Dimensional versus categorical classification of mental disorders in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and beyond: comment on the special section

The value of including dimensional elements in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has been recognized for decades. Nevertheless, no proposals have been made for introducing dimensional classification in the diagnostic system in a valid and feasible manner. As an initial step in this endeavor, the authors suggest introducing dimensional severity ratings to the extant diagnostic categories and criteria sets. Although not without difficulties, this would begin to determine the feasibility of dimensional classification and would address some limitations of the purely categorical approach (e.g., failure to capture individual differences in disorder severity, and clinically significant features subsumed by other disorders or falling below conventional DSM thresholds). The utility of incorporating broader dimensions of temperament and personality in diagnostic systems beyond the fifth edition of the DSM is also discussed.     

Clinicians' judgments of clinical utility: a comparison of the DSM-IV and five-factor models

Clinical utility, or the usefulness of a diagnostic system in clinical practice, has been identified as an important construct in proposed revisions to the diagnostic nomenclature and a significant limitation of dimensional models of personality disorder, such as the 5-factor model (FFM). Only 1 study to date has addressed explicitly the clinical utility of the FFM, and the findings suggested significant limitations. In the current study, 245 practicing psychologists described 3 historic cases using both the FFM and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) and then rated each model on 6 aspects of clinical utility. In contrast to prior research, the psychologists in this study considered the FFM to have greater clinical utility than the existing diagnostic categories.     

Dimensional and Cross‐Cutting Assessment in the DSM‐5

A significant proposed change to the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM‐5) that will significantly affect the way counselors diagnose mental disorders is the addition of dimensional assessments to the categorical diagnoses. The author reviews the current DSM's (4th ed., text rev.; American Psychiatric Association, 2000 ) categorical classification system, describes the proposed dimensional and cross‐cutting assessments, and provides implications about clinical utility and user acceptability of a dimensional diagnostic approach.     

Clinical utility: a prerequisite for the adoption of a dimensional approach in DSM

A potential obstacle to implementing dimensional representations in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is lack of data about clinical utility and user acceptability. Adopting a dimensional approach would likely complicate medical record keeping, create administrative and clinical barriers between mental disorders and medical conditions, require a massive retreating effort, disrupt research efforts (e.g., meta-analyses), and complicate clinicians' efforts to integrate prior clinical research using DSM categories into clinical practice. Efforts to empirically demonstrate the clinical utility of dimensional alternatives should be a prerequisite for their future implementation in order to establish that their advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Approaches to promote user acceptability and the development of an empirical database include dimensionalizing existing DSM categories and including research dimensions in the DSM appendix.     

Toward a multidimensional model of personality disorder diagnosis: implications for DSM-5

This article outlines a model of personality disorder (PD) diagnosis that combines clinically useful constructs from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) with assessment procedures that maximize reliability and clinical utility while minimizing problems associated with threshold-based PD classification. I begin by addressing limitations in the current DSM conceptualization of PDs: excessive comorbidity, use of arbitrary cutoffs to distinguish normal from pathological functioning, failure to capture variations in the adaptive value of PD symptoms, and inattention to situational influences that shape PD-related behaviors. The revisions proposed by the DSM-5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group help resolve some of these issues, but create new problems in other areas. A better solution would be to employ a multidimensional model of PD diagnosis in which clinicians (a) assign a single dimensional rating of overall level of personality dysfunction, (b) provide separate intensity and impairment ratings for each PD dimension, and (c) list those personality traits-including PD-related traits-that enhance adaptation and functioning. Preliminary evidence bearing on the multidimensional model is reviewed, and broader clinical and empirical implications of the model are discussed.     

A framework for integrating dimensional and categorical classifications of personality disorder

Although empirical evidence strongly supports a dimensional representation of personality disorder, there is strong resistance to dimensional classification due in part to concerns about clinical utility. Acceptance of an evidence-based dimensional classification would be facilitated by information on how such a system would map onto existing diagnoses. With this objective in mind, an integrated framework is proposed that combines categorical and dimensional diagnoses. A two-component classification is adopted that distinguishes between the diagnosis of general personality disorder and the assessment of individual differences in the form the disorder takes. Then, the DSM definition of personality disorders is extended by defining individual disorders as categories of trait dimensions. This makes it possible to develop an integrated classification organized around a set of empirically derived primary traits. Assessments of these traits may then be combined to generate categorical and dimensional diagnoses. It is argued that this approach would introduce an etiological perspective into the classification of personality disorder and improve categorical classification by providing an explicit definition of each diagnosis. The clinical utility of incorporating a dimensional classification is discussed in terms of convenience and acceptability, value in predicting outcomes and treatment planning, and usefulness in organizing and selecting interventions.     

