactors of oppositional defiant disorder: Converging evidence from structural and latent class analyses
Article
Structural models of oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) symptoms have gained empirical support but await greater empirical scrutiny on issues such as reconciliation between competing models, evidence for gender differences, and delineation of external correlates. More extensive validation evidence is particularly necessary in consideration of their incorporation in psychiatric nomenclature. We fitted previously proposed, but competing, models to ODD symptoms assessed with the Computerized Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (Shaffer et al., , J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry, 39, 28) in a community sample and then fitted the best-fitting model in a replication sample (combined N = 730, Mage = 9.89, SD = 0.75). Analyses also examined potential classes based on resulting subfactors, gender differences, longitudinal associations with later behavioral problems, and concurrent personality associations. Burke's (2010) two-factor model composed of Irritability and Oppositionality subfactors best fit the data. Irritability and Oppositionality showed convergent and divergent patterns of association with personality traits at T1 and with externalizing and internalizing problems at T2. Latent class analyses revealed three classes (low severity, irritable/combined, and oppositional) which showed parallel divergence in externalizing and internalizing problem comorbidity. These findings were largely robust across gender and samples. These findings support Irritability/Oppositionality subfactors of ODD in two mixed-gender samples, demonstrate strong evidence for a lack of gender differences in such subfactors, and demonstrate their convergent and divergent validity in emergent latent classes, later behavioral problems, and personality correlates. © 2015 Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health.
View
Dimensions of Oppositional Defiant Disorder in Young Children: Model Comparisons, Gender and Longitudinal Invariance
Article
  • Aug 2014
  • J ABNORM CHILD PSYCH
Identifying the latent structure of Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) may have important clinical and research implications. The present study compared existing dimensional models of ODD for model fit and examined the metric and scalar invariance of the best-fitting model. Study participants were a diverse (38.8 % minority, 49.1 % boys) community sample of 796 children. Parents completed the Child Symptom Inventory and the DISC-YC ODD scales at child ages of 4, 5 and 6-7 years. When comparing single-factor (DSM-IV model), two-factor (oppositional behavior, negative affect), and three-factor models (one with dimensions of oppositional behavior, negative affect, antagonistic behavior; a second with dimensions of irritable, hurtful, and headstrong), the two-factor model showed the best fit. The two-factor model showed configural, metric and scalar invariance across gender and age. Results suggest that, among existing models, ODD is best characterized as two separate dimensions, one behavioral and one affective, which are comparable for both boys and girls in these age groups.
View
Invited Paper: The Rediscovery of Bifactor Measurement Models
Article
  • Sep 2012
Bifactor latent structures were introduced over 70 years ago, but only recently has bifactor modeling been rediscovered as an effective approach to modeling construct-relevant multidimensionality in a set of ordered categorical item responses. I begin by describing the Schmid-Leiman bifactor procedure (Schmid & Leiman, 1957), and highlight its relations with correlated-factors and second-order exploratory factor models. After describing limitations of the Schmid-Leiman, two newer methods of exploratory bifactor modeling are considered, namely, analytic bifactor (Jennrich & Bentler, 2011) and target bifactor rotations (Reise, Moore, & Maydeu-Olivares, 2011). In section two, I discuss limited and full-information estimation approaches to confirmatory bifactor models that have emerged from the item response theory and factor analysis traditions, respectively. Comparison of the confirmatory bifactor model to alternative nested confirmatory models and establishing parameter invariance for the general factor also are discussed. In the final section, important applications of bifactor models are reviewed. These applications demonstrate that bifactor modeling potentially provides a solid foundation for conceptualizing psychological constructs, constructing measures, and evaluating a measure's psychometric properties. However, some applications of the bifactor model may be limited due to its restrictive assumptions.
View