Abstract
This study examined the structure of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in an adult community sample using first-order confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), and bifactor confirmatory factor analysis and ESEM models, with two group factors (inattention [IA] and hyperactivity/impulsivity [HY/IM]) and two different three group factors (IA, hyperactivity [HY], and impulsivity [IM]; and IA, motoric HY/IM, and verbal HY/IM). A total of 738 adults (males = 374 and females = 364) between 17 and 72 years of age completed the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale. The results provided most support for the ESEM model with group factors for IA, motoric HY/IM, and verbal HY/IM. The factors in this model were reasonably well defined, had good internal consistency omega reliabilities, and had support for their external validities, thereby making it a suitable model for ratings of the ADHD symptoms presented in the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale. The theoretical and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.
Highlights
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) 3-F model differed from the exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) 3-F (Δdf = 36; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 152.04, p < .001), bifactor CFA (BCFA) 3-s-F (Δdf = 186; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 80.31, p < .001), and bi-factor ESEM (BESEM) 3-s-F (Δdf = 186; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 218.82, p < .001) models
The BCFA 3-s-F model differed from the ESEM 3-F (Δdf = 18; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 84.32, p < .001) and BESEM 3-s-F (Δdf = 36; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 152.30, p < .001) model
The ESEM 3-F model differed significantly from the BESEM 3-s-F (Δdf = 18; ΔWLSMVχ2 = 74.11, p < .001) model. This means that the fit values for all models differed significantly from each other, with the BESEM 3-s-F model showing the best fit, followed in sequence by ESEM 3-F, BCFA 3-s-F, and ESEM 3-F models
Summary
Given the aforementioned limitations and omissions, the major aim of the present study was to examine the structure of the DASS-21 items among adults from the general community using the BESEM with target rotation approach. The three factors in all models were depression, anxiety, and stress. These models were described earlier (see Fig 1). For all four models tested, model-based reliabilities and support for the external validities of the different factors in them were examined. Most support for the BESEM with three specific factors with target rotation model in terms of global fit was expected, but it was speculated that one or more of its specific factors may not be well defined
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
