The DSM-IV-TR represents a

Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75

Notice: Trying to get property 'status' of non-object in /home/rmhu6fn7r820/public_html/wp-content/themes/opskill-123help/functions.php on line 75

Essay > Words: 392 > Rating: Excellent > Buy full access at $1

The DSM-IV-TR represents a categorical model of abnormality. Some psychologists have suggested that a dimensional model (where behavior exists on a continuum and “abnormal” is simply an extreme form of normal behaviors) may be more accurate. Do you support the categorical approach or the dimensional? Why? Which model (categorical or dimensional) would be of greatest use to clinicians? What about researchers?

DSM has always promoted categorization of personality disorders. This approach entails treating abnormalities of personality as discrete entities through hierarchical structuring. In contrast, the dimensional model treats personality disorders as measurable continua and does not place people in diagnostic categories. Simply put, DSM approach attempts to evaluate the absence or presence of a particular disorder whereas the dimensional model seeks to explore the degree of a particular personality disposition. In my view, clustering of disorders into different classes- a doctrine supported by DSM-IV-TR -is inferior to treating disorders as a continuum and that’s why is support the dimensional model. Another reason, why I disapprove of the DSM-IV-TR approach is that this categorization system prescribes to arbitrary thresholds for diagnosis. As result, you find that sometimes there are heterogeneities, .............

Type: Essay || Words: 392 Rating || Excellent

Subscribe at $1 to view the full document.

Buy access at $1