• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science, Technology and Human Values >Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health 'Research Domain Criteria' (RDoC)
【24h】

Psychiatry and the Sociology of Novelty: Negotiating the US National Institute of Mental Health 'Research Domain Criteria' (RDoC)

机译：精神病和新奇的社会学：谈判美国全国心理健康研究领域标准（RDOC）

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is seeking to encourage researchers to move away from diagnostic tools like the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the DSM). A key mechanism for this is the "Research Domain Criteria" (RDoC) initiative, closely associated with former NIMH Director Thomas Insel. This article examines how key figures in US (and UK) psychiatry construct the purpose, nature, and implications of the ambiguous RDoC project; that is, how its novelty is constituted through discourse. In this paper, I explore and analyze these actors' accounts of what is new, important, or (un)desirable about RDoC, demonstrating how they are constituted through institutional context and personal affects. In my interviews with mental health opinion leaders, RDoC is presented as overly reliant on neurobiological epistemologies, distant from clinical imaginaries and imperatives, and introduced in a top-down manner inconsistent with the professional norms of scientific research. Ultimately, the article aims to add empirical depth to current understandings about the epistemological and ontological politics of contemporary (US) psychiatry and to contribute to science and technology studies (STS) debates about "the new" in technoscience. Accordingly, I use discussions about RDoC as a case study in the sociology of novelty.
机译：在美国，国家心理健康研究所（NIMH）正在寻求鼓励研究人员远离精神障碍诊断和统计手册等诊断工具（DSM）。这是一项关键机制是“研究域标准”（RDOC）倡议，与前NiMH主任Thomas Insel密切相关。本文介绍了美国（和英国）精神病学的关键数字如何构建暧昧的RDOC项目的目的，性质和影响;也就是说，它的新颖性是如何通过话语构成的。在本文中，我探索并分析了这些演员对RDOC有望的新，重要或（联合国）的账户，展示了如何通过体制背景和个人影响构成。在我对心理健康意见领导人的采访中，RDOC呈现出神经生物学认识论的过度依赖，远离临床思想和必要性，并以自上而下的方式介绍与科学研究的专业规范不一致。最终，该文章旨在为现代（美国）精神病学的认识论和本体政治的经验谅解，并为科技研究（STS）关于“新”技术的辩论而增加了实证深度。因此，我使用关于RDOC的讨论作为新奇的社会学的案例研究。

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