The hermeneutics of mental symptoms in the Cambridge School

Aragona, Massimiliano; Marková, Ivana

doi:10.1590/1415-4714.2015v18n4p599.2

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accordingly, “the fewer modulatory factors involved, the closer the final symptom will be to the original brain signal. The more modulatory factors, the less representative it will be to the point that nothing in the final symptom will be redolent of its original brain address” ( 37 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Translational Neuroscience on Revisiting Psychiatric Diagnosis: State of the Art and Conceptual Analysis

Aragona¹

2017

Balkan Med J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews translational research in psychiatry, focusing on those programs addressing the problem of the validity of psychiatric diagnoses. In medicine in general, and in psychiatry in particular, the term “translational” is used with different meanings. A conceptual analysis suggests that there are at least seven different types of translational research in psychiatry: T1 (“bench-to-bedside” development of tools and treatments), T2 (application of animal models to human psychiatry), T3 (papers focusing on the mind-brain gap, studying biological, neurobiological and cognitive dysfunctions), T4 (personalised therapies and prediction of treatment responses), T5 (“bedside-to-bench” translation of population data for laboratories), T6 (implementation of treatments at the population level, including accessibility and quality of services), and T7 (improving translational knowledge in residents’ trainings and researchers’ careers).Concerning the problem of validity of psychiatric diagnoses, new neurocognitive models like the Research Domain Criteria project are considered, in particular the translational program of cross-validation aimed at reducing the gap between neuroimaging data and psychopathological scores derived from rating-scales. It is shown that these programs are useful, filling some of the current research gaps, but it is also stressed that they carry implicit realist and reductionist assumptions. It is finally suggested that the formation of mental symptoms is a complex process involving both neurocognitive and semantic factors, which raises doubts about the possibility of complete translations, without residuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Translational Neuroscience on Revisiting Psychiatric Diagnosis: State of the Art and Conceptual Analysis

Aragona¹

2017

Balkan Med J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Cambridge model (Aragona & Marková, 2015; Berrios, 2013; Marková & Berrios, 2009, 2012) is perhaps the most elaborated model of the internal structure and formation of subjectively experienced symptoms. The model proposes that these kinds of symptoms are created in the following way.…”

Section: Perspectives On Symptomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Symptom Descriptions in Psychopathology: How Well Are They Working for Us?

Wilshire

Ward

Clack

2021

Clinical Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we examine how symptoms are conceptualized in theories of psychopathology. We identify five questions that need to be asked about symptoms, including what kind of constructs they are, how we should describe them, and what causal explanations they support. We then examine how three different theoretical frameworks address these questions: the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the symptom-network-modeling approach, and the Cambridge model of symptom formation. We show that the assumptions these frameworks make affect the kinds of theoretical models they support and the research approaches they advocate. When symptoms are viewed as empirical observations, the focus of inquiry is directed elsewhere. However, when symptoms are understood as complex constructs in their own right, that are themselves built on certain theoretical assumptions, then understanding them becomes crucial to theoretical progress. We conclude by calling for greater focus on research that unpacks the constructs underlying symptoms.

show abstract

“…Among them, we can highlight new versions of the translational model, which seek new strategies to find biological correlates of the psychiatric symptoms through neuroimaging techniques (6, 7). Moreover, the complex role of hermeneutics in shaping a neurobiological signal as mental symptom has been considered in models trying to reconcile neurobiology and humanities (8, 9). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%