IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijpsjl/v8y2016i3p98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Diagnostic Approach Is More Valid? The DSM or the Rational-Choice Theory of Neurosis

Author

Listed:
  • Yacov Rofé

Abstract

This article challenges the validity of the DSM-III to exclude neurosis, a decision that has led the DSM to become “an expanding list of disease, from a few dozen disorders in the first edition to well over 200†(Grinker, 2010, p. 169; see also Warelow & Holmes, 2011). It points out the unanimous consensus that the best diagnostic approach would be a theory that can account for the development and treatment of certain diagnostic categories and, at the same time, provide measurable criteria that can distinguish them from other behaviors. Accordingly, it shows that a new theory, the Rational-Choice Theory of Neurosis (RCTN) (Rofé, 2000, 2010, 2016; Rofé & Rofé, 2013, 2015), which despite profound differences is similar to psychoanalysis in several fundamental respects, can offer practical diagnostic criteria that differentiate neurosis from other disorders. Three types of evidence, including a review of research literature, case studies and a new study that directly examined the validity of RCTN’s diagnostic criteria, support the validity of neurosis. The greatest advantage of RCTN’s diagnostic approach is not only is based on empirical evidence instead of the consensus of biased researchers. Rather, their main contribution is that it emerged out of a theory that succeeded to integrate research and clinical data pertaining to the development and treatment of neurosis.

Suggested Citation

  • Yacov Rofé, 2016. "Which Diagnostic Approach Is More Valid? The DSM or the Rational-Choice Theory of Neurosis," International Journal of Psychological Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(3), pages 1-98, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijpsjl:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijps/article/download/61967/33295
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijps/article/view/61967
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roy Richard Grinker, 2010. "In retrospect: The five lives of the psychiatry manual," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7321), pages 168-169, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      JEL classification:

      • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
      • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijpsjl:v:8:y:2016:i:3:p:98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.