
doi: 10.1037/a0034028
pmid: 24016027
As a commentary for the special section on Reconceptualizing the Classification of Mental Disorders, this article begins with a description of the impetus for the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health's (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative and provides an update of progress on that initiative to date. The commentary then engages the articles in this special section, beginning with a response to Berenbaum's concern that the RDoC approach to sorting constructs across multiple units of analysis espouses a de facto biological fundamentalism. This leads us to delineate the relationship between RDoC and the NIMH priorities relevant to this initiative. The commentary then considers how Patrick's iterative "construct-network" method can be applied to RDoC construct validation, highlighting several aspects that are particularly useful. One aspect of this work involves determining subject inclusion and exclusion criteria that provide an appropriate range of variance. Finally, this commentary considers the Bilder group's article, explicating the ways in which multilevel models can foster development of hypotheses and informatics approaches needed for further RDoC progress.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Biomedical Research, Psychopathology, Mental Disorders, Neural Pathways, Humans, National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.), United States
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Biomedical Research, Psychopathology, Mental Disorders, Neural Pathways, Humans, National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.), United States
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 308 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% |
