Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-txr5j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-27T15:29:52.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The bifactor model of the Hungarian self-report version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD and Normal Behaviors scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2024

K. Vajsz ,
L. R. Paulina  and
M. Miklósi
K. Vajsz*
Affiliation:
1Department of Clinical Psychology, Semmelweis University 2Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University
L. R. Paulina
Affiliation:
1Department of Clinical Psychology, Semmelweis University 2Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University
M. Miklósi
Affiliation:
1Department of Clinical Psychology, Semmelweis University 2Department of Developmental and Clinical Child Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University 3Centre of Mental Health, Heim Pál National Pediatric Institute, Budapest, Hungary
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neuropsychiatric conditions, maintaining its presence well into adolescence and adulthood, resulting in impaired functioning. Evaluating ADHD symptoms through self-reporting plays a crucial role in assessing individuals within these age groups. The novel self-report version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHD and Normal Behaviors (SWAN) scale offers a comprehensive assessment of behaviour, extending beyond just focusing on the typical signs and symptoms of ADHD, thus providing a more holistic perspective.

Objectives

Our goal was to assess the factorial validity of the Hungarian version of the SWAN self-report by comparing a two-factor model with bifactor models with a general and 1) two specific factors (inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity), 2) three specific factors (inattention, motor hyperactivity/impulsivity, verbal hyperactivity/impulsivity) in a community sample.

Methods

Data from 717 adolescents and young adults (mean age = 20.0 years, SD = 3.10, range: 14 - 25 years, female: N = 664, 92.6%) were analysed. Participants completed an online questionnaire including the SWAN scale after giving informed consent. Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted based on the maximum likelihood estimator (ML).

Results

The bifactor model with a general and three specific factors demonstrated the best fit to our data (CFI = .933, RMSEA = .064 [90% CI: .058 – .071], SRMR = .038). While the overall composite reliability was excellent (ω = .91), the reliability of the specific verbal hyperactivity/impulsivity factor fell below acceptable (ωh = .40).

Conclusions

In line with previous studies, the fit indices of the bifactor models were superior to the non-hierarchical two-factor model. Our results support the existence of a strong general factor but suggest uncertainty in the capacity of the specific factors to consistently explain the distinct variance in observed variables, particularly when compared to the overarching influence of the general factor.

This work was supported by the ÚNKP-22-2 New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Culture and Innovation from the source of the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund (grant number ÚNKP-22-2-I-ELTE-854).

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Type
Abstract
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 67 , Special Issue S1: Abstracts of the 32nd European Congress of Psychiatry , April 2024 , pp. S75 - S76
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.