CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 102Mental Health and PsychiatryPsychology and Mental HealthMedical Research and Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The DSM and its lure of legitimacy

Lafrance, Michelle N, McKenzie-Mohr, Suzanne·2013·Feminism & Psychology
DOI 10.1177/0959353512467974
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) offers a biomedical framing of people’s experiences of distress and impairment, and despite decades of criticism, it remains the dominant approach. This dominance is maintained not only by powerful corporate interests such as the pharmaceutical industry, but also through the everyday talk of people as they attempt to make meaning of themselves and their experiences. This paper explores how and why the DSM holds such cultural currency for individual speakers, and unpacks what is being accomplished in their taking up the language of psychiatric diagnosis. In particular, we argue that a biomedical construction of distress offers the lure, or promise, of validating persons’ pain and legitimizing their identities. However, we also argue that the very assumptions of biomedicine ensure that this promise can never entirely be fulfilled and, despite its lure, a biomedical construction of ‘mental illness’ all too frequently fails to protect individuals from delegitimation and stigma.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0959353512467974

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 72 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bhaskar R, 1989, Reclaiming Reality
  2. Hare-Mustin RT, 1997, Critical Psychology: An Introduction, 105
  3. 10.1037/0735-7028.12.1.76 · DOI
  4. Marecek J, 1999, New Visions of Victims: Feminists Struggle with the Concept, 158
  5. Marecek J, 2004, Critical Psychology: An Introduction, 75
  6. Ussher JM, 2007, International Journal of Critical Psychology, 21, 145

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 102

Related

Metadata

Authors
Lafrance, M. N., & McKenzie-Mohr, S.
Affiliations
St. Thomas University (CA)
ORCID
Lafrance, Michelle N
Venue
Feminism & Psychology
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2013-02
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
119-140
ISSN
  • 0959-3535 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7161
DOI
10.1177/0959353512467974
OpenAlex
W2158819391
Cited by
102
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1
FWCI
56.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Feminism & Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Medical Terminology › Medical Research and Practices
Keywords
DSM, psychiatric diagnosis, biomedical model of mental illness, legitimacy, stigma, delegitimization, pharmaceutical industry, everyday conversation, identity, distress

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