首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Subjective Experience, Heterophenomenology, or Neuroimaging? A Perspective on the Meaning and Application of Mental Disorder Terms, in Particular Major Depressive Disorder
【24h】

Subjective Experience, Heterophenomenology, or Neuroimaging? A Perspective on the Meaning and Application of Mental Disorder Terms, in Particular Major Depressive Disorder

机译:主观经验,异象学或神经影像?精神障碍术语,特别是重度抑郁症的含义和应用透视

获取原文

摘要

Increasing research efforts try to identify biological markers in order to support or eventually replace current practices of diagnosing mental disorders. Inasmuch as these disorders refer to subjective mental states, such efforts amount to their objectification. This gives rise to conceptual as well as empirical challenges: What kind of things are mental disorders? And how to deal with situations where subjective reports, clinical decisions, and brain scans contradict each other? The present paper starts out with a discussion of recent efforts to objectify beauty. Such attempts to quantify and localize psychological constructs in the brain are compared to earlier examples from the history of psychology. The paper then discusses personal and social implications of the objectification of subjective mental states, including mental disorders. The construct of Major Depressive Disorder, one of the most prevalent mental disorders, is then analyzed in more detail. It turns out that this is a very complex construct probably associated with highly heterogeneous actual instances of the disorder. It is then shown that it is unlikely to replace these symptoms’ descriptions with patterns of brain activations, at least in the near future, given these patterns’ empirical lack of specificity. The paper then discusses which of the disorder’s core symptoms are more or less amenable to behavioral or neuroscientific investigation and analyses whether the heterophenomenological method can solve the problem. The conclusion is that the disorder construct is neither entirely subjective, nor completely objectifiable, and that clinical experts do well by continuing to take a pragmatical stance.
机译:越来越多的研究尝试尝试鉴定生物学标记,以支持或最终取代目前诊断精神障碍的实践。由于这些障碍指的是主观精神状态,因此这种努力等于其客观化。这带来了概念上和经验上的挑战:精神障碍是什么东西?以及如何处理主观报告,临床决策和脑部扫描相互矛盾的情况?本文首先讨论了对美化对象的最新努力。将这种量化和定位大脑中心理结构的尝试与来自心理学史的早期实例进行了比较。然后,本文讨论了包括精神障碍在内的主观心理状态的客观化对个人和社会的影响。然后,对最普遍的精神障碍之一-严重抑郁症的构成进行了更详细的分析。事实证明,这是一个非常复杂的结构,可能与该疾病的高度异质实际情况相关。然后表明,鉴于这些经验缺乏特异性,至少在不久的将来,不太可能用大脑激活的方式代替这些症状的描述。然后,论文讨论了哪种疾病的核心症状或多或少适合行为或神经科学研究,并分析了异现象学方法是否可以解决问题。结论是该疾病的构造既不是完全主观的,也不是完全客观的,并且临床专家通过继续采取务实的立场做得很好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号