Journal
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 269-279Publisher
EDUCATIONAL PUBLISHING FOUNDATION-AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1111/cpsp.12075
Keywords
categorical; classification; comorbidity; diagnosis; diagnostic and statistical manual; dimensional; natural kinds
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The excellent articles in this Special Series underscore the centripetal forces pushing the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), including DSM-5, toward science, as well as the centrifugal forces pushing the DSM away from science. These articles demonstrate that, some assertions to the contrary, many of the DSM-5 revisions were indeed responsive to data. At the same time, these articles underscore the point that certain assumptions and constraints are impeding the DSM's scientific potential. I highlight three such centrifugal forces here: (a) unwarranted categorical assumptions, (b) unwarranted belief in natural kinds, and (c) the DSM's many masters. Although the DSM is in part a scientific document, it is also in part a pragmatic compromise among multiple competing demands and constituencies. I encourage boosting competition in the marketplace of ideas as a means of enhancing the verisimilitude of the psychiatric classification system.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available