当前位置: X-MOL 学术Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The Philosophy of Nosology
Annual Review of Clinical Psychology ( IF 18.4 ) Pub Date : 2017-05-08 00:00:00 , DOI: 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-045020
Peter Zachar 1 , Kenneth S. Kendler 2
Affiliation  

Many scholars believe that psychiatric nosology is undergoing a crisis of confidence. Some of the issues up for debate hark back to the introduction of the natural history approach to classification in the seventeenth century. Natural histories map sameness and difference rather than speculate about causes. In contrast, the natural classification approach aspires to carve nature at the joints by demarcating classifications by causes. Natural classifications are more ideal scientifically, but speculation about causality has had a poor track record in psychiatric nosology. A natural classification of psychiatric disorders may have the added burden of requiring normative assumptions in addition to the discovery of fact. In the natural classification tradition, the epistemic iteration perspective, the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative, and dimensional models offer different views about the criteria of naturalness (or validity). Also in this tradition, some thinkers believe that causes can be empirically indexed by latent variable models, especially if the latent variables are moderately heritable, but these assumptions may be neither statistically nor genetically warranted.

中文翻译:


本体论哲学

许多学者认为,精神病学正遭受信心危机。有待辩论的一些问题可以追溯到17世纪引入自然历史分类方法。自然历史描绘的是相同与否,而不是推测原因。相反,自然分类方法渴望通过按原因划分分类来在关节处雕刻自然。从科学上讲,自然分类更理想,但有关因果关系的推测在精神病学方面的记录较差。精神疾病的自然分类除了发现事实外,还可能需要另外的规范假设。在自然分类的传统中,从认知迭代的角度出发,研究领域标准(RDoC)倡议,维度模型对自然性(或有效性)标准提供了不同的观点。同样在这种传统中,一些思想家认为,可以通过潜变量模型对因果进行索引,尤其是在潜变量具有中等遗传性的情况下,但这些假设可能既无统计学依据,也无遗传依据。

更新日期:2017-05-08
down
wechat
bug