Cargando…

Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)

In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is seeking to encourage researchers to move away from diagnostic tools like the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the DSM). A key mechanism for this is the “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC) initiative, closely...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Pickersgill, Martyn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6557003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31327882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243919841693
_version_ 1783425404258746368
author Pickersgill, Martyn
author_facet Pickersgill, Martyn
author_sort Pickersgill, Martyn
collection PubMed
description In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is seeking to encourage researchers to move away from diagnostic tools like the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the DSM). A key mechanism for this is the “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC) initiative, closely associated with former NIMH Director Thomas Insel. This article examines how key figures in US (and UK) psychiatry construct the purpose, nature, and implications of the ambiguous RDoC project; that is, how its novelty is constituted through discourse. In this paper, I explore and analyze these actors’ accounts of what is new, important, or (un)desirable about RDoC, demonstrating how they are constituted through institutional context and personal affects. In my interviews with mental health opinion leaders, RDoC is presented as overly reliant on neurobiological epistemologies, distant from clinical imaginaries and imperatives, and introduced in a top-down manner inconsistent with the professional norms of scientific research. Ultimately, the article aims to add empirical depth to current understandings about the epistemological and ontological politics of contemporary (US) psychiatry and to contribute to science and technology studies (STS) debates about “the new” in technoscience. Accordingly, I use discussions about RDoC as a case study in the sociology of novelty.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6557003
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65570032019-07-18 Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC) Pickersgill, Martyn Sci Technol Human Values Articles In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is seeking to encourage researchers to move away from diagnostic tools like the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the DSM). A key mechanism for this is the “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC) initiative, closely associated with former NIMH Director Thomas Insel. This article examines how key figures in US (and UK) psychiatry construct the purpose, nature, and implications of the ambiguous RDoC project; that is, how its novelty is constituted through discourse. In this paper, I explore and analyze these actors’ accounts of what is new, important, or (un)desirable about RDoC, demonstrating how they are constituted through institutional context and personal affects. In my interviews with mental health opinion leaders, RDoC is presented as overly reliant on neurobiological epistemologies, distant from clinical imaginaries and imperatives, and introduced in a top-down manner inconsistent with the professional norms of scientific research. Ultimately, the article aims to add empirical depth to current understandings about the epistemological and ontological politics of contemporary (US) psychiatry and to contribute to science and technology studies (STS) debates about “the new” in technoscience. Accordingly, I use discussions about RDoC as a case study in the sociology of novelty. SAGE Publications 2019-04-12 2019-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6557003/ /pubmed/31327882 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243919841693 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Articles
Pickersgill, Martyn
Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title_full Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title_fullStr Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title_full_unstemmed Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title_short Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health “Research Domain Criteria” (RDoC)
title_sort psychiatry and the sociology of novelty: negotiating the us national institute of mental health “research domain criteria” (rdoc)
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6557003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31327882
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243919841693
work_keys_str_mv AT pickersgillmartyn psychiatryandthesociologyofnoveltynegotiatingtheusnationalinstituteofmentalhealthresearchdomaincriteriardoc