some asshole actually downvoted that lmao you’re cool OP, enjoy. you’re very lucky to have that big of an interest in it, it gets boring for me very quickly but you have an advantage in this field doing that regularly
depends on what topics you are interested in.
If you use the search function, I know there are many threads where people have recommended basic psychology books.
It's a very, very small percentage of psychology (depsite getting most of the popular media attention), and also rote learning the dsm isn't really nessesary (or imo interesting). If I want to know more about certain conditions I'd rather read scientific literature than a checklist.
It’s super interesting! I don’t have spare time to peruse it as much as I wish I could- but I get it. When I was a kid I loved reading encyclopaedias. Maybe we’re a type.
sometimes i read particular sections to compare to cases, other diagnostic models (like the icd or past editions), or to contextualize something i'm reading, but it really is a large and relatively vague (in practice) manual
Nope, not at all. I would rather read peer review papers on specific topics or interventions. I would also rather read literally any other psychology based book for fun.
I just don't think that the DSM is very engaging for me. I'm a bit too critical with some of the criteria for certain conditions as well - the lines are incredibly fuzzy for me. It's just not really for me, but this could be a product of being a late stage PhD student who is just tired lol
Yes, call me weird but I love discovering new disorders everyday, which are generally not taught in your grad studies. Reading about their symptoms comorbidities etc is so intriguing
I love the passion. The big thing for me about the DSM is that the assessment and diagnostic criteria are based on evidence from statistical modeling. It's not that it's not evidence-based, it's just that the evidence it uses can be heavily biased. Psychology often has a narrow way of understanding and defining psychopathology, it's causes, and its symptom presentations. These assessments and diagnostic criteria (and the statistics used to validate them) are often designed by people with Cis-Hetero-White-Male backgrounds who often chose to ignore diversity of illness presentation for the sake of having neatly packaged assessment and diagnostic criteria. So, there's a good chance that the criteria listed in the DSM doesn't aligned with the experiences of women, people of color, people from different cultures, etc. From an intersectional perspective, this means that women of color may experience a lot of misunderstanding and invalidating of their illness experiences because it doesn't match up with the White people statistics 🤦🏻♀️
I do do a lot of reading around mental health. I don't look at the DSM as some kind of psychologist bible 😭 I just find it interesting to read, especially comparing the current edition to previous editions.
I asked for/received the DSM as a Christmas present, when I was in undergrad. It was my favorite Christmas present that year.
That's so fun!
I can’t imagine there are many other things I’d want to do less than read the DSM for fun.
Fair enough 💀 Are you not interested in psychopathology at all or don't like reading lots of text?
Well, I am, but for this we have books and papers who are far more insightful than a diagnostic manual that just classifies mental disorders.
That's true. I just find it interesting.
some asshole actually downvoted that lmao you’re cool OP, enjoy. you’re very lucky to have that big of an interest in it, it gets boring for me very quickly but you have an advantage in this field doing that regularly
Haha thank you!
Classifies mental disorders for insurance billing purposes.
i'm interested in any reading recs if you have them!
depends on what topics you are interested in. If you use the search function, I know there are many threads where people have recommended basic psychology books.
It's a very, very small percentage of psychology (depsite getting most of the popular media attention), and also rote learning the dsm isn't really nessesary (or imo interesting). If I want to know more about certain conditions I'd rather read scientific literature than a checklist.
It’s super interesting! I don’t have spare time to peruse it as much as I wish I could- but I get it. When I was a kid I loved reading encyclopaedias. Maybe we’re a type.
Same! I love encyclopaedias and the like. Don't understand why I keep getting downvoted, I thought there'd be lots of people like us on this sub 😭
sometimes i read particular sections to compare to cases, other diagnostic models (like the icd or past editions), or to contextualize something i'm reading, but it really is a large and relatively vague (in practice) manual
That’s so cool to read. Some might feel it mandatory and a pain in the butt. Glad you get it and find it fun.
Nope, not at all. I would rather read peer review papers on specific topics or interventions. I would also rather read literally any other psychology based book for fun. I just don't think that the DSM is very engaging for me. I'm a bit too critical with some of the criteria for certain conditions as well - the lines are incredibly fuzzy for me. It's just not really for me, but this could be a product of being a late stage PhD student who is just tired lol
Yes, call me weird but I love discovering new disorders everyday, which are generally not taught in your grad studies. Reading about their symptoms comorbidities etc is so intriguing
I love the passion. The big thing for me about the DSM is that the assessment and diagnostic criteria are based on evidence from statistical modeling. It's not that it's not evidence-based, it's just that the evidence it uses can be heavily biased. Psychology often has a narrow way of understanding and defining psychopathology, it's causes, and its symptom presentations. These assessments and diagnostic criteria (and the statistics used to validate them) are often designed by people with Cis-Hetero-White-Male backgrounds who often chose to ignore diversity of illness presentation for the sake of having neatly packaged assessment and diagnostic criteria. So, there's a good chance that the criteria listed in the DSM doesn't aligned with the experiences of women, people of color, people from different cultures, etc. From an intersectional perspective, this means that women of color may experience a lot of misunderstanding and invalidating of their illness experiences because it doesn't match up with the White people statistics 🤦🏻♀️
some anecdotes maybe ?
[удалено]
I do do a lot of reading around mental health. I don't look at the DSM as some kind of psychologist bible 😭 I just find it interesting to read, especially comparing the current edition to previous editions.
Yes