Diagnosing and Classifying Psychological Disorders

Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
Explain why classification systems are necessary in the study of psychopathology

Describe the basic features of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth
Edition (DSM-5)
Discuss changes in the DSM over time, including criticisms of the current edition
Identify which disorders are generally the most common
A first step in the study of psychological disorders is carefully and systematically discerning significant
signs and symptoms. How do mental health professionals ascertain whether or not a person’s inner
states and behaviors truly represent a psychological disorder? Arriving at a proper diagnosis—that is,
appropriately identifying and labeling a set of defined symptoms—is absolutely crucial. This process
enables professionals to use a common language with others in the field and aids in communication
about the disorder with the patient, colleagues and the public. A proper diagnosis is an essential
element to guide proper and successful treatment. For these reasons, classification systems that
organize psychological disorders systematically are necessary.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

(DSM)
Although a number of classification systems have been developed over time, the one that is used by
most mental health professionals in the United States is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM-5), published by the American Psychiatric Association (2013). (Note that the
American Psychiatric Association differs from the American Psychological Association; both are
abbreviated APA.) The first edition of the DSM, published in 1952, classified psychological disorders
according to a format developed by the U.S. Army during World War II (Clegg, 2012). In the years since,
the DSM has undergone numerous revisions and editions. The most recent edition, published in 2013,
is the DSM-5 (APA, 2013). The DSM-5 includes many categories of disorders (e.g., anxiety disorders,
depressive disorders, and dissociative disorders). Each disorder is described in detail, including an
overview of the disorder (diagnostic features), specific symptoms required for diagnosis (diagnostic
criteria), prevalence information (what percent of the population is thought to be afflicted with the
disorder), and risk factors associated with the disorder. Figure 15.4 shows lifetime prevalence rates—
the percentage of people in a population who develop a disorder in their lifetime—of various
psychological disorders among U.S. adults. These data were based on a national sample of 9,282 U.S.
residents (National Comorbidity Survey, 2007).
Figure 15.4 The graph shows the breakdown of psychological disorders, comparing the percentage prevalence among adult males and
adult females in the United States. Because the data is from 2007, the categories shown here are from the DSM-IV, which has been
supplanted by the DSM-5. Most categories remain the same; however, alcohol abuse now falls under a broader Alcohol Use Disorder
category.
The DSM-5 also provides information about comorbidity; the co-occurrence of two disorders. For
example, the DSM-5 mentions that 41% of people with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) also
meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder (Figure 15.5). Problematic substance use is
highly comorbid with other mental illnesses; 6 out of 10 people who have a substance use disorder also
suffer from another form of mental illness (National Institute on Drug Abuse [NIDA], 2007).
Figure 15.5 Obsessive-compulsive disorder and major depressive disorder frequently
occur in the same person.
CONNECT THE CONCEPTS
Comorbidity
As you’ve learned in the text, comorbidity refers to situations in which an individual suffers
from more than one disorder, and often the symptoms of each can interact in negative ways.
Co-occurrence and comorbidity of psychological disorders are quite common, and some of
the most pervasive comorbidities involve substance use disorders that co-occur with
psychological disorders. Indeed, some estimates suggest that around a quarter of people who
suffer from the most severe cases of mental illness exhibit substance use disorder as well.
Conversely, around 10 percent of individuals seeking treatment for substance use disorder
have serious mental illnesses. Observations such as these have important implications for
treatment options that are available. When people with a mental illness are also habitual drug
users, their symptoms can be exacerbated and resistant to treatment. Furthermore, it is not
always clear whether the symptoms are due to drug use, the mental illness, or a combination
of the two. Therefore, it is recommended that behavior is observed in situations in which the
individual has ceased using drugs and is no longer experiencing withdrawal from the drug in
order to make the most accurate diagnosis (NIDA, 2018).
Obviously, substance use disorders are not the only possible comorbidities. In fact, some of
the most common psychological disorders tend to co-occur. For instance, more than half of
individuals who have a primary diagnosis of depressive disorder are estimated to exhibit some
sort of anxiety disorder. The reverse is also true for those diagnosed with a primary diagnosis
of an anxiety disorder. Further, anxiety disorders and major depression have a high rate of
comorbidity with several other psychological disorders (Al-Asadi, Klein, & Meyer, 2015).
The DSM has changed considerably in the half-century since it was originally published. The first two
editions of the DSM, for example, listed homosexuality as a disorder; however, in 1973, the APA voted
to remove it from the manual (Silverstein, 2009). While the DSM-III did not list homosexuality as a
disorder, it introduced a new diagnosis, ego-dystonic homosexuality, which emphasized same-sex
arousal that the patient viewed as interfering with desired heterosexual relationships and causing
distress for the individual. This new diagnosis was considered by many as a compromise to appease
those who viewed homosexuality as a mental illness. Other professionals questioned how appropriate it
was to have a separate diagnosis that described the content of an individual's distress. In 1986, the
diagnosis was removed from the DSM-III-R (Herek, 2012). Additionally, beginning with the DSM-III in
1980, mental disorders have been described in much greater detail, and the number of diagnosable
conditions has grown steadily, as has the size of the manual itself. DSM-I included 106 diagnoses and
was 130 total pages, whereas DSM-III included more than 2 times as many diagnoses (265) and was
nearly seven times its size (886 total pages) (Mayes & Horowitz, 2005). Although DSM-5 is longer than
DSM-IV, the volume includes only 237 disorders, a decrease from the 297 disorders that were listed in
DSM-IV. The latest edition, DSM-5, includes revisions in the organization and naming of categories and
in the diagnostic criteria for various disorders (Regier, Kuhl, & Kupfer, 2012), while emphasizing careful
consideration of the importance of gender and cultural difference in the expression of various
symptoms (Fisher, 2010).
Some believe that establishing new diagnoses might overpathologize the human condition by turning
common human problems into mental illnesses (The Associated Press, 2013). Indeed, the finding that
nearly half of all Americans will meet the criteria for a DSM disorder at some point in their life (Kessler et
al., 2005) likely fuels much of this skepticism. The DSM-5 is also criticized on the grounds that its
diagnostic criteria have been loosened, thereby threatening to “turn our current diagnostic inflation into
diagnostic hyperinflation” (Frances, 2012, para. 22). For example, DSM-IV specified that the symptoms
of major depressive disorder must not be attributable to normal bereavement (loss of a loved one). The
DSM-5, however, has removed this bereavement exclusion, essentially meaning that grief and sadness
after a loved one’s death can constitute major depressive disorder.
The International Classification of Diseases

