top of page

Research: psychiatric diagnosis like depresion, anxiety, bipolar are scientifically meaningless

Study finds psychiatric diagnosis to be ‘scientifically meaningless’

And what could this mean for our popular MBTI, DISC, and other personality test?

A new study, led by researchers from the University of Liverpool, involved a detailed analysis of five key chapters of the latest edition of the widely used Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), on ‘schizophrenia’, ‘bipolar disorder’, ‘depressive disorders’, ‘anxiety disorders’ and ‘trauma-related disorders’.

Diagnostic manuals such as the DSM were created to provide a common diagnostic language for mental health professionals and attempt to provide a definitive list of mental health problems, including their symptoms.

The main findings of the research were:

  1. Psychiatric diagnoses all use different decision-making rules.

  2. There is a huge amount of overlap in symptoms between diagnoses.

  3. Almost all diagnoses mask the role of trauma and adverse events

  4. Diagnoses tell us little about the individual patient and what treatment they need

The authors conclude that diagnostic labeling represents ‘a disingenuous categorical system’.

Lead researcher Dr. Kate Allsopp, University of Liverpool, said:

“Although diagnostic labels create the illusion of an explanation they are scientifically meaningless and can create stigma and prejudice.
I hope these findings will encourage mental health professionals to think beyond diagnoses and consider other explanations of mental distress, such as trauma and other adverse life experiences.”

Professor Peter Kinderman, University of Liverpool, said: “This study provides yet more evidence that the biomedical diagnostic approach in psychiatry is not fit for purpose. Diagnoses frequently and uncritically reported as ‘real illnesses’ are in fact made on the basis of internally inconsistent, confused and contradictory patterns of largely arbitrary criteria.

The diagnostic system wrongly assumes that all distress results from disorder, and relies heavily on subjective judgments about what is normal.”

Professor John Read, University of East London, said: “Perhaps it is time we stopped pretending that medical-sounding labels contribute anything to our understanding of the complex causes of human distress or of what kind of help we need when distressed.”

When you read this I wonder how these findings relate to - in the business world - popular used DISC, MBTI and other personally test?

I know they serve a different purpose and are tested differently and still they label the person to be more Red than Blue or more Thinker than Feeler etc.

Could it be that the Schrödinger's cat principle: we are both until we are observed is actually true?

Have beautiful week Christoffel Sneijders

Source: University of Liverpool Original Research: “Heterogeneity in psychiatric diagnostic classification”. Kate Allsopp, John Read, Rhiannon Corcoran, Peter Kinderman. Psychiatry Research. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2019.07.005


bottom of page