The Psychophysiology of Anxiety and Mood Disorders

2017 ◽  
Vol 225 (3) ◽  
pp. 175-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Lang ◽  
Lisa M. McTeague ◽  
Margaret M. Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Brain Function ◽  
Physiological Reactivity ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Diagnostic Systems ◽  
Psychophysiological Reactivity ◽  
Diagnostic Categories ◽  
New Research ◽  
Research Domain

Abstract. Several decades of research are reviewed, assessing patterns of psychophysiological reactivity in anxiety patients responding to a fear/threat imagery challenge. Findings show substantive differences in these measures within principal diagnostic categories, questioning the reliability and categorical specificity of current diagnostic systems. Following a new research framework (US National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], Research Domain Criteria [RDoC]; Cuthbert & Insel, 2013 ), dimensional patterns of physiological reactivity are explored in a large sample of anxiety and mood disorder patients. Patients’ responses (e.g., startle reflex, heart rate) during fear/threat imagery varied significantly with higher questionnaire measured “negative affect,” stress history, and overall life dysfunction – bio-marking disorder groups, independent of Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals (DSM). The review concludes with a description of new research, currently underway, exploring brain function indices (structure activation, circuit connectivity) as potential biological classifiers (collectively with the reflex physiology) of anxiety and mood pathology.

scholarly journals The role of RDoC in future classification of mental disorders

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-85 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Affective Behavior ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Computational Approaches ◽  
Diagnostic Categories ◽  
Key Features ◽  
Study Designs ◽  
Research Domain

The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project constitutes a translational framework for psychopathology research, initiated by the National Institute of Mental Health in an attempt to provide new avenues for research to circumvent problems emerging from the use of symptom-based diagnostic categories in diagnosing disorders. The RDoC alternative is a focus on psychopathology based on dimensions simultaneously defined by observable behavior (including quantitative measures of cognitive or affective behavior) and neurobiological measures. Key features of the RDoC framework include an emphasis on functional dimensions that range from normal to abnormal, integration of multiple measures in study designs (which can foster computational approaches), and high priority on studies of neurodevelopment and environmental influences (and their interaction) that can contribute to advances in understanding the etiology of disorders throughout the lifespan. The paper highlights key implications for ways in which RDoC can contribute to future ideas about classification, as well as some of the considerations involved in translating basic behavioral and neuroscience data to psychopathology.

Research Domain Criteria and OCD

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eyal Kalanthroff ◽  
Gideon E. Anholt ◽  
Helen Blair Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
The United States ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Diagnostic Systems ◽  
Behavioral Measures ◽  
Research Domain

This chapter discusses the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project, an initiative of the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) of the United States to develop for research purposes new ways of classifying mental disorders based on dimensions of observable behavior and neurobiological measures, and explores how the hallmark symptoms of OCD (obsessions, compulsions, and anxiety) can be mapped onto RDoC domains. Unlike current categorical diagnostic systems (e.g., DSM), RDoC seeks to integrate many levels of information (from genomics to self-report) to validate dimensions defined by neurobiology and behavioral measures that cut across current disorder categories. The chapter explores, for heuristic reasons, how the RDoC matrix might be used to elucidate the neurobehavioral domains of dysfunction that lead to the characteristic symptoms of OCD. It then selectively reviews the OCD literature from the perspective of the RDoC domains, aiming to guide future transdiagnostic studies to examine specific neurobehavioral domains across disorders.

Global mental health and the National Institute of Mental Health Research Domain Criteria

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 436-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stevan Merill Weine ◽  
Scott Langenecker ◽  
Aliriza Arenliu
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Global Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Research ◽  
Targeted Prevention ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
New Research ◽  
Research Domain

Background: The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project presents innovative ways of investigating mental illness based on behavioral and neurobiological measures of dimensional processes. Although cultural psychiatrists have critiqued RDoC’s implications and limitations for its under-developed focus on context and experience, RDoC presents opportunities for synergies with global mental health. It can capture aspects of clinical or sub-clinical behavior which are less dependent upon Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5) and perhaps better elucidate the role of culture in disease expression and resilience. Aim/Results: This article uses the example of migration to describe several starting points for new research: (1) providing components for building an investigable conceptual framework to understand individual’s mental health, resilience and adjustment to migration challenges or social adversities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and (2) identifying measurable factors which determine resilience or vulnerability, to guide development and evaluation of targeted prevention, treatment and recovery strategies for mental health in LMICs. Conclusion: In such ways, RDoC frameworks could help put the new cutting edge neurobiological dimensional scientific advances in a position to contribute to addressing mental health problems amid social adversities in LMICs. However, this would require a much-expanded commitment by both RDoC and global mental health researchers to address contextual and experiential dimensions.

scholarly journals The Research Domain Criteria: moving the goalposts to change the game

2014 ◽  
Vol 204 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne L. Doherty ◽  
Michael J. Owen
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Diagnostic Criteria ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Diagnostic Categories ◽  
Research Domain

SummaryThere is increasing concern that a reliance on the descriptive, syndrome-based diagnostic criteria of ICD and DSM is impeding progress in research. The USA's major funder of psychiatric research, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), have stated their intention to encourage more research across diagnostic categories using a novel framework based on findings in neuroscience.

