Psychopathology papers & dx criteria

Kotov et al., 2021

Reviews the HiTOP model framework, supporting evidence, and limitations of the DSM.

Forbes et al., 2023

Fried et al., 2017

Southward et al., 2023

Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2023

Brownlow, 2023

Hall et al., 2016

MDD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Hollon et al., 2021

Monroe & Harkness, 2022

Rottenberg, 2017

Culverhouse, 2017

GAD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Newman & Llera, 2011

PTSD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Bryant, 2019

Brewin et al., 2017

Haslam, 2016

SAD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Ginat-Frolich et al., 2024

Krieg & Xu, 2015

Bainbridge et al., 2022

Panic disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Agoraphobia DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Robinaugh et al., 2019

Naragon-Gainey et al., 2010

OCD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Abramowitz & Jacoby, 2015

Asher et al., 2020

Anorexia Nervosa DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Forbush et al (in press)

Walsh et al., 2023

Johnson-Munguia et al., 2024

Bulimia Nervosa DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Binge Eating Disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Stice, 2016

Nagata et al., 2020

Brown & Keel, 2023

BPD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Crowell et al., 2009

Southward & Cheavens, 2018

Rodriguez-Seijas et al., 2024

Bullis et al., 2019

Histrionic PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Narcissistic PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Miller et al., 2021

Miller et al., 2022

Conduct Disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Oppositional Defiant Disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Beauchaine & McNulty, 2013

Beauchaine et al., 2010

Frick et al., 2014

Antisocial PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Beauchaine et al., 2009

Wright et al., 2022

Muris et al., 2017

Intermittent Explosive Disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Coccaro, 2012

Wakefield, 2016

ADHD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Hinshaw, 2018

Faraone et al., 2021

Nigg, 2017

Substance-Related Disorders DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Boness et al., 2021

Watts et al., 2021

Watts et al., 2023

Grant et al., 2010

OCPD DSM-5-TR

Diedrich & Voderholzer, 2015

Limburg et al., 2017

Samuel et al., 2022

Avoidant PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Lampe, 2016

Hummelen et al., 2022

De Fruyt & de Clercq, 2014

Paranoid PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Fanti et al., 2023

Samuel & Widiger, 2008

d’Huart et al., 2023

Schizoid PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Schizotypal PD DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Kendler, 1985

Raine, 2006

Schizophrenia DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Andreou et al., 2023

Kotov et al., 2024

Torrey, 2024

Bipolar I Disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

Sigitova et al., 2017

Sperry et al., 2017

Sperry et al., 2024

Bipolar II disorder DSM-5-TR dx criteria

HiTOP model

AMPD model

How do the categorical, dimensional, and network models of psychopathology differ from one another? 

DSM limitations (Kotov, 2021)

• Unsupported Categorical Assumption: Traditional systems assume mental disorders are discrete categories, but extensive research finds continuity between psychopathology and normality.

• Poor Reliability and Stability: Categorical diagnoses demonstrate low stability over time and low agreement between diagnosticians, leading to a loss of information.

• Excessive Comorbidity: The co-occurrence of multiple disorders is extremely common, complicating research and clinical decision-making. Traditional systems treat disorders as independent conditions, failing to account for their shared features.

• Diagnostic Heterogeneity: Many traditional diagnoses group together symptoms that have little in common, creating highly heterogeneous patient groups.

• Prevalence of Unspecified Diagnoses: A significant number of patients who need care do not meet the full criteria for any specific disorder and receive an uninformative "Other Specified/Unspecified" diagnosis.

HiTOP core principles (Kotov, 2021)

1. Dimensionality: Psychopathology is best described by dimensions, improving reliability and fully characterizing every individual's standing on each construct. While the model is primarily dimensional, it remains open to evidence of discrete, categorical entities if they are identified.

2. Co-occurrence: The classification is built by grouping related signs and symptoms into coherent dimensions, which addresses the problem of diagnostic heterogeneity.

3. Hierarchy: The model arranges dimensions from narrow to broad, accounting for comorbidity. Higher-order dimensions represent the shared features among more specific conditions, allowing comorbidity to be measured and studied directly.

HiTOP structure (Kotov, 2021)

• Superspectra: The highest level includes broad factors like the general psychopathology p factor. Hypothesized superspectra include emotional dysfunction, psychosis, and externalizing.

• Spectra: Six major spectra have been identified: Internalizing, Thought Disorder, Disinhibited Externalizing, Antagonistic Externalizing, Detachment, and Somatoform (provisional).

• Subfactors: Spectra are composed of clusters of syndromes, such as Fear and Distress within the Internalizing spectrum.

• Syndromes: These are dimensional constructs composed of closely related components (e.g., social anxiety).

• Symptom Components and Maladaptive Traits: The most specific level, comprising over 100 proposed dimensions like performance anxiety, separation insecurity, and anhedonia.