Results for 'RDoC'

8 found
Order:
  1. Stabilizing Constructs Through Collaboration Across Different Research Fields as a Way to Foster the Integrative Approach of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) Project.Jacqueline A. Sullivan - 2016 - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (00):00.
    In this article, I explain why stabilizing constructs is important to the success of the Research Domain Criteria Project and identify one measure for facilitating such stability.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  2.  22
    Not Understanding Others. The RdoC Approach to Theory of Mind and Empathy Deficits in Schizophrenia, Borderline Personality Disorder and Mood Disorders.Elisa Melloni, Francesco Benedetti, Benedetta Vai & Elisabetta Lalumera - 2020 - Phenomenology and Mind 2:162-181.
    The Research Domani Criteria framework (RdoC) encourages research on specific impairments present across traditional nosological categories and suggests a list of biological and behavioral measures for assessing them. After a description of RdoC, in this article we focus on impairments of the ability of understanding others, specifically in Theory of Mind and empathy. We illustrate recent evidence on brain anomalies correlating with these deficits in Schizophrenia, Addiction Disorders and Mood Disorders populations. In the last section, we zoom out (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. In What Sense Are Mental Disorders Brain Disorders? Explicating the Concept of Mental Disorder Within RDoC.Marko Jurjako & Luca Malatesti - 2020 - Phenomenology and Mind 18:182-198.
    Recently there has been a trend of moving towards biological and neurocognitive based classifications of mental disorders that is motivated by a dissatisfaction with the syndrome-based classifications of mental disorders. The Research Domain Criteria (indicated with the acronym RDoC) represents a bold and systematic attempt to foster this advancement. However, RDoC faces theoretical and conceptual issues that need to be addressed. Some of these difficulties emerge when we reflect on the plausible reading of the slogan “mental disorders are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Epistemological Reflections About the Crisis of the DSM-5 and the Revolutionary Potential of the RDoC Project.Massimiliano Aragona - 2014 - Dialogues in Philosophy, Mental and Neuro Sciences 7 (1):11-20.
    This paper tests the predictions of an epistemological model that considered the DSM psychiatric classification (in the neopositivist and neo-Kraepelinian shape introduced by the DSM-III) as a scientific paradigm in crisis. As predicted, the DSM-5 did not include revolutionary proposals in its basic structure. In particular, the possibility of a dimensional revolution has not occurred and early proposals of etiopathogenic diagnoses were not implemented due to lack of specific knowledge in that field. However, conceiving the DSM-5 as a bridge between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. A Response To: "A Commentary on "Stabilizing Constructs Through Collaboration Across Different Research Fields as a Way to Foster the Integrative Approach of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) Project".Jacqueline A. Sullivan - 2016 - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience:00-00.
    This paper is a response to a commentary by Walter Glannon (2016, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience) on my paper "Stabilizing Constructs Across Research Fields as a Way to Foster the Integrative Approach of the Research Domain Criteria Project".
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Models of Mental Illness.Jacqueline Sullivan - 2016 - In Harold Kincaid, Jeremy Simon & Miriam Solomon (eds.), The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Medicine. Routledge. pp. 455-464.
    This chapter has two aims. The first aim is to compare and contrast three different conceptual-explanatory models for thinking about mental illness with an eye towards identifying the assumptions upon which each model is based, and exploring the model’s advantages and limitations in clinical contexts. Major Depressive Disorder is used as an example to illustrate these points. The second aim is to address the question of what conceptual-theoretical framework for thinking about mental illness is most likely to facilitate the discovery (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. Psychiatric Progress and The Assumption of Diagnostic Discrimination.Kathryn Tabb - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82:1047-1058.
    The failure of psychiatry to validate its diagnostic constructs is often attributed to the prioritizing of reliability over validity in the structure and content of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Here I argue that in fact what has retarded biomedical approaches to psychopathology is unwarranted optimism about diagnostic discrimination: the assumption that our diagnostic tests group patients together in ways that allow for relevant facts about mental disorder to be discovered. I consider the Research Domain Criteria framework (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  8. Phenomenology and Dimensional Approaches to Psychiatric Research and Classification.Anthony Vincent Fernandez - 2019 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 26 (1):65-75.
    Contemporary psychiatry finds itself in the midst of a crisis of classification. The developments begun in the 1980s—with the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders —successfully increased inter-rater reliability. However, these developments have done little to increase the predictive validity of our categories of disorder. A diagnosis based on DSM categories and criteria often fails to accurately anticipate course of illness or treatment response. In addition, there is little evidence that the DSM categories link up (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations