Introduction: Psychiatric Research and Extraordinary Science

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Research ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
The Core ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Research Domain

This chapter introduces the core thematic ideas of the present volume: that psychiatric research is in crisis, that it has entered a period of extraordinary science, and that a fully adequate response to the crisis should be responsive to the perspectives and interests of persons. We identify various sources of the crisis, drawing special attention to controversies concerning the role of the DSM in psychiatric research. And, we identify different strategies of response to the current crisis, including approaches that emphasize the importance of personal perspectives and the needs of the clinic and those that emphasize the important role of various scientific research programs. Further, we survey various developments (e.g., debates over fundamentals and a role for philosophical analysis, probing of the problems of the DSM framework, relaxation of standard forms of research practice, the introduction of the Research Domain Criteria initiative and other novel research programs) that are jointly suggestive of Thomas Kuhn’s characterization of periods of crisis that can arise in scientific research and of the “extraordinary science” that ensues. We suggest that this Kuhnian framework is useful for understanding the state of psychiatric research and it provides a framework for thinking about responses to the current crisis. We conclude with brief overviews of the contributions to the volume, each of which provides such a response.

Challenges of Fear Conditioning Research in the Age of RDoC

2017 ◽  
Vol 225 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina B. Lonsdorf ◽  
Jan Richter
Keyword(s):  
Fear Conditioning ◽  
Clinical Diagnosis ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Major Focus ◽  
The Future ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Research Domain

Abstract. As the criticism of the definition of the phenotype (i.e., clinical diagnosis) represents the major focus of the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative, it is somewhat surprising that discussions have not yet focused more on specific conceptual and procedural considerations of the suggested RDoC constructs, sub-constructs, and associated paradigms. We argue that we need more precise thinking as well as a conceptual and methodological discussion of RDoC domains and constructs, their interrelationships as well as their experimental operationalization and nomenclature. The present work is intended to start such a debate using fear conditioning as an example. Thereby, we aim to provide thought-provoking impulses on the role of fear conditioning in the age of RDoC as well as conceptual and methodological considerations and suggestions to guide RDoC-based fear conditioning research in the future.

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.

scholarly journals Behavioral and neurodevelopmental precursors to binge-type eating disorders: support for the role of negative valence systems

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (14) ◽  
pp. 2921-2936 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Vannucci ◽  
E. E. Nelson ◽  
D. M. Bongiorno ◽  
D. S. Pine ◽  
J. A. Yanovski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Developmental Trajectory ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Physiological Data ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Risk Models ◽  
Eating Disorder Risk ◽  
Negative Valence ◽  
Research Domain

Background.Pediatric loss-of-control (LOC) eating is a robust behavioral precursor to binge-type eating disorders. Elucidating precursors to LOC eating and binge-type eating disorders may refine developmental risk models of eating disorders and inform interventions.Method.We review evidence within constructs of the Negative Valence Systems (NVS) domain, as specified by the Research Domain Criteria framework. Based on published studies, we propose an integrated NVS model of binge-type eating-disorder risk.Results.Data implicate altered corticolimbic functioning, neuroendocrine dysregulation, and self-reported negative affect as possible risk factors. However, neuroimaging and physiological data in children and adolescents are sparse, and most prospective studies are limited to self-report measures.Conclusions.We discuss a broad NVS framework for conceptualizing early risk for binge-type eating disorders. Future neural and behavioral research on the developmental trajectory of LOC and binge-type eating disorders is required.

Paradigm Function Morphology: Assumptions and Innovations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Stump
Keyword(s):  
Inflectional Morphology ◽  
Formal Representation ◽  
The Core ◽  
Recent Innovation ◽  
Morphological Theory ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Fundamental Insight ◽  
Definition Of

Paradigm Function Morphology (PFM) is an evolving approach to modeling morphological systems in a precise and enlightening way. The fundamental insight of PFM is that words have both content and form and that in the context of an appropriately organized lexicon, a language’s morphology deduces a complex word’s form from its content. PFM is therefore a realizational theory: a language’s grammar and lexicon are assumed to provide a precise characterization of a word’s content, from which the language’s morphology then projects the corresponding form. Morphemes per se have no role in this theory; by contrast, paradigms have the essential role of defining the content that is realized by a language’s morphology. At the core of PFM is the notion of a paradigm function, a formal representation of the relation between a word’s content and its form; the definition of a language’s paradigm function is therefore the definition of its inflectional morphology. Recent elaborations of this idea assume a distinction between content paradigms and form paradigms, which makes it possible to account for a fact that is otherwise irreconcilable with current morphological theory—the fact that the set of morphosyntactic properties that determines a word’s syntax and semantics often differs from the set of properties (some of them morphomic) that determines a word’s inflectional form. Another recent innovation is the assumption that affixes and rules of morphology may be complex in the sense that they may be factored into smaller affixes and rules; the evidence favoring this assumption is manifold.

