The DSM

Discussion 1: The DSM

At the heart of every great mystery lies a solution. Just as a good detective may use specific guidelines to gather evidence for a solution, so too might a good psychologist use set criteria to gather evidence for an accurate solution, or diagnosis. Although detectives focus on who is responsible for the problem, psychologists focus on why and how the problem surfaced. To make an accurate diagnosis, psychologists follow set diagnostic criteria outlined in the DSM. As a classification system for diagnosis, the DSM is important in the field, but current literature highlights the fact that, along with its strengths, limitations exist in it for accuracy in client diagnosis.

For this Discussion, consider the classification system of the DSM. Think about the relative strengths and limitations of this classification system in making a diagnosis.

With these thoughts in mind:

Post by Day 3a brief description of the overall classification system of the DSM in your own words. Then discuss the strengths and limitations of the DSM.

Be sure to support your postings and responses with specific references to the Learning Resources and current literature.

Readings

·         American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

o    Introduction, Use of the Manual, Cautionary Statement for Forensic Use of DSM-5

o    Assessment Measures, Cultural Formulation

o    Appendix: Highlight of Changes from DSM-IV to DSM-5

   Paris, J. (2015). The intelligent clinician’s guide to the DSM-5 (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from the Walden Library.

·         Chapter 5, “Diagnostic Validity”

·         Chapter 6, “Dimensionality”

·         Chapter 7, “Clinical Utility”

   Johnson, R. (2013). Forensic and culturally responsive approach for the DSM-5: Just the FACTS. Journal of Theory Construction & Testing, 17(1), 18–22. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

   Miller, R., & Prosek, E. A. (2013). Trends and implications of proposed changes to the DSM-5 for vulnerable populations. Journal Of Counseling & Development, 91(3), 359–366. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

   Mohr, J. J., Weiner, J. L., Chopp, R. M., & Wong, S. J. (2009). Effects of client bisexuality on clinical judgment: When is bias most likely to occur? Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(1), 164–175.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

   McLaughlin, J. E. (2006). The pros and cons of viewing formal diagnosis from a social constructionist perspective. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education & Development, 45(2), 165–172.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

   Thakker, J., & Ward, T. (1998). Culture and classification: The cross-cultural application of the DSM-IV. Clinical Psychology Review, 18(5), 501–529.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

   Document: Marvin Case Study Use this document to complete Discussion 2 this week.

Optional Resources

·         Flanagan, E. H., & Blashfield, R. K. (2007). Clinician's folk taxonomies of mental disorders. Philosophy, Psychiatry & Psychology, 14(3), 249–269.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

·         Hohenshil, T. H. (1996). Editorial: Role of assessment and diagnosis in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, 75(1), 64–67.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.  

·         Hays, D. G., McLeod, A. L., & Prosek, E. (2009). Diagnostic variance among counselors and counselor trainees. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 42(1), 3–14.  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.  

·         MacDonald, A., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). Mapping the country within: A special section on reconceptualizing the classification of mental disorders. Journal Of Abnormal Psychology, 122(3), 891–893. Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

·         Obiols, J. E. (2012). DSM 5: Precedents, present and prospects. International Journal Of Clinical Health & Psychology, 12(2), 281–290.