Talk:Psychopathology

Psychology High‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Neurology / Psychiatry High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Psychiatry portal This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Johnsonr5.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Links to Holonomic brain theory

It's bad form to revert someone without commenting on the talk page. It leaves no room for discussion, and leads to bad blood. That's why I'm placing this comment, to give an opportunity to for consensus to emerge. Please discuss this link prior to adding it back.
brenneman ^(t)^(c) 11:54, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mental Illness?

Hi there, I was reading this article and noticed that the term "mental illness" was mentioned repeatedly. I think the term should be dropped and replaced with "mental health problems". I believe the latter term best represents the current state-of-affairs without any of the negative connotations... Can someone with expertise in this field look into this? --158.223.168.81 (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look in to this. Legios (talk) 03:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

US-Centric

The article is currently very US-Centric (only passing mentions of the ICD-10). It also needs a lot of work. eg. it makes references to disorders, but there's no real explanation of the association between the terms 'psychopathology' and 'disorder'.

Going to see if I can build this article up a bit.

Legios (talk) 03:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your US-centric comment. DSM-IV is not only used in the US and there is no information in the article that is specific for the US. However, this article does lack inline references. Lova Falk talk 10:25, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just came from the PTSD page where there were issues raised around it being too focussed on the DSM-IV and as such US-centric so I dragged that opinion with me to here. But true, it's not exclusive to the US. Legios (talk) 22:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revised Introduction

I realize that in general, "lead follows body", and I do not mean to abandon that principle here. Unfortunately, since the article lacks content, we need to start somewhere, and I'm hoping that a succinct introduction will help.

Here are some specific problems with the previous introduction:

it did not explain psychopathology straight away; instead, the first sentence announced a dual meaning.
it created a fictional dichotomy between psychiatrists, who purportedly study psychopathology, and psychologists, who allegedly study only abnormal psychology.
it betrayed a preference for a medical approach to understanding mental disorders, e.g., highlighting "disease processes" and inserting the unnecessary "non-medical" when referring to psychology.
it confused a manifestation of psychopathology, viz., symptoms, with the concept itself.

I therefore rewrote the introduction. If you strenuously object to the changes I made, feel free to revert it, and let's discuss it more here.

I will be working on the body of the article too. For example: I will explain further what is meant by an effective classification scheme, i.e., it is one that leads to reliable, accurate diagnoses, which, in turn, lead to effective therapeutic interventions or recovery. I'll specify further what is meant by manifestations, e.g., signs, symptoms, functional impairment (disability), behavioral patterns, cognitive changes, felt experience (emotions), and somatic (physical) effects. And I will explain that treatment involves therapeutic efforts designed to alleviate suffering, improve functioning, and enhance quality of life.

Thanks! - Mark D Worthen PsyD 03:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In-line references required

This is a very useful and helpful article HOWEVER it has NOT ONE inline citation (and its footnotes are only etymological). I would have flagged the article but doing so can have the unfortunate consequence of attracting wiki traffic wardens, with all the editing madness that results in - but nonetheless it does need inline citations. As it stands the whole article could be deleted in its entirety as being an unreferenced piece of Original Research! Please help if you can. Ta! LookingGlass (talk) 12:40, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DSM section overhaul

The DSM section needs to be overhauled. It appears to have been updated in patches, to take account of new issues of the DSM, resulting in the grammar of the whole being thrown out of wack. LookingGlass (talk) 13:06, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New user wanting to add information in the future

I chose this article because I've always had an interest in Psychopathology. I look forward to making this article more accurate and organized. I plan on doing that by reviewing research articles and adding any relevant information that is related directly to the topic. Here are links that I plan on reviewing but haven't decided on entering any information yet. http://dx.doi.org.glacier.sou.edu/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.043 https://books.google.com/books?id=fFFaBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=VymvhHReru&dq=psychopathology&lr&pg=PA63#v=onepage&q=psychopathology&f=false http://www.aojcramer.com/wp-content/uploads/AnnRev.pdf Johnsonr5 (talk) 07:16, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structure

I've come across this article today and I am concerned it is not structured in a helpful way to discuss the field of psychopathology. For such an important subject it seems relatively brief and lacking in a structure to explain theories and approaches helpfully. Obviously changes that is beyond my ability at the moment but I was hoping to flag this up and discuss how to better structure the article and include important informationTheheroesjourney (talk) 13:52, 20 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Some suggestions of improvements we could make

remove P factor section at present or inlcude less as its given too much prominense in the article
reduce DSM section, doesn't add much that a link to DSM doesn't provide
Four D section is not referenced and doesn't seem to be useful in present form

key points

The article needs to be focused on the field of study of "symptoms in the mind" rather than distracted about aetiology etc
multiple sections are just not cohesive
hisotry section is a bit muddled.Theheroesjourney (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Theheroesjourney: Excellent points! Your edits so far are, IMHO, very good and improve the article noticeably. I'll try to pitch in too, with your recommendations in mind. - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) (I'm a man—traditional male pronouns are fine.) 16:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Organization and writing quality

- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? ALthough it has quite a few sources not cited the overrall writing aspect is good and easy to understand. There a no spelling mistakes (for what I could see) and it seemend organized and concise. Larapaderes17 (talk) 03:42, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do see many grammatical errors, and the article itself does not seem comprehensive considering really the broadness and scope of "the scientific study of mental disorders" would have a more detailed article. This article is rated C-class by three WikiProjects, and I agree. It should be extended. Potentially a section for each major disorder area, e.g., Neurodevelopmental Disorders. PSYCHREL (talk) 06:01, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Methods in Clinical Psychology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 March 2024 and 9 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Klocascio (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Klocascio (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to be updating this article. It needs significant edits, additional citations and more information. Let me know if you have any objections. Klocascio (talk) 16:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]