Criticism of discrete classification systems for mental disorders has led to a focus on identification of mechanisms that cut across symptom clusters, known as transdiagnostic factors. One such proposed factor is negative repetitive thought (NRT), or a perseverative, often uncontrollable, focus on negative information, experiences, or expectations. Worry and rumination are two major constructs thought to compose NRT. No confirmatory factor analyses have investigated whether worry and rumination might compose a general NRT factor, discrete factors, or some combination of the two. The first purpose of the current study was to use confirmatory factor analyses to uncover whether worry and rumination are best characterized as separate or common constructs. In addition to this purpose, the study investigated NRT as a transdiagnostic factor for psychopathology. Finally, it examined incremental associations of NRT with mental illness symptoms, after controlling for negative emotionality, the most well established transdiagnostic risk factor. A bi-factor conceptualization of worry and rumination, in which there was a common NRT factor and specific worry and rumination factors, yielded the best fit to the data across three separate samples. The NRT factor was associated with both internalizing and externalizing psychopathology; however, it demonstrated significant overlap with negative emotionality. Further exploration of this overlap using bi-factor modeling demonstrated that NRT and negative emotionality are likely best thought of as a unidimensional general negative affect construct, and this structure was replicated across samples. Importantly, evidence was found that this tendency to experience negative affect was also a common liability for mental illness symptoms.

This study aimed to examine the internal structure, score reliability, scoring, and interpretation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit-S; Duckworth & Quinn, 2009) using a sample of engineering students (N = 610) from one large southeastern university located in the United States. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to compare four competing theoretical models: (a) a unidimensional model, (b) a two-factor model, (c) a second-order model, and (d) a bi-factor model. Given that researchers have used Grit-S as a single factor, a unidimensional model was examined. Two-factor and second-order models were considered based upon the work done by Duckworth, Peterson, Matthew, and Kelly (2007), and Duckworth and Quinn (2009). Finally, Reise, Morizot, and Hays (2007) have suggested a bi-factor model be considered when dealing with multidimensional scales given its ability to aid researches about the dimensionality and scoring of instruments consisting of heterogeneous item content. Findings from this study show that Grit-S was best represented by a bi-factor solution. Results indicate that the general grit factor possesses satisfactory score reliability and information, however, the results are not entirely clear or supportive of subscale scoring for either consistency of effort subscale or interest. The implications of these findings and future research are discussed.