Unpacking Bias and Validity in HiTOP Multi-Informant Approaches to Psychopathology

Abstract

HiTOP emerged from observing patterns of covariation among DSM symptoms and diagnoses, intending to identify the primary dimensions of psychopathology (Kotov et al., 2017). The HiTOP structure, therefore, reflects information from two primary sources: self-reports and clinician appraisals. Although individuals are often aware of their struggles and clinicians can provide valuable external perspectives, people's peers (people who know them) may know things about them that are not readily accessible either to the self or to clinicians. Peer ratings may help to reduce errors or blind spots in assessments, leading to more comprehensive understanding of psychopathology. This symposium comprises research using a variety of multi-informant approaches to develop improved assessment practices, investigate potential sources of bias within HiTOP, and determine the degree to which peer reports can provide additional validity. Speakers will give 15-minute presentations, each followed by a brief question period. After the four talks, DeYoung will act as discussant and then moderate discussion between speakers and the audience in the remaining 15-20 minutes.

Chair

Hannah Asis | University of Minnesota-Twin Cities

Discussant

Colin DeYoung | University of Minnesota