Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 500 of the 500 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): III. Emotional dysfunction superspectrum

Open access
Watson, David, Levin‐Aspenson, Holly F., Waszczuk, Monika A., Conway, Christopher C., Dalgleish, Tim, Dretsch, Michael N., Eaton, Nicholas R., Forbes, Miriam K., Forbush, Kelsie T., Hobbs, Kelsey A., Michelini, Giorgia, Nelson, Brady D., Sellbom, Martin, Slade, Tim, South, Susan C., Sunderland, Matthew, Waldman, Irwin, Witthöft, Michael, Wright, Aidan G.C., Kotov, Roman, Krueger, Robert F., HiTOP Utility Workgroup·2022·World Psychiatry
DOI 10.1002/wps.20943
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is a quantitative nosological system that addresses shortcomings of traditional mental disorder diagnoses, including arbitrary boundaries between psychopathology and normality, frequent disorder co‐occurrence, substantial heterogeneity within disorders, and diagnostic unreliability over time and across clinicians. This paper reviews evidence on the validity and utility of the internalizing and somatoform spectra of HiTOP, which together provide support for an emotional dysfunction superspectrum. These spectra are composed of homogeneous symptom and maladaptive trait dimensions currently subsumed within multiple diagnostic classes, including depressive, anxiety, trauma‐related, eating, bipolar, and somatic symptom disorders, as well as sexual dysfunction and aspects of personality disorders. Dimensions falling within the emotional dysfunction superspectrum are broadly linked to individual differences in negative affect/neuroticism. Extensive evidence establishes that dimensions falling within the superspectrum share genetic diatheses, environmental risk factors, cognitive and affective difficulties, neural substrates and biomarkers, childhood temperamental antecedents, and treatment response. The structure of these validators mirrors the quantitative structure of the superspectrum, with some correlates more specific to internalizing or somatoform conditions, and others common to both, thereby underlining the hierarchical structure of the domain. Compared to traditional diagnoses, the internalizing and somatoform spectra demonstrated substantially improved utility: greater reliability, larger explanatory and predictive power, and greater clinical applicability. Validated measures are currently available to implement the HiTOP system in practice, which can make diagnostic classification more useful, both in research and in the clinic.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/wps.20943

Cites

500 of 500 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 500 references

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. 10.1037/0021-843X.110.4.585 · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.110.4.585 · Paper page
  2. 10.1037/0021-843X.107.2.216 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Deary IJ, 1999, A taxonomy of medically unexplained symptoms, J Psychosom Res, 47, 51
  4. Leonhart R, 2018, Comparison of the factor structure of the Patient Health Questionnaire for somatic symptoms (PHQ‐15) in Germany, the Netherlands, and China. A transcultural structural equation modeling (SEM) study. Front, Psychiatry, 9, 240
  5. 10.1037/0021-843X.103.1.18 · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.103.1.18 · Paper page
  6. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1166(199912)14:12<1044::AID-GPS55>3.0.CO;2-0 · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1166(199912)14:12<1044::aid-gps55>3.0.co;2-0
  7. Levey DF, 2020, GWAS of depression phenotypes in the Million Veteran Program and meta‐analysis in more than 1.2 million participants yields 178 independent risk loci, medRxiv
  8. Duval ER, 2015, Neural circuits in anxiety and stress disorders: a focused review, Ther Clin Risk Manag, 11, 115
  9. Duarte JA, 2016, Neurobiological underpinnings of bipolar disorder focusing on findings of diffusion tensor imaging: a systematic review. Braz, J Psychiatry, 38, 167
  10. 10.1037/0021-843X.106.2.213 · doi:10.1037/0021-843x.106.2.213
  11. Martel MM, 2019, Handbook of personality development, 534
  12. Nielsen IKM, 2014, The impact of temperamental dimensions on change in symptoms of oppositional defiant disorder from preschool to first grade
  13. García‐Escalera J, 2016, Efficacy of transdiagnostic cognitive‐behavioral therapy for anxiety and depression in adults, children and adolescents: a meta‐analysis, Rev de Psicopatol y Psicol Clin, 21, 147
  14. Barlow DH, 2017, Unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders: Therapist guide
  15. Frank E., 1999, Interpersonal and social rhythm therapy prevents depressive symptomatology in bipolar I patients, Bipolar Disord
  16. Dessel N, 2014, Non‐pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms (MUPS) in adults, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 11, CD011142
  17. Beck AT, 1996, Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory II
  18. 10.1037/pas0000820 · doi:10.1037/pas0000820
  19. Livesley WJ, 2009, Manual for the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology ‐ Basic Questionnaire
  20. Ben‐Porath YS, 2008, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory‐2‐Restructured Form
  21. Morey LC, 2007, Professional manual for the Personality Assessment Inventory
  22. Lee TT, 2017, Neuropsychological assessment in the age of evidence‐based practice: diagnostic and treatment evaluations, 65
  23. Kessler RC, 1997, Patterns and correlates of self‐help group membership in the United States, Soc Policy, 27, 27
  24. Alloy L, 1990, Comorbidity of mood and anxiety disorders, 499

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Watson, D., Levin‐Aspenson, H. F., Waszczuk, M. A., Conway, C. C., Dalgleish, T., Dretsch, M. N., Eaton, N. R., Forbes, M. K., Forbush, K. T., Hobbs, K. A., Michelini, G., Nelson, B. D., Sellbom, M., Slade, T., South, S. C., Sunderland, M., Waldman, I., Witthöft, M., Wright, A. G. C., Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., & Workgroup, H. U.
Venue
World Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-01-11
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
26-54
ISSN
  • 1723-8617 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-5545
DOI
10.1002/wps.20943
OpenAlex
W4205400385
Cited by
265
References
500
FWCI
44.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): III. Emotional dysfunction superspectrum. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/wps.20943
The paper
Watson, D., Levin‐Aspenson, H. F., Waszczuk, M. A., Conway, C. C., Dalgleish, T., Dretsch, M. N., Eaton, N. R., Forbes, M. K., Forbush, K. T., Hobbs, K. A., Michelini, G., Nelson, B. D., Sellbom, M., Slade, T., South, S. C., Sunderland, M., Waldman, I., Witthöft, M., Wright, A. G. C., . . . Workgroup, H. U. (2022). Validity and utility of Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): III. Emotional dysfunction superspectrum. World Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20943

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.