Since its initial publication, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has been the object of criticism which has led to regular revisions by the American Psychiatric Association. This article analyses the debates that surrounded the publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Building on the concepts of public arenas and reception theory, it explores the meaning encoded in the manual by audiences. Our results, which draw from a thematic analysis of traditional and digital media sources, identify eight audiences that react to the American Psychiatric Association’s narrative of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.): conformist, reformist, humanist, culturalist, naturalist, conflictual, constructivist and utilitarian. While some of their claims present argumentative polarities, others overlap, thus challenging the idea, often presented in academic publications, of a fixed debate. In order to further discuss on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, we draw attention to claims that ‘travel’ across different communities of audiences.
L’hypothèse de la psychologisation nourrit la réflexion critique sur l’intervention sociale depuis maintenant quelques décennies, suscitant des mises en garde de toutes sortes à l’égard de l’appauvrissement du social et notamment de l’action collective. Si la mauvaise réputation de la psychologisation n’est plus à démontrer, il semble pertinent et nécessaire en revanche 1) d’élargir la réflexion sur le spectre des possibles qui émergent des dynamiques historiques et sociales contemporaines auxquelles la psychologisation est associée; 2) de replacer le phénomène de la prolifération des pratiques d’accompagnement qui semblent s’appuyer sur une psychologisation croissante des interventions sociales dans un contexte de transformations sociales plus larges et 3) d’ illustrer les liens entre accompagnement et psychologisation à l’aide d’une recherche empirique récente centrée sur l’étude des pratiques d’accompagnement dans deux contextes « d’expérience-limite ».The extensive influence of psychology on what used to be conceived as strictly social or political matters has been the subject of several critics for a few decades now, arguing its tendency to diminish collective action and lessen social consistency. If this seemingly reputation of psychology is not to be made anymore, it seems important never the less to open the discussion by 1) exploring other possibilities that can emerge from the historical and sociological dynamics that are linked more broadly to its spreading influence; 2) replacing the growing popularity of “coaching” practises in this context of larger social transformations and 3) by illustrating the link between coaching and “psychologization” with results from a recent empirical research on intervention practices that deal with extreme conditions of existence
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.