In a critique of a review by Frick (2022), Salekin (2022) perpetuates several misinterpretations of the research extending the construct of psychopathy to research and diagnostic classification of children with Conduct Disorder Specifically, he proposes that the existing research, including the research reviewed by Frick, does not support limiting the extension to a single construct and proposes that the diagnostic criteria should consider more dimensions than just the callous-unemotional (CU) dimension. My response shows that these concerns are misleading and divert attention from several critical issues. That is, contrary to Salekin's assertion, the focus of my review was not on whether multiple dimensions of psychopathy should inform research and diagnosis of Conduct Disorder but on how this should be done based on available research. Further, contrary to Salekin's assertion, multiple dimensions of psychopathy are already integrated into diagnostic classification for childhood disruptive behavior disorders. The focus of my review was whether the available research currently supports a different method of integrating them. Unfortunately, by trying to promote a false narrative, Salekin's response could limit research to address these critical issues and lead to harmful consequences for children with disruptive behavior disorders.

在对 Frick (2022) 的评论的批评中，Salekin (2022) 延续了对将精神病的结构扩展到行为障碍儿童的研究和诊断分类的研究的几种误解，具体来说，他建议现有的研究，包括所回顾的研究Frick 不支持将扩展限制为单一结构，并建议诊断标准应考虑更多维度，而不仅仅是冷酷无情 (CU) 维度。我的回答表明，这些担忧具有误导性，并转移了对几个关键问题的注意力。也就是说，与 Salekin 的断言相反，我的审查重点不是精神病的多个维度是否应该为行为障碍的研究和诊断提供信息，而是应该如何根据现有的研究来完成。此外，与 Salekin 的断言相反，精神病的多个维度已经被整合到儿童破坏性行为障碍的诊断分类中。我审查的重点是现有研究是否支持整合它们的不同方法。不幸的是，通过试图宣传虚假的叙述，萨利金的反应可能会限制研究以解决这些关键问题，并对患有破坏性行为障碍的儿童造成有害后果。