There is a growing body of evidence highlighting the presence of a single general dimension of psychopathology that can account for multiple associations across mental and substance use disorders. However, relatively little evidence has emerged regarding the validity of this model with respect to a range of factors that have been previously implicated across multiple disorders. The current study utilized a cross-sectional population survey of adolescents (n = 2,003) to examine the extent to which broad psychopathology factors account for specific associations between psychopathology and key validators: poor sleep, self-harm, suicidality, risky sexual behavior, and low self-esteem. Confirmatory factor models, latent class models, and factor mixture models were estimated to identify the best structure of psychopathology. Structural equation models were then estimated to examine the broad and specific associations between each psychopathology indicator and the validators. A confirmatory factor model with three lower-order factors, representing internalizing, externalizing, and psychotic-like experiences, and a single higher-order factor evidenced the best fit. The associations between manifest indicators of psychopathology and validators were largely nonspecific. However, significant and large direct effects were found between several pairwise associations. These findings have implications for the identification of potential targets for intervention and/or tailoring of prevention programs.

Background: The present study explored the reliability, validity, and factor structure of a modified version of the Moral Disengagement Scale (MDS), which comprehensively assesses proneness to disengage from different forms of conduct specific to Australian adolescents. Methods: A sample of 452 students (M age = 12.79; SD = 1.93) completed the modified MDS and the Australian Self-Report Delinquency Scale. A multistep approach was used to evaluate the factor structure of the MDS. The sample was divided into exploratory (n = 221) and cross-validation samples (n = 231). Principal component analysis was conducted with the exploratory sample and multiple factor solutions compared to determine the optimal factor structure of the modified MDS. The final factor solution was confirmed in the cross-validation sample using confirmatory factor analysis. Internal consistency of the final scale and convergent validity with the delinquency questionnaire was also assessed. Results: Analyses resulted in a 22-item MDS for use in Australia, with four factors mapping onto the four conceptual categories of moral disengagement. The individual subscales demonstrated adequate to good internal consistency, and the total scale also demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.87). Convergent validity of the scale was established. Conclusions: The 22-item Australian MDS is a reliable and valid instrument for use within an Australian population.