scholarly journals Neuroclinical Framework for the Role of Stress in Addiction

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 247054701769814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Kwako ◽  
George F. Koob
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Negative Reinforcement ◽  
Stress Component ◽  
Negative Emotionality ◽  
Psychiatric Disease ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Research Domain

Addiction has been conceptualized as a three-stage cycle— binge/intoxication, withdrawal/negative affect, and preoccupation/anticipation—that worsens over time and involves allostatic changes in hedonic function via changes in the brain reward and stress systems. Using the withdrawal/negative affect stage and negative reinforcement as an important source of motivation for compulsive drug seeking, we outline the neurobiology of the stress component of the withdrawal/negative affect stage and relate it to a derivative of the Research Domain Criteria research construct for the study of psychiatric disease, known as the Addictions Neuroclinical Assessment. Using the Addictions Neuroclinical Assessment, we outline five subdomains of negative emotional states that can be operationally measured in human laboratory settings and paralleled by animal models. We hypothesize that a focus on negative emotionality and stress is closely related to the acute neurobiological alterations that are experienced in addiction and may serve as a bridge to a reformulation of the addiction nosology to better capture individual differences in patients for whom the withdrawal/negative affect stage drives compulsive drug taking.

scholarly journals Discussing The Foundations for Interpretivist Digital Government Research

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keegan McBride ◽  
Yuri Misnikov ◽  
Dirk Draheim
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Digital Government ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
The Core ◽  
Philosophical Basis ◽  
Research Philosophy ◽  
Government Research ◽  
Research Domain

As the research domain of digital government continues to develop itself as an important body of scholarly research, and it continues to grow in terms of researchers, publications, research funding, and other related indicators, it is important to understand the core theoretical and philosophical basis of the discipline. However, there is currently a lack of critical discussion about the concrete role of research philosophy for digital government research; which is one of the biggest current criticisms against the domain. This paper makes a first step in addressing this criticism by presenting arguments and discussion in favor of the importance of an interpretivist research philosophy for the domain of digital government. The paper provides a comprehensive overview of an interpretivist ontology and epistemology for digital government, discusses relevant theories and methods, and concludes with an overview of what is essential for conducting and carrying out interpretivist digital government research. This paper’s contribution represents one of the first concentrated efforts to lay out some initial foundations for the role of interpretivism, and research philosophy more generally, for the field.

Brain Reward Systems and Apathy

2021 ◽  
pp. 191-211
Author(s):  
Stefan Kaiser ◽  
Florian Schlagenhauf
Keyword(s):  
Prediction Error ◽  
Reward System ◽  
Reward Systems ◽  
Research Domain Criteria ◽  
Promising Candidate ◽  
Brain Reward ◽  
Positive Valence ◽  
Research Domain ◽  
Value Representation

Reward is essential for motivating goal-directed behaviour. Impairment in the processing of reward is therefore a promising candidate for understanding apathy which has been defined as a loss of motivation and a quantitative reduction of goal-directed behaviour. This chapter employs the recently updated Research Domain Criteria framework for positive valence systems to provide an overview of reward system functions that have been associated with apathy, including reward anticipation, reward consumption, learning and prediction error, value representation, and integration of effort. For each construct, the concept and the measures on the behavioural and neural level are discussed. The chapter then provides examples from the schizophrenia literature on the association of apathy with these functions and gives a transdiagnostic perspective on the role of reward system dysfunction.

Evidence-Based Medicine, Biological Psychiatry, and the Role of Science in Medicine

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn Bluhm
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Biological Psychiatry ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
New Research ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Research Domain

Both evidence-based medicine (EBM) and biological psychiatry aim to improve clinical practice by basing it more firmly on the results of scientific research. In this chapter, however, I show that the two approaches have very different views on what kinds of research will improve practice. This is because EBM is a form of medical empiricism – it focuses solely on whether treatments work, while biological psychiatry is a form of medical rationalism – it seeks to understand the causes that give rise to observed clinical outcomes. I argue that EBM’s empiricism is ultimately shortsighted and that it should integrate some of the rationalist concerns with pathophysiology. I then use this analysis to draw some lessons for research based on the NIMH’s new Research Domain Criteria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document