Building an evidence base for DSM-5 conceptualizations of oppositional defiant disorder and conduct disorder: introduction to the special section

The DSM-5 ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders Work Group recently outlined a research agenda designed to support possible revisions to the diagnostic criteria for oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and conduct disorder (CD). Some of the areas in need of further investigation include (a) examining the clinical utility of the current diagnostic system in girls, (b) further clarifying the developmental progression from ODD to CD, (c) determining whether facets of ODD symptoms can help explain heterotypic continuity and enhance predictive validity, (d) evaluating the clinical utility of a new subtyping scheme for CD on the basis of the presence of callous-unemotional traits, and (e) comparing the clinical utility of dimensional versus categorical conceptualizations of ODD and CD. This special section was organized in an attempt to provide data on these issues using a diverse array of longitudinal data sets consisting of both epidemiological and clinic-based samples that collectively cover a large developmental span ranging from childhood through early adulthood.     

The (In)visibility of Psychodiagnosticians' Expertise

This study investigates decision making in mental health care. Specifically, it compares the diagnostic decision outcomes (i.e., the quality of diagnoses) and the diagnostic decision process (i.e., pre‐decisional information acquisition patterns) of novice and experienced clinical psychologists. Participants' eye movements were recorded while they completed diagnostic tasks, classifying mental disorders. In line with previous research, our findings indicate that diagnosticians' performance is not related to their clinical experience. Eye‐tracking data provide corroborative evidence for this result from the process perspective: experience does not predict changes in cue inspection patterns. For future research into expertise in this domain, it is advisable to track individual differences between clinicians rather than study differences on the group level. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A study of the foundations of ethical decision making of clinical medical ethicists

A study of clinical medical ethicists was conducted to determine the various philosophical positions they hold with respect to ethical decision making in medicine and their various positions' relationship to the subjective-objective controversy in value theory. The study consisted of analyzing and interpreting data gathered from questionnaires from 52 clinical medical ethicists at 28 major health care centers in the United States. The study revealed that most clinical medical ethicists tend to be objectivists in value theory, i.e., believe that value judgments are knowledge claims capable of being true or false and therefore expressions of moral requirements and normative imperatives emanating from an external value structure or moral order in the world. In addition, the study revealed that most clinical medical ethicists are consistent in the philosophical foundations of their ethical decision making, i.e., in decision making regarding values they tend not to hold beliefs which are incompatible with other beliefs they hold about values.     

Toward a clinically-oriented model of anxiety disorders

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) model of psychopathology has generally been the accepted standard in North America for understanding and diagnosing psychological disorders for over half a century. This classification model, particularly since DSM-III, has been formulated around the goals of aiding diagnosis, enhancing communication among professionals, fostering psychopathology research and informing treatment. However, all classification systems are inherently dependent on the purpose for the classification. In this paper, an argument is made for a clinically-relevant diagnostic system of mental disorders to support a primary goal of informing treatment. Several lines of research are examined, including studies on diagnostic reliability, dimensional vs categorical nature of anxiety disorders, co-morbidity, and psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatment outcome as they relate to current and proposed diagnostic models of anxiety disorders. Based on the evidence, suggestions are made for revising diagnostic models of anxiety, and key lines of future research are proposed.     

Empirically and clinically useful decision making in psychotherapy: differential predictions with treatment response models

In the delivery of clinical services, outcomes monitoring (i.e., repeated assessments of a patient's response to treatment) can be used to support clinical decision making (i.e., recurrent revisions of outcome expectations on the basis of that response). Outcomes monitoring can be particularly useful in the context of established practice research networks. This article presents a strategy to disaggregate patients into homogeneous subgroups to generate optimal expected treatment response profiles, which can be used to predict and track the progress of patients in different treatment modalities. The study was based on data from 618 diagnostically diverse patients treated with either a cognitive-behavioral treatment protocol (n = 262) or an integrative cognitive-behavioral and interpersonal treatment protocol (n = 356). The validity of expected treatment response models to predict treatment in those 2 protocols for individual patients was evaluated. The ways such a procedure might be used in outpatient centers to learn more about patients, predict treatment response, and improve clinical practice are discussed.     

Enhanced Definitions of Intimate Partner Violence for DSM‐5 and ICD‐11 May Promote Improved Screening and Treatment

Nuanced, multifaceted, and content valid diagnostic criteria for intimate partner violence (IPV) have been created and can be used reliably in the field even by those with little‐to‐no clinical training/background. The use of such criteria such as these would likely lead to more reliable decision making in the field and more consistency across studies. Further, interrater agreement was higher than that usually reported for individual mental disorders. This paper will provide an overview of (a) IPV's scope and impact; (b) the reliable and valid diagnostic criteria that have been used and the adaptation of these criteria inserted in the latest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and another adaptation proposed for the forthcoming International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD); (c) suggestions for screening of IPV in primary care settings; (d) interventions for IPV; and (e) suggested steps toward globally accepted programs.     

Internal consistency reliability of the self-report antisocial process screening device

The self-report version of the Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD) has become a popular measure for assessing psychopathic features in justice-involved adolescents. However, the internal consistency reliability of its component scales (Narcissism, Callous-Unemotional, and Impulsivity) has been questioned in several studies. This study evaluates the internal consistency reliability of the self-report APSD by examining various indices (e.g., Cronbach's alpha, mean interitem correlation) across 11 studies. Whereas the Narcissism and Impulsivity scales display moderate to good reliability, internal consistency indices for the Callous-Unemotional scale are consistently poor across studies. Suggestions are made for revisions to this scale that would substantially improve its internal consistency reliability.     

