Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Cognitive Psychology
Developing Constructs For Psychopathology Research: Research Domain Criteria, Charles A. Sanislow, Daniel S. Pine, Kevin J. Quinn, Michael J. Kozak, Marjorie A. Garvey, Robert K. Heinssen, Philip Sung-En Wang, Bruce N. Cuthbert
Developing Constructs For Psychopathology Research: Research Domain Criteria, Charles A. Sanislow, Daniel S. Pine, Kevin J. Quinn, Michael J. Kozak, Marjorie A. Garvey, Robert K. Heinssen, Philip Sung-En Wang, Bruce N. Cuthbert
Charles A. Sanislow, Ph.D.
There exists a divide between findings from integrative neuroscience and clinical research focused on mechanisms of psychopathology. Specifically, a clear correspondence does not emerge between clusters of complex clinical symptoms and dysregulated neurobiological systems, with many apparent redundancies. For instance, many mental disorders involve multiple disruptions in putative mechanistic factors (e.g., excessive fear, deficient impulse control), and different disrupted mechanisms appear to play major roles in many disorders. The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework is a heuristic to facilitate the incorporation of behavioral neuroscience in the study of psychopathology. Such integration might be achieved by shifting the central research focus …
Research Domain Criteria (Rdoc): Toward A New Classification Framework For Research On Mental Disorders, Thomas R. Insel, Bruce N. Cuthbert, Marjorie A. Garvey, Robert K. Heinssen, Daniel S. Pine, Kevin J. Quinn, Charles A. Sanislow, Philip S. Wang
Research Domain Criteria (Rdoc): Toward A New Classification Framework For Research On Mental Disorders, Thomas R. Insel, Bruce N. Cuthbert, Marjorie A. Garvey, Robert K. Heinssen, Daniel S. Pine, Kevin J. Quinn, Charles A. Sanislow, Philip S. Wang
Charles A. Sanislow, Ph.D.
Current versions of the DSM and ICD have facilitated reliable clinical diagnosis and research. However, problems have increasingly been documented over the past several years, both in clinical and research arenas (e.g., 1, 2). Diagnostic categories based on clinical consensus fail to align with findings emerging from clinical neuroscience and genetics. The boundaries of these categories have not been predictive of treatment response. And, perhaps most important, these categories, based upon presenting signs and symptoms, may not capture fundamental underlying mechanisms of dysfunction. One consequence has been to slow the development of new treatments targeted to underlying pathophysiological mechanisms.