Effects of diagnostic classification systems on clinical hypothesis-generation

  • Marjolijn M. Vermande
  • John H. van den Bercken
  • Eric E. De Bruyn


In this study it was determined whether (a) classification as opposed to absence of classification has an effect on the quality of clinical hypotheses (b) the DSM-III-R and the CBCL have a different effect on the quality of clinical hypotheses, and (c) the potential difference between the DSM-III-R and the CBCL is moderated by the different number of syndromes identified by these systems. To investigate these questions, an experiment was conducted in which 86 clinicians generated hypotheses for six cases. The clinicians were divided into a DSM-III-R, a CBCL, and a control group. Of the six cases, two were classified by both classification systems as one syndrome, two were classified as one syndrome by the DSM-III-R but as two syndromes by the CBCL, and two were classified as two syndromes by the DSM-III-R but as one syndrome by the CBCL. The quality of the hypotheses was determined by means of four dependent variables selected from an overview of qualitative criteria: explanatory value, redundancy, possibility of operationalization, and specificity. No differences between the CBCL and the control groups were found. The DSM group performed better than the control group regarding explanatory value and redundancy. The DSM-III-R group also scored better than the CBCL group regarding explanatory value, particularly when the number of identified syndromes was two for the CBCL and one for the DSM-III-R.

Key words

DSM-III-R Child Behavior Checklist psychopathological classification systems hypothesis generation qualitative characteristics of clinical hypotheses 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Achenbach, T. M. (1991a).Integrative guide for the 1991 CBCL/4-18, YSR, and TRF profiles. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
  2. Achenbach, T. M. (1991b).Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
  3. Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1978). The classification of child psychopathology: A review and analysis of empirical efforts.Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1275–1301.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Achenbach, T. M., & Edelbrock, C. S. (1983).Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist and Revised Behavior Profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
  5. Achenbach, T. M., & McConaughy, S. H. (1987).Empirically based assessment of child and adolescent psychopathology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. American Psychiatric Association (1987).Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd rev. ed.). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
  7. Blashfield, R. K. (1984).The classification of psychopathology: Neo-Kraepelinian and quantitative approaches. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  8. Braspenning, J., & Sergeant, J. (1994). General practitioner's decision making for mental health problems: Outcomes and ecological validity.Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 47, 1365–1372.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bunge, M. (1985). Types of psychological explanation. In J. L. McGaugh (Ed.),Contemporary psychology: Biological processes and theoretical issues (pp. 489–501). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. Cantor, N., Smith, E. E., French, R. de S., & Mezzich, J. (1980). Psychiatric diagnosis as prototype categorization.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 89, 181–193.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cantwell, D. P., & Baker, L. (1988). Issues in the classification of child and adolescent psychopathology.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 27, 521–533.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Carey, M. P., Flasher, L. V., Maisto, S. A., & Turkat, I. D. (1984). The a priori approach to psychological assessment.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15, 515–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carlier, E., Van Der Heijden, M. K., & Hellendoorn, J. (1988). De rol van hypothesen in het diagnostisch proces [The role of hypotheses in the diagnostic process]. In J. Rispens, E. Carlier, & P. Schoorl (Eds.),Diagnostiek in de hulpverlening (pp. 71–88). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  14. Chalmers, A. F. (1976).What is this thing called science? St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
  15. Davison, G. C., & Neale, J. M. (1990).Abnormal psychology (5th ed.). New York: Wiely.Google Scholar
  16. De Bruyn, E. E. J. (1992). A normative-prescriptive view on clinical psychodiagnostic decision making.European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 8, 163–171.Google Scholar
  17. De Groot, A. D. (1950).Het object der psychodiagnostiek [The object of psychodiagnostics], Inaugural lecture. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  18. De Groot, A. D. (1969).Methodology Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.Google Scholar
