Taxonomic Subgroups within Psychosomatic Disease Entities: An Alternative Strategy to the Specificity Approach?

Abstract

There are empirical indications that the well-known weaknesses of the different psychosomatic specificity theorems are linked to their presupposition of a one-to-one relationship between one specific psychosocial configuration and one definite disease entity. An alternative conceptualization is offered: The majority of the psychosocial phenomena found within a definite disease entity fall into a small group of perhaps half a dozen different patterns. Only a minority of cases show a high variation with many different patterns – some even individually unique. This alternative concept demands different research strategies and methods which are provided by taxometrics. This is illustrated with examples from a follow-up study of anorexia nervosa.

Patterns of Self-Definition of Asthma Patients and Normal Persons in the Freiburg Personality Inventory

“…Since Meyer [1984] had ideas of taxo nomic order theoretically included into enti ties of psychosomatic disorders, the problem of the formation of subgroups has been fol lowed up more intensely by modern mathe matical methods.…”

A cluster analytic approach to interest measurement with the ACT Interest Inventory

“…By clustering scores on scales of the Yale Eating Patterns Questionnaire, Kristeller and Rodin (1989) developed a classification scheme of eating behavior applicable to the general population. Meyer (1984) identified four subgroups of anorexics which replicated across several clustering methods. These groups varied on the severity of their symptoms, and on their reliance on fasting, purging, and abuse of alcohol and purgatives.…”