The DOI matches its Crossref record; 146 of the 150 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC): An analysis of methodological and conceptual challenges
Abstract
In a bold effort to address the longstanding shortcomings of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) framework for the classification and diagnosis of psychopathology, the National Institute of Mental Health recently launched a research program - the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) - in the hopes of developing an alternative taxonomic system rooted in dysfunctional brain circuitry. Although the RDoC endeavor has considerable promise, it faces several methodological and conceptual challenges, four of which I address here: (a) an overemphasis on biological units and measures, (b) neglect of measurement error, (c) biological and psychometric limitations of endophenotypes, and (d) the distinction between biological predispositions and their behavioral manifestations. Because none of these challenges is in principle insurmountable, I encourage investigators to consider potential remedies for them. RDoC is a calculated gamble that appears to be worth the risk, but its chances of success will be maximized by a thoughtful consideration of hard-won lessons learned--but frequently forgotten--over the past several decades of psychological and psychiatric research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“the RDoC initiative has been met with its own set of critiques, including an underdeveloped conceptual framework, an overemphasis on biological units, neglect of the psychometric weaknesses and measurement error of some methods, inadequate consideration of developmental factors and socio-cultural contexts, and a disconnect between research and clinical practice [109-114]”
From Advancing the study of sluggish cognitive tempo via DSM, RDoC, and hierarchical models of psychopathology (2019) · cites this paper as [114]
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
American Psychiatric Association (2013) · doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 · Cited by 116,369
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798
Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S. J., & Munafò, M. R. (2013) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3475 · Cited by 7,641 · cited 2×
“Adding to these replicability concerns are findings that the average statistical power of functioning brain imaging studies is only about 8%, which is considerably lower than in most other domains of psychological and psychiatric research (Button et al., 2013).”
BackgroundInsel, T., Cuthbert, B., Garvey, M., Heinssen, R., Pine, D. S., Quinn, K., Sanislow, C., & Wang, P. (2010) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.09091379 · Cited by 7,067
Spitzer, R. L. (1978) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1978.01770300115013 · Cited by 6,946
The Endophenotype Concept in Psychiatry: Etymology and Strategic Intentions
Gottesman, I. I., & Gould, T. D. (2003) · American Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.160.4.636 · Cited by 5,615
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition
(2013) · American Psychiatric Association Publishing eBooks · doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.893619 · Cited by 4,412
Madison, P., & Mischel, W. (1968) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421067 · Cited by 4,395
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Insel, 2013, Transforming diagnosis, NIMH Director’s Blog
- O'Connor, 1994, Emergent properties, American Philosophical Quarterly, 91
- Weinberger, 2014, RDoCs redux, World Psychiatry, 36
- 1998, Vol. 4
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Clark, L. A., Cuthbert, B., Lewis-Fernández, R., Narrow, W. E., & Reed, G. M. (2017) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100617727266 · Cited by 688
“adapt to particular social circumstances; emergent properties of neurobiological structures can lead to healthy adaptation or pathology across different environments; and self-reflection, narrative interpretation of experience, and patterns of interaction with others (called the interactome after the connectome, which…”
BackgroundThe NIMH research domain criteria initiative: Background, issues, and pragmatics
Kozak, M. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2016) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.12518 · Cited by 655
“This issue for the RDoC approach has already been highlighted by Berenbaum (2013) and reiterated by Lilienfield (2014), and addressed directly by Cuth-bert and Kozak (2013) and Cuthbert (2014).”
BackgroundMethodAnnual Research Review: Suicide among youth – epidemiology, (potential) etiology, and treatment
Cha, C. B., Franz, P. J., M. Guzmán, E., Glenn, C. R., Kleiman, E. M., & Nock, M. K. (2018) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12831 · Cited by 602
“…greater attention (e.g. neglect of measurement error when assessing mechanisms; ignoring potential distinctions between biological predispositions from behavioral manifestations; poor conceptual validity; underemphasized role of the environment; Lilienfeld, 2014; Lilienfeld & Treadway, 2016).”
BackgroundAnnual Research Review: Building a science of personalized intervention for youth mental health
Ng, M. Y., & Weisz, J. R. (2016) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12470 · Cited by 291
“…researchers would be wise to consider possible challenges (e.g. risk of biological reductionism which limits understanding of psychopathology, psychometric problems of laboratory-based measures) as well as ways to address them (see Franklin, Jamieson, Glenn, & Nock, 2014; Lilienfeld, 2014).”
The C factor: cognitive dysfunction as a transdiagnostic dimension in psychopathology
Abramovitch, A., Short, T., & Schweiger, A. (2021) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102007 · Cited by 269
“As aptly put by Lilienfeld (2014): “ Yet investigators … must be careful not to confuse biological mediation with biological etiology.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lilienfeld, S. O.
- Affiliations
- Emory University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lilienfeld, Scott O.
- ORCID
- Lilienfeld, Scott O.
- Venue
- Behaviour Research and Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-11
- Volume
- 62
- Pages
- 129-139
- ISSN
- 0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2080055550
- Cited by
- 248
- References
- 150
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 154.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
- Keywords
- Research Domain Criteria, psychopathology classification, DSM, endophenotypes, measurement error, biological predispositions, behavioral manifestations, psychiatric diagnosis
- MeSH terms
- Mental Disorders, Humans, National Institute of Mental Health (U.S.), Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Research, United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
