Questions and Answers
What are the pros of the categorical approach?
Who expressed concerns about the clinical utility of the dimensional approach?
First (2005)
Who critiques the categorical-polythetic approach for not being empirically derived?
Krueger & Markon (2006)
Who claims that most research does not support a categorical/discontinuous approach?
Signup and view all the answers
Who critiques categorical systems for poorly defined categories and boundaries?
Signup and view all the answers
What is a critique of the categorical system regarding diagnostic comorbidity?
Signup and view all the answers
Define dimensional classification.
Signup and view all the answers
Who argues that the Five Factor Model should be used for the classification of personality disorders?
Signup and view all the answers
The two main latent liabilities according to Krueger & Markon are ______ and ______.
Signup and view all the answers
What are Watson's (2005) three subordinate factors?
Signup and view all the answers
Who proposed that we should focus on clinical utility in determining how to classify diagnoses?
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Categorical vs. Dimensional Classification
- Categorical approach offers benefits such as simplifying communication and defining rare disorders.
- Concerns expressed regarding the clinical utility of the dimensional approach by First (2005).
- The categorical approach is criticized for lacking empirical validation, complicating medical record-keeping, and leading to excessive diagnostic comorbidity.
- Critics of the categorical/polythetic approach argue it lacks empirical derivation (Krueger & Markon, 2006).
- Hyman (2010) claims most research challenges a categorical/discontinuous approach; it may not reflect true disorders.
- Poorly defined categories in categorical systems can lead to heightened rates of comorbidity (Klein & Riso, 1993).
- Widiger & Trull (2007) challenge categorical classifications due to inadequate scientific basis, with issues like arbitrary boundaries and diagnostic heterogeneity.
Dimensional Classification
- Dimensional classification views disorders on a continuum with normalcy, lacking clear separations (Hyman, 2010).
- Potential benefits include identifying at-risk children for early intervention (Drabick & Kendall, 2010).
- Dimensional models could be grounded in empirical research (Klein & Riso, 1993), potentially improving classification and treatment of personality disorders through the Five Factor Model (Widiger & Trull, 2007).
- Samuel & Widiger (2006) found that psychologists rated the utility of the Five Factor Model higher than DSM-IV descriptions in assessing cases.
Hierarchical Classification
- Hierarchical classification groups disorders based on shared underlying structures, focusing on internalizing and externalizing factors.
- Watson (2005) identified a superordinate factor called internalizing/negative affectivity with subordinate factors like distress, fear, and bipolar disorders.
- Krueger et al. (2005) used latent class analysis to find support for a continuum in externalizing spectrum disorders.
- Kessler et al. (2011) replicated findings across 14 countries, affirming the model's validity, though residual significant pairwise associations remain.
Taxon Classifications
- "True taxon" classification identifies entities based on latent structures of disorders.
- Limitations noted in true taxon classification include the current inadequate understanding of disorder etiology.
- Hyman (2010) presents a proposal identifying true taxons across several disorder types based on specific neurobiological interactions.
Evidence for Classification Approaches
- Ruscio, Brown, & Ruscio (2009) provide evidence supporting categorical definitions of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) using taxometric analyses.
- Ruscio & Ruscio (2000) suggest MDD may represent a dimensional construct, with no taxonic peak found in their analyses of large samples.
- Beach & Amir (2003) indicate that while MDD symptoms show dimensionality, some somatic symptoms appear taxonic.
Methodology for Assessment
- Various methodologies are recommended to determine disorder classification, including Discriminant Function Analysis and Latent Class Analysis (Klein & Riso, 1993).
- Evidence for abuse vs. dependence states there are no distinct correlates or predictors, and they share common genetic risks (DSM-V Task Force findings).
- Alternative DSM-5 model identifies four domains of personality functioning: identity, self-direction, empathy, and intimacy, and five pathological domains: negative affectivity, detachment, antagonism, disinhibition, psychoticism.
Critiques and Alternative Models
- Widiger & Trull's (2007) Five Factor Model is a widely researched alternative to categorical notions of disorders.
- Critiques of FFM indicate an absence of consensus, challenges in clinical utility, and time-consuming identification processes (Flanagan & Blashfield, 2010).
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
Explore the ongoing debate between categorical and dimensional approaches in classification of psychological disorders. This quiz examines the advantages and criticisms of both methods, supported by key research findings. Test your understanding of these classification systems and their implications in clinical practice.