  19. Edelbrock, C., & Costello, A. J. (1988). Convergence between statistically derived behavior problem syndromes and child psychiatric diagnoses.Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 16, 219–231.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Elstein, A. S., Shulman, L. S., & Sprafka, S. A. (1978).Medical problem solving: An analysis of clinical reasoning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Elster, J. (1983).Explaining technical change. A case study in the philosophy of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Elster, J. (1989).Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Fischhoff, B., & Beyth-Marom, R. (1988). Hypothesis evaluation from a Bayesian perspective. In J. Dowie & A. Elstein (Eds.),Professional judgement. A reader in clinical decision making (pp. 232–248). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Føllesdal, D., Walløe, L., & Elster, J. (1986).Rationale Argumentation. Ein Grundkurs in Argumentations- und Wissenschaftstheorie [Rational argumentation. A basic course on the theory of argumentation and science]. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  25. Fuqua, D. R., Gunberg, E. W., & Newman, J. L. (1984). Effects of varying the practice stimuli on clinical hypothesis-formation.Psychological Reports, 55, 999–1002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gadenne, V. (1988). Hypothesen, Erklärungen und Prognosen in der psychologischen Diagnostik [Hypotheses, explanations, and prognoses in psychodiagnostics]. In R. S. Jäger (Ed.),Psychologische Diagnostik. Ein Lehrbuch (pp. 276–285). München: Psychologie Verlags Union.Google Scholar
  27. Haynes, S. N. (1992).Models of causality in psychopathology: Toward dynamic, synthetic and nonlinear models of behavior disorders. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Haynes, S. N., Spain, E. H., & Oliveira, J. (1993). Identifying causal relationships in clinical assessment.Psychological Assessment, 5, 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hellendoorn, J. (1988). Rapportage en dossiervorming [Reporting and file formation]. In J. Rispens, E. Carlier, & P. Schoorl (Eds.),Diagnostiek in de hulpverlening (pp. 191–222). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  30. Hempel, C. G. (1965).Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames.American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kirk, R. E. (1982).Experimental design (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  33. Krol, N. P. C. M., De Bruyn, E. E. J., & Van den Bercken, J. H. L. (1992). Diagnostic classification by experts and novices.Acta Psychologica, 81, 23–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Krol, N. P. C. M., De Bruyn, E. E. J., & Van den Bercken, J. H. L. (1995). Intuitive and empirical prototypes in childhood psychopathology.Psychological Assessment, 7, 533–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kuipers, S., & Hellingman, P. (1994).Enkele kenmerken van expertise in de psychodiagnostiek [Some characteristics of expertise in psychodiagnostics]; Unpublished master's thesis. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen, Department of Special Education.Google Scholar
  36. Kurpius, D. J., Benjamin, D., & Morran, D. K. (1985). Effects of teaching a cognitive strategy on counselor trainee internal dialogue and clinical hypothesis formulation.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lazare, A. (1976). The psychiatric examination in the walk-in clinic. Hypothesis generation and hypothesis testing.Archives of General Psychiatry, 33, 96–102.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. McGuire, C. H., Solomon, L. M., & Bashook, P. G. (1976).Construction and use of written simulations. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  39. Morey, L. C., Skinner, H. A., & Blashfield, R. K. (1986). Trends in the classification of abnormal behavior. In A. R. Ciminero, K. S. Calhoun, & H. E. Adams (Eds.),Handbook of behavioral assessment (2nd ed., pp. 47–75). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  40. Morran, D. K. (1986). Relationship of counselor self-talk and hypothesis formulation to performance level.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 395–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nezu, A. M., & Nezu, C. M. (1993). Identifying and selecting target problems for clinical interventions: A problem-solving model.Psychological Assessment, 5, 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pameijer, N. K. (1992).Het hypothesetoetsend model en de diagnostiek van leer-en opvoedingsproblemen in de praktijk [The hypothesis-testing model and the diagnostics of learning and educational problems in practice.] Amsterdam: Gemeentelijk Pedologisch Institut.Google Scholar
  43. Phillips, L. D. (1973).Bayesian statistics for social scientists. London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  44. Quinn, M. E. (1971). Evaluation of a method for teaching hypothesis formation to sixth grade children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania).Dissertation Abstracts International, 32, 1937A.Google Scholar