Cells, Circuits, and Syndromes: A Critical Commentary on the NIMH Research Domain Criteria Project

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niall McLaren
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Research Program ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Critical Commentary ◽  
The Us ◽  
New Research ◽  
Research Domain

The US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) has recently declared a new research program for psychiatry, the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC), as the successor of the long-standing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnostic program. However, the new program is based on a series of assumptions that, on analysis, lack any formal scientific standing. Essentially, as presently conceptualized, the RDoC program is no more than ideology masquerading as science, and thus cannot achieve its stated goals. It is argued that the program will lead psychiatry into intellectually sterile areas because it is in fact the wrong research program for the present state of our knowledge.

Vergleich von kategorialer und dimensionaler Analyse bei Angststörungen

2020 ◽  
Vol 88 (05) ◽  
pp. 291-292
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Dsm Iv ◽  
Dimensionale Analyse ◽  
Research Domain

Zur Diagnose von Patienten mit Angststörungen existieren zwei unterschiedliche analytische Ansätze: ein kategorialer, der auf dem DSM-IV beruht und eine dimensionale Analyse, die auf den Research Domain Criteria (einer Initiative des National Institute of Mental Health) basiert. Es ist bisher nicht bekannt, ob die beiden Ansätze unterschiedliche oder ähnliche Informationen bezüglich der Diagnose von Personen mit Angststörungen liefern.

scholarly journals Research Domain Criteria: cognitive systems, neural circuits, and dimensions of behavior

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-37 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
Neural Circuits ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Diagnostic Systems ◽  
Research Perspective ◽  
Treatment And Prevention ◽  
Regulatory Systems ◽  
Positive Valence ◽  
Research Domain

Current diagnostic systems for mental disorders were established before the tools of neuroscience were available, and although they have improved the reliability of psychiatric classification, progress toward the discovery of disease etiologies and novel approaches to treatment and prevention may benefit from alternative conceptualizations of mental disorders. The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative is the centerpiece of NIMH's effort to achieve its strategic goal of developing new methods to classify mental disorders for research purposes. The RDoC matrix provides a research framework that encourages investigators to reorient their research perspective by taking a dimensional approach to the study of the genetic, neural, and behavioral features of mental disorders, RDoCs integrative approach includes cognition along with social processes, arousal/regulatory systems, and negative and positive valence systems as the major domains, because these neurobehavioral systems have all evolved to serve the motivational and adaptive needs of the organism. With its focus on neural circuits informed by the growing evidence of the neurodevelopmental nature of many disorders and its capacity to capture the patterns of co-occurrence of behaviors and symptoms, the RDoC approach holds promise to advance our understanding of the nature of mental disorders.

Positive Valence System Dysregulation in Psychosis

2019 ◽  
pp. 251-283
Author(s):  
Deanna M. Barch ◽  
David Pagliaccio ◽  
Katherine Luking
Keyword(s):  
Action Selection ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Treatment Development ◽  
Diagnostic Categories ◽  
Reward Prediction ◽  
Hedonic Experience ◽  
Positive Valence ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Hedonic Processing ◽  
Research Domain

Motivational and hedonic impairments cut across diagnostic categories, are core aspects of psychopathology, and may be crucial for understanding pathways to development and maintenance of psychopathology. Given the pervasive nature of motivational and hedonic deficits across psychopathology forms, the Research Domain Criteria initiative includes a “positive valence” systems domain that outlines constructs critical for understanding motivational and hedonic impairments in psychopathology. These constructs include initial responsiveness to reward, reward anticipation or expectancy, incentive or reinforcement learning, effort valuation, and action selection. The chapter reviews behavioral and neuroimaging studies providing evidence for construct impairments in in individuals with psychosis versus individuals with depressive pathology. Evidence suggests there are meaningful differences in reward-related and hedonic deficits associated with psychosis versus depression. These differences have implications for understanding the differential etiology of these forms of psychopathology and the ways treatment development may need to proceed for each domain. The literature suggests that individuals with depressive pathology experience impairments of in-the-moment hedonics or “liking,” particularly among those who experience anhedonia. Given that hedonic experience is the basis in many ways for all other aspects of motivational function, such deficits may propagate forward and contribute to impairments in other constructs dependent on hedonic responses. In contrast, individuals with psychosis have relatively intact in-the-moment hedonic processing, instead experiencing impairments in process aspects that translate reward to action selection. More specifically, individuals with schizophrenia exhibit altered reward prediction and associated striatal and prefrontal activation, impaired reward learning, and impaired reward-modulated action selection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document