Year: 2024
Type: article
Abstract: In response to the crisis in validity of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , psychiatry has seen a proliferation of alternative research frameworks for studying and classifying psychiatric disorders. In this paper, I argue that the existence of multiple frameworks in which each employs their own standards of validity is problematic methodologically speaking for trying to do any kind of unified validation work. Fundamental disagreements concerning the underlying phenomenon, sources of validating evidence, and the very nature of validity move each framework into an unrecognized plurality. The consequence for psychiatry is a new validity crisis.
Source: Philosophy of Science
DOI: 10.1017/psa.2024.71
Author: Nicholas Zautra
Institutions: Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana University
Language: English
Topic: Mental Health and Psychiatry
Subfield: Philosophy
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Estimated APC paid: $3,450
Funder: University of Cambridge
OpenAlex ID: W4405247172