  45. Ruben, D. (1990).Explaining explanation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Runkel, P. J., & McGrath, J. E. (1972).Research on human behavior. A systematic guide to method. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  47. Rutter, M., & Gould, M. (1985). Classification. In M. Rutter & L. Hersov (Eds.),Child and adolescent psychiatry. Modern approaches (2nd ed., pp. 304–321). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  48. Salmon, W. C. (1970). Statistical explanation. In R. G. Colodny (Ed.),The nature and function of scientific theories (pp. 173–231). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  49. Schaefer, R. E. (1977). Das Bayes-Theorem als diagnostisches Klassifikationsinstrument [Bayes' theorem as a diagnostic classification instrument].Archiv für Psychologie, 129, 302–318.Google Scholar
  50. Schroots, J. J. F., Akkerman, A. E., & De Groot, A. D. (1978).Leidse Diagnostische Test. Deel 2. Handleiding voor het stroomdiagram. Van klinisch oordeel tot psychologisch rapport [The Leyden Diagnostic Test. Part 2. Manual for the flow chart. From clinical judgement to psychological report]. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  51. Shapiro, M. B. (1951). An experimental approach to diagnostic psychological testing.Journal of Mental Science, 97, 748–764.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1988). Decision making. In R. C. Atkinson, R. J. Hernstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.),Steven's handbook of experimental psychology (2nd ed.).Vol. 2: Learning and cognition (pp. 673–738). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  53. SPSS (1990). SPSS reference guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  54. Stegmüller, W. (1983).Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und analytischen Philosophie. Band I: Erklärung—Begründung—Kausalität [Problems and results of the theory of science and analytical philosophy, Vol. 1. Explanation—Argumentation—Causality] (2nd rev. ed.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  55. Strohmer, D. C., Biggs, D. A., Haase, R. F., & Keller, K. E. (1983). Hypothesis formation and testing in clinical judgment.Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 607–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Turkat, I. D. (1987). Invited case transcript. The initial clinical hypothesis.Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 18, 349–356.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Mechelen, I., & De Boeck, P. (1989). Implicit taxonomy in psychiatric diagnosis: A case study.Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 8, 276–287.Google Scholar
  58. Verhulst, F. C., Koot, J. M., Akkerhuis, G. W., & Veerman, J. W. (1990).Praktische handleiding voor de CBCL (Child Behavior Checklist) [Practical guide to the CBCL]. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  59. Vermande, M. M. (1995).Psychodiagnostics: Classification and hypothesis-generation (Doctoral dissertation). Nijmegen: Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  60. Vermande, M. M., Van den Bercken, J. H. L., & De Bruyn, E. E. J. (1991).The effect of DSM-III-R and CBCL on psychodiagnostic hypotheses: Questionnaire data. Unpublished data.Google Scholar
  61. Vermande, M. M., Weusten, M. C. M., Coppen, P. A. J. M., & Kracht, D. (1993).Correspondences between syndrome-definitions of DSM-III-R and CBCL (Tech. Rep. No. 93-08). Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information.Google Scholar
  62. Vermande, M. M., Van den Bercken, J. H. L., & De Bruyn, E. E. J. (1994). Classifying behavioral and emotional problems by means of DSM-III-R and CBCL: Effects on psychodiagnostic hypotheses.European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 200–213.Google Scholar
  63. Wenar, C. (1990).Developmental psychopathology. From infancy through adolescence (2nd rev. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  64. Westmeyer, H. (1972).Logik der Diagnostik: Grundlagen einer normativen Diagnostik [Logic of diagnostics: Foundations of normative diagnostics]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  65. Westmeyer, H. (1975). The diagnostic process as a statistical-causal analysis.Theory and Decision, 6, 57–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Westmeyer, H. (1990). Wissenschaftstheoretische Grundbegriffe für Klassifikation, Ätiologie und Diagnostik [Basic theory of science concepts for classification, etiology, and diagnostics]. In U. Baumann & M. Perrez (Eds.),Lehrbuch klinische Psychologie (Vol. 1, pp. 77–87). Bern, Switzerland: Verlag Hans Huber.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marjolijn M. Vermande
    • 1
  • John H. van den Bercken
    • 1
  • Eric E. De Bruyn
    • 1
  1. 1.Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information (NICI)University of NijmegenNijmegensThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations