Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Reliability, validity and culture (studies for diagnosis) - Coggle Diagram
Reliability, validity and culture (studies for diagnosis)
RELIABILITY
Goldstein (1988)
-
She re diagnosed 199 patients using DMS III, originally diagnosed using DSM II; with some differences but 85% consistent
She asked 2 other experts to re diagnose a random sample of the patients using the case histories with all indication of previous diagnoses removed - she found high level of agreement/consistency = inter rater reliability
-
VALIDITY
Kim-Cohen et al (2005)
-
Childrens mothers were interviewed and the teachers were asked to complete postal questionnaires about conduct disorder symptoms (from DSM IV) observed in last 6 months
The children who received the diagnosis were also more likely to display behavioural and educational difficulties at age 7 = predictive validity
CROSS-CULTURAL
Davison and Neale (1944)
In asian cultures, people are praised if they do not show emotions when experiencing emotional turmoil
In certain Arabic cultures, outpouring of public emotion is understood and encouraged.
Without this knowledge, an individual displaying overt emotional behavior may be regarded as abnormal
-
RELIABILITY/ VALIDITY
Kirk and Kitchen (1992)
Argued there are methodological problems with studies used to test the reliability of the DSM up until 1992, limiting generalisability
The studies outlined used interviews and questionnaires to gather data. K&K argued that training and supervision of the interview was insufficient and that they lacked the commitment and skills to be accurate. Also pointed out that the studies tended to take place in specialised research settings, which means that their findings might nit relate to clinicians in clinical settings.
As an unreliable diagnostic tool lacks validity, K&K suggested that the DSM could lack validity.
-