Our current nosology of psychopathology relies on a categorical model that has notable limitations. For example, this medical model of classifying mental disorders does not account for the significant heterogeneity of symptom presentations across psychopathology. Today, we speak with Robert Latzman, Ph.D., to discuss the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP), an alternative nosology that uses factor analysis to address the issues with our current diagnostic classification standard.
If you’d like to receive APA-approved CE credit for listening to this episode, click here.
- Overview of the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP)
- Major challenges to our current nosology of psychopathology
- Comparing the diagnostic approach between the DSM-5 and HiTOP
- The role of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in HiTOP
- The “p” factor of psychopathology
- Integrating HiTOP with the RDoC to improve clinical research
- Assessment instruments that are consistent with HiTOP
- Limitations in structured diagnostic inventories
- How HiTOP can inform the next iteration of the DSM
- The clinical utility of HiTOP in psychiatric and neurocognitive disorders
Dr. Robert D. Latzman received his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the University of Iowa. He completed his internship and his postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Rob is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology at Georgia State University. He is interested in characterizing etiological mechanisms that underlie the development of externalizing disorders and related psychopathology, including aggression, delinquency, substance use, and psychopathy. He is also interested in the development of a multi-modal and dimensional model that examines the role of individual differences as central mechanisms in the clinical manifestation of psychopathology (i.e., the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology; HiTOP). Rob is the co-chair of the HiTOP neurobiological foundations workgroup.
Link to the official consortium site: https://renaissance.stonybrookmedicine.edu/HITOP
Link to the HiTOP Clinical Network site: https://hitop.unt.edu/
Conway, C. C., Forbes, M. K., Forbush, K. T., Fried, E. I., Hallquist, M. N., Kotov, R., et al. (2019). A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology Can Transform Mental Health Research. Perspect Psychol Sci, 14(3), 419-436.
Hengartner, M. P., & Lehmann, S. N. (2017). Why psychiatric research must abandon traditional diagnostic classification and adopt a fully dimensional scope: two solutions to a persistent problem. Frontiers in psychiatry, 8, 101.
Hopwood, C. J., Bagby, R. M., Gralnick, T., Ro, E., Ruggero, C., Mullins-Sweatt, S., et al. (2019). Integrating psychotherapy with the hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology (HiTOP). Journal of Psychotherapy Integration.
Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2018). A paradigm shift in psychiatric classification: the Hierarchical Taxonomy Of Psychopathology (HiTOP). World Psychiatry, 17(1), 24-25.
Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F., Watson, D., Achenbach, T. M., Althoff, R. R., Bagby, R. M., et al. (2017). The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. J Abnorm Psychol, 126(4), 454-477.
Latzman, R. D., DeYoung, C. G., & WORKGROUP, H. N. F. (2020). Using empirically-derived dimensional phenotypes to accelerate clinical neuroscience: the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) framework. Neuropsychopharmacology, 45(7), 1083-1085.
Lilienfeld, S. O., Ritschel, L. A., Lynn, S. J., Cautin, R. L., & Latzman, R. D. (2013). Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence-based practice: Root causes and constructive remedies. Clinical psychology review, 33(7), 883-900.
Raskin, J. D. (2019). Are there viable alternatives to the DSM-5? Retrieved August, 2020, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/making-meaning/201905/are-there-viable-alternatives-the-dsm-5
Rubin, J. (2018). The classification and statistical manual of mental health concerns: A proposed practical scientific alternative to the DSM and ICD. Journal of humanistic psychology, 58(1), 93-114.