Abstract

The author examines the influence of authoritative nosological systems--those developed by an authoritative body or organization (e.g., the DSM, ICD, RDoC)--on the development of scientific theory and research. Although there has been extensive discussion of how such systems should be organized, and of the historical role of such systems, little focus has been placed on whether these systems impede or facilitate scientific progress. The author reviews the nature and role of constructs in scientific theory and the role of authoritative taxonomy in science. He presents an argument that, although authoritative classification systems clearly have value for nonscientific purposes, or for specific scientific purposes, the systems themselves, at least as they have been constructed thus far, likely impede scientific development by constraining competitive discourse. Implications and recommendations are discussed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.