UPI Study › Courses › Abnormal Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 1.3 Free with a free account
The DSM Explained: Purpose and Structure
Abnormal Psychology · Chapter 1: Foundations of Abnormal PsychologySection 1.3 · lesson 3 of 9714 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Abnormal Psychology.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Abnormal Psychology
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Pitfalls in Mental Health Classification →← The Role of Biology and Historical EvolutionNext lesson: Pitfalls in Mental Health Classification →
In this lesson
What a shared classification is for, how it is built, and what it refuses to say.
- Name the several jobs a shared classification does at once
- Describe the current organization, and what replaced the axes
- Identify every structural component inside a diagnostic entry
- Explain what the clinical significance requirement gates, and how
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,967 words). Read along, or search it.
Foundations of Abnormal Psychology
The DSM Explained: Purpose and Structure
A diagnosis looks like a verdict. It is closer to a compression. This section opens up the manual that does the compressing. What it is for, how it is built, and what it deliberately refuses to say. We start with a surprise. The manual is not doing one job. It is doing at least five at once, and they pull against each other. Then the architecture. What replaced the five axes, and why they went. Then the skeleton that every single entry in the manual shares. Learn that skeleton and you can interrogate any diagnostic claim you meet. We finish by working one composite case, criterion by criterion. It will not meet the entry, and the reason is the interesting part.
Before You Begin
Diagnostic Literacy, Not Diagnostic Authority
One note before we begin, and it is a careful one. This material is educational. It builds diagnostic literacy, not diagnostic authority. Diagnostic literacy means reading a diagnostic statement and understanding what it claims. Diagnosis itself is the work of a trained, licensed professional. Someone who can interview, observe, and gather history over time. Nothing here is a basis for diagnosing yourself, or anyone else. One more thing. Every criteria set shown in this section is a hypothetical. Constructed for teaching, and clearly labeled as such. Real criteria are paraphrased in the course's own language, never reproduced. What you take away is the structure, which transfers to any entry.
Five Jobs At Once
Why a Shared Classification Exists
A diagnostic manual is an agreed catalog of recognized conditions. Each one carries stated requirements for identifying it. The manual in widespread use is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Fifth edition, referred to from here as the D S M. It is easy to assume a classification exists for one purpose. Telling a clinician what a person has. That is not the whole story. It is asked to do at least five different jobs at the same time. Communication, first. A diagnosis compresses a page of description into a word. Treatment selection, second. Evidence about what works is organized by diagnosis. Research comparability, third. Shared criteria let one country's study be read in another. Reimbursement, fourth. A diagnostic code decides whether care is funded, and for how long. And legal use, fifth. Diagnoses appear in decisions about capacity, custody, and responsibility. Now notice the tension, because it explains most of the criticism. Research rewards fine-grained categories. Reimbursement rewards a clean yes or no. Legal use rewards stability. No single system can optimize all three.
Edition History
The Decisive Changes Were Architectural
The manual has been revised repeatedly, and not merely by adding conditions. The structural changes matter far more than the content changes. The first edition, in nineteen fifty-two, gave brief narrative descriptions. The second, in nineteen sixty-eight, expanded the list but still had no explicit rules. Then nineteen eighty, and the third edition, which changed everything. Explicit operational criteria arrived, along with the multiaxial system. From that point the manual went largely silent on the causes of conditions. The fourth edition, in nineteen ninety-four, revised criteria against field-trial data. It also gave the clinical significance requirement a standard form. Then two thousand thirteen, the fifth edition, and the second great change. The axes were removed, and the categories were reordered. The revised text of two thousand twenty-two changed the text, not the criteria. Read that column and notice where the large changes fall. Two dates carry them. And notice what no row records. No change in what causes any condition. The manual does not make claims of that kind.
The End Of The Axes
Why the Multiaxial System Was Removed
The multiaxial system deserves its own explanation, because its removal shaped current records. From nineteen eighty until two thousand thirteen, clinicians recorded a person on five dimensions. The main clinical condition. Personality conditions and intellectual disability. Relevant physical conditions. Psychosocial and environmental problems. And an overall rating of functioning. The intention was sound, and worth defending. It forced attention to the body, the circumstances, and the level of functioning. None of those is conveyed by a bare diagnosis. So why was it removed? Three reasons, one per problem axis. Separating the second axis implied a distinction the evidence did not support. The third implied physical conditions were a separate matter, rather than part of the picture. And the fifth, a single global functioning score, proved unreliable between raters. It was being used for administrative decisions it could not support. What replaced it is one combined list of all diagnoses, physical and psychological together. Context is recorded with dedicated codes, and functioning with purpose-built instruments.
How It Is Ordered
Developmental Sequence and Relatedness
Now the ordering of the current edition, which is neither alphabetical nor arbitrary. Two principles govern it, and the second one is doing real clinical work. The first is developmental sequence. Categories are arranged roughly in the order of life in which they first appear. Conditions with onset in the developmental period come near the beginning. The point is to keep age of onset in view, because that is diagnostic information. The second principle is relatedness. Categories sharing features, course, or apparent mechanisms sit next to one another. This produces two broad families. Internalizing, where difficulty is directed inward. Anxiety, low mood, and somatic distress belong there. Externalizing, where it is directed outward, as impulsivity, conduct difficulty, and substance use. Here is the practical reason for the adjacency. The conditions most likely to be confused with one another are now printed together. A clinician reading toward one diagnosis passes the alternatives on the way. That is why the reordering counted as substantive rather than cosmetic.