A Psychometric Review of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5): Current Status and Future Directions

The paradigm of personality psychopathology is shifting from one that is purely categorical in nature to one grounded in dimensional individual differences. Section III (Emerging Measures and Models) of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed. [DSM–5]; American Psychiatric Association, 2013), for example, includes a hybrid categorical/dimensional model of personality disorder classification. To inform the hybrid model, the DSM–5 Personality and Personality Disorders Work Group developed a self-report instrument to assess pathological personality traits—the Personality Inventory for the DSM–5 (PID–5). Since its recent introduction, 30 papers (39 samples) have been published examining various aspects of its psychometric properties. In this article, we review the psychometric characteristics of the PID–5 using the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing as our framework. The PID–5 demonstrates adequate psychometric properties, including a replicable factor structure, convergence with existing personality instruments, and expected associations with broadly conceptualized clinical constructs. More research is needed with specific consideration to clinical utility, additional forms of reliability and validity, relations with psychopathological personality traits using clinical samples, alternative methods of criterion validation, effective employment of cut scores, and the inclusion of validity scales to propel this movement forward.     

DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder: A critical evaluation

The present article critically examines the diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder (BPD) recently proposed by the DSM-IV Axis II work group (Gunderson, J. G., et al., Journal of Personality Disorders, 5, 340–352, 1991). It is concluded that some of the revisions are trivial and there is insufficient justification for others. The revisions are likely to increase the overlap between BPD and other disorders and represent an attempt to retain a categorical classification in the face of evidence that a dimensional model is more appropriate. Evidence suggests that many borderline traits are manifestations of extreme neuroticism.     

Construct Validity of the Iowa Gambling Task

The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) was created to assess real-world decision making in a laboratory setting and has been applied to various clinical populations (i.e., substance abuse, schizophrenia, pathological gamblers) outside those with orbitofrontal cortex damage, for whom it was originally developed. The current review provides a critical examination of lesion, functional neuroimaging, developmental, and clinical studies in order to examine the construct validity of the IGT. The preponderance of evidence provides support for the use of the IGT to detect decision making deficits in clinical populations, in the context of a more comprehensive evaluation. The review includes a discussion of three critical issues affecting the validity of the IGT, as it has recently become available as a clinical instrument: the lack of a concise definition as to what aspect of decision making the IGT measures, the lack of data regarding reliability of the IGT, and the influence of personality and state mood on IGT performance.     

The concept of disorder as a foundation for the DSM's theory-neutral nosology: response to Follette and Houts, Part 2.

Follette and Houts [Follette, W. C., Houts, A. C. (1996). Models of scientific progress and the role of theory in taxonomy development: a case study of the DSM. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1120-1132] argue that 'mental disorder' and 'function' are value concepts that offer no scientific basis for the DSM's theory-neutral nosology or for distinguishing disorders from other behavioral problems. They also claim that the DSM presupposes a biological theory of etiology, thus is not really theory-neutral. They recommend replacing the DSM by theory-laden diagnostic manuals. I argue: (1) DSM criteria do not imply a biological model of disorder, (2) 'mental disorder' and 'function' have scientific content that allows one to distinguish disorder from nondisorder, (3) the evolutionary 'harmful dysfunction' analysis of disorder [Wakefield, J. C. (1992a). The concept of mental disorder: on the boundary between biological facts and social values. American Psychologist, 47, 373-388] coherently demarcates disorder from nondisorder, (4) the proposed behaviorist alternative to the DSM illustrated by the articles in Follette's special section [Follette, W. C. (Ed.) (1996a). Special section on the development of theoretically coherent alternatives to the DSM system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1117-1201] is incoherent because it does not distinguish disorder from nondisorder.     

An Examination of the RDoC Negative Valence Systems Domain Constructs and the Self-Reports Unit of Analysis

In response to shortcomings with the current diagnostic classification system for mental health disorders, such as poor validity and reliability of categorical diagnoses, the National Institute of Mental Health proposed the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative to move towards a dimensional approach using translational research. The current study examined associations between measures of behaviors, cognitions, and mental health symptoms and how they overlap in the Negative Valence Systems (NVS) domain. Specifically, we examined how the Self-Reports unit of analysis reflects the RDoC NVS constructs of acute threat, potential threat, sustained threat, frustrative nonreward, and loss. The overall goal was to identify additional self-report measures that reflect these constructs. Participants, two student samples and two community samples (total N = 1,509), completed online self-reported measures. Questionnaire total and subscale scores were submitted to a principal-axis factor analysis with Promax rotation separately for each sample. For both student samples and one community sample six-factor solutions emerged reflecting major aspects of the RDoC NVS and positive valence systems, particularly acute threat (i.e., fear/panic), potential threat (i.e., inhibition/worry), sustained threat (i.e., chronic stress), loss (i.e., low well-being), frustrative nonreward (i.e., reactive aggression), and reduced behavioral activation. The second community sample differed in that fear/panic and frustration/anger was combined in a general distress factor. Recommendations for additional NVS self-report markers are discussed.