Quantitatively derived dimensional models of psychopathology enjoy overwhelming empirical support, and a large and active community of psychopathology researchers has been establishing an empirically based dimensional hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology (or HiTOP) as a strong candidate replacement for the current categorical classification system. The hierarchical nature of this taxonomy implies that different levels of resolution are likely to be optimal for different purposes. Our aim was to identify which level of detail is likely to provide optimal validity and explanatory power with regard to relevant clinical variables.

In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services project, we used data from a sample of 2900 psychiatric outpatients to compare different levels from a bass-ackwards model of psychopathology in relation to psychosocial impairment across different domains (global functioning, inability to work, social functioning, suicidal ideation, history of suicide attempts, history of psychiatric hospitalization).

All functioning indices were significantly associated with general psychopathology, but more complex levels provided significant incremental validity. The optimal level of complexity varied across functioning indices, suggesting that there is no single ‘best’ level for understanding relations between psychopathology and functioning.

Results support the hierarchical organization of psychopathology dimensions with regard to validity considerations and downstream implications for applied assessment. It would be fruitful to develop and implement measurement of these dimensions at the appropriate level for the purpose at hand. These findings can be used to guide HiTOP-consistent assessment in other research and clinical settings.