Entry Anatomy
Six Questions Every Entry Must Answer
Every entry in the manual has the same skeleton. Learning the skeleton beats memorizing any particular criteria set. It tells you what questions to ask of any diagnosis you ever encounter. First, name and code. The label for communication, the code for records and funding. Second, the criteria set. The list of features, plus how many must be present. Note that carefully. The count is a threshold decision, not a discovery. Third, the duration requirement, separating a persistent condition from a transient state. Meeting every symptom for a shorter period does not meet the entry. Fourth, clinical significance. The symptoms must be costing the person something. Fifth, exclusion criteria. Not a substance, not a medical condition, not another condition. That is the differential written directly into the entry. Sixth, specifiers and a severity rating, recording form and degree. Read those down and they fall into a fixed order of six questions. What is it called, what must be present, for how long, at what cost. What must it not be, and in what form and degree. Use those six on anything.
The Gatekeeper
The Clinical Significance Requirement
One component deserves separate treatment, because students skip it most often. It is also the one doing the most work. The clinical significance requirement is attached to most entries. It states that symptoms must cause marked distress or impairment before diagnosis. Its purpose is to be a gatekeeper. Here is why one is needed. Most diagnostic criteria describe experiences that exist across the general population. Worry, low mood, distractibility, checking, unusual beliefs, difficulty sleeping. In milder form, these are ordinary. Without a significance requirement, a criteria set that merely counted experiences would overreach. It would classify an implausibly large share of people as having conditions. Notice what this really is. It is the four D's, written into the manual's structure. Dysfunction, and to a lesser degree distress, as a condition of entry. It has a well-known weakness, and it is worth stating plainly. The requirement is written in general terms and applied by judgment. Marked impairment is not specified numerically, so two clinicians can weigh it differently.
Two Systems
The ICD, and Why Both Coexist
The D S M is not the only classification in use. The International Classification of Diseases is currently in its eleventh revision. It covers all health conditions, physical and psychological together. It is maintained by the global public health body of the United Nations system. Member states adopt it for official health statistics. So why do two systems coexist? Because they were built for different jobs. The I C D exists to make health data comparable between countries. That requires it to cover everything, be usable by non-specialists, and stay stable. The D S M serves specialist practice and research in a single national context. That permits more detail, more explicit operational form, and more frequent revision. The two are deliberately harmonized. Entries in one carry codes from the other. But they are not identical, and that matters in international research. A prevalence figure derived under one system is not automatically comparable with the other. So the sensible question is never which system is correct. The question is which job is being done.
Degree, Not Just Kind
Dimensional Elements Inside a Categorical Manual
The tension between categories and continua is visible inside the manual itself. The current edition remains categorical in structure. A diagnosis is present or absent. But it has admitted dimensional elements, which record degree rather than presence. Severity ratings attached to many entries are the most familiar of these. Cross-cutting symptom measures ask about features spanning several categories. The most substantial addition is the alternative model for personality disorders. It is a second scheme, printed alongside the traditional categories. It describes personality difficulty by the degree of impairment in self and interpersonal functioning. Then it adds ratings on a set of trait dimensions. It sits in the section for measures requiring further study. So it does not replace the categorical scheme. Both appear in the same edition. That arrangement is unusual, and worth naming for what it is. The manual prints two incompatible descriptions of the same domain. It does that because the evidence has not settled which one is better. Treat it as an honest admission rather than as an error.
Stated Limits
What the Manual Explicitly Does Not Do
Three limits are stated by the manual itself. Misunderstanding them is the commonest error made with diagnostic information. First, it does not state causes. Since nineteen eighty the manual has been largely silent on origins. It describes what is observed rather than why it occurs. So a diagnosis is not an explanation. Watch for the circular sentence. She does that because she has X. But X was identified from the doing. Second, it does not prescribe treatment. A diagnosis narrows what is worth considering, because evidence is organized that way. The entry itself recommends nothing at all. Third, it does not describe the person. A diagnosis is a statement about a pattern, meeting requirements, during a period. It says nothing about history, strengths, circumstances, values, or prospects. A fourth limit follows from the first three, and it changes how you speak. Criteria can cease to be met. The person no longer meets criteria. That is different from saying the diagnosis was wrong.
Working An Entry
One Composite, Criterion by Criterion
Now work one entry, criterion by criterion, on a composite describing no real person. Neelam is thirty-seven, and describes evening restlessness. She cannot remain seated after about seven in the evening. She paces the corridor of her flat, and becomes sharply irritable after dark. She repeatedly abandons tasks she has started. The pattern began roughly four months ago. No medication change, no substance use, and a recent physical examination found nothing. Criterion A is the symptom count. The entry requires at least three of five features. Four are present. Met. Criterion B is duration. The entry requires at least six months. She has four. Not met. Criterion C is clinical significance. She reports distress, and has stopped an evening class. Met. Criterion D is exclusions. Nothing else accounts for it. Met. So the outcome is that the diagnosis is not made. Three of four criteria are satisfied, and the entry requires all of them. Criteria are joined by and. They are not counted the way symptoms are counted. The failure here is duration, the least interesting component and the most overlooked. And here is the point that matters clinically. She is distressed and impaired now. Not meeting criteria is not the same thing as not needing help.
About Abnormal Psychology at UPI Study
Abnormal Psychology (Psychology 180) is a self-paced online course of 97 video lessons in 25 chapters, from the main theoretical perspectives and clinical assessment to anxiety, mood, psychotic and personality disorders, treatment and the law. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Abnormal Psychology with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Abnormal Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About The DSM Explained: Purpose and Structure
What is the DSM used for?
Why did the DSM-5 remove the multiaxial system?
What is the clinical significance criterion in the DSM?
What is the difference between the DSM and the ICD?
About the Abnormal Psychology course
How many college credits is Abnormal Psychology?
How much does Abnormal Psychology cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Abnormal Psychology take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Abnormal Psychology.
97 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →