Abnormal Psychology. William J. Ray

predictive validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity.

      There are several models of assessment that represent different ways of assessing signs and symbols. These include symptom questionnaires, personality tests, projective tests, and neuropsychological testing. Neuroscience techniques offer an additional level of analysis to the models of assessment that focus on signs and symbols. Scientists have sought to identify underlying markers associated with specific mental disorders. Using various brain imaging techniques such as MRI, fMRI, EEG, and MEG, there has been a search for structural and functional changes associated with psychopathology. There might be different underlying brain processes involved in what appears as a single disorder. Thus, neuroscience methods may lead to better diagnostic procedures. It is also possible to use these techniques to follow the course of a disorder over time. Another potential for neuroscience methods is that by knowing the underlying brain and genetic processes involved in a particular disorder for a particular person, it would be possible to create a treatment particular to a given individual.

      Classification is a way to organize the diversity seen in mental disorders. Over the past 200 years, numerous systems have been developed; however, in the past 50 years, the emphasis has been on reliability of diagnosis. There has been a push for observable characteristics that would define a specific disorder—signs and symptoms delineated through observation of, and conversation with, the individual. In general, these types of criteria make up the structure of the DSM, published by the APA and used in North America, and the ICD, published by the WHO and used in Europe. One overall change in the most recent edition of DSM (DSM–5) is the use of dimensional assessments and spectrum-related disorders. Another change is in the placement of disorders based on underlying vulnerabilities as well as symptom characteristics to reflect how a variety of disorders may have some common underlying similarities. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) has begun a program to better study, prevent, and treat mental disorders, which includes developing a new way to classify mental disorders, referred to as Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). Beginning with the next chapter, I will turn to focusing on particular disorders.

      Study Resources

      Review Questions

      1 What are some of the advantages of conducting a structured interview for an initial mental health assessment? In addition, what specific advantages do the mental status exam and the SCID offer?

      2 How do reliability and validity relate to the assessment and classification of psychopathology?

      3 How can neuropsychological testing help us understand mental illness?

      4 What important areas of potential do neuroscience techniques offer in the assessment and classification of mental illness?

      5 “Classification is a way to organize the diversity seen in mental disorders.” From what you have read about ICD and DSM, the advantages of classification are clear, but are there any disadvantages or things that are overlooked?

      For Further Reading

      Frances, A. (2013). Saving normal: An insider’s revolt against out-of-control psychiatric diagnosis, DSM–5, big pharma, and the medicalization of ordinary life. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

      Kitayama, S., & Cohen, D. (2007). The handbook of cultural psychology. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

      Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

      Key Terms and Concepts

       Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) 131

       categorical 140

       classification 142

       comorbid 140

       Continuous Performance Test (CPT) 137

       Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) 127

       delusional thinking 126

       Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) 139