A second classification system, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), is also widely
recognized. Published by the World Health Organization (WHO), the ICD was developed in Europe
shortly after World War II and, like the DSM, has been revised several times. The categories of
psychological disorders in both the DSM and ICD are similar, as are the criteria for specific disorders;
however, some differences exist. Although the ICD is used for clinical purposes, this tool is also used to
examine the general health of populations and to monitor the prevalence of diseases and other health
problems internationally (WHO, 2013). The ICD is in its 10th edition (ICD-10); however, efforts are now
underway to develop a new edition (ICD-11) that, in conjunction with the changes in DSM-5, will help
harmonize the two classification systems as much as possible (APA, 2013).
A study that compared the use of the two classification systems found that worldwide the ICD is more
frequently used for clinical diagnosis, whereas the DSM is more valued for research (Mezzich, 2002).
Most research findings concerning the etiology and treatment of psychological disorders are based on
criteria set forth in the DSM (Oltmanns & Castonguay, 2013). The DSM also includes more explicit
disorder criteria, along with an extensive and helpful explanatory text (Regier et al., 2012). The DSM is
the classification system of choice among U.S. mental health professionals, and this chapter is based
on the DSM paradigm.
The Compassionate View of Psychological Disorders

As these disorders are outlined, please bear two things in mind. First, remember that psychological
disorders represent extremes of inner experience and behavior. If, while reading about these disorders,
you feel that these descriptions begin to personally characterize you, do not worry—this moment of
enlightenment probably means nothing more than you have had a range of experiences and emotions.
Each of us experiences episodes of sadness, anxiety, and preoccupation with certain thoughts—times
when we do not quite feel ourselves. These episodes should not be considered problematic unless the
accompanying thoughts and behaviors become extreme and have a disruptive effect on one’s life.
Second, understand that people with psychological disorders are far more than just embodiments of
their disorders. We do not use terms such as schizophrenics, depressives, or phobics because they are
labels that objectify people who have these conditions, thus promoting biased and disparaging
assumptions about them. It is important to remember that a psychological disorder is not what a
person is; it is something that a person has—through no fault of their own. As is the case with cancer or
diabetes, those with psychological disorders suffer debilitating, often painful conditions that are not of
their own choosing. These individuals deserve to be viewed and treated with compassion,
understanding, and dignity.

Diagnosing and Classifying Psychological Disorders

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diagnosing and Classifying Psychological Disorders

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Diagnosing and Classifying Psychological Disorders

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Explain why classification systems are necessary in the study of psychopathology

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

CONNECT THE CONCEPTS

The International Classification of Diseases

The Compassionate View of Psychological Disorders

You might also like