How Robust Is the p Factor? Using Multitrait-Multimethod Modeling to Inform the Meaning of General Factors of Youth Psychopathology

We used multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) modeling to examine general factors of psychopathology in three samples of youth (Ns = 2119, 303, 592) for whom three informants reported on the youth's psychopathology (e.g., child, parent, teacher). Empirical support for the p-factor diminished in multi-informant models compared with mono-informant models: the correlation between externalizing and internalizing factors decreased and the general factor in bifactor models essentially reflected externalizing. Widely used MTMM-informed approaches for modeling multi-informant data cannot distinguish between competing interpretations of the patterns of effects we observed, including that the p-factor reflects, in part, evaluative consistency bias or that psychopathology manifests differently across contexts (e.g., home vs. school). Ultimately, support for the p-factor may be stronger in mono-informant designs, although it is does not entirely vanish in multi-informant models. Instead, the general factor of psychopathology in any given mono-informant model likely reflects a complex mix of variances, some substantive and some methodological.