Development of the DSM-IV: Validity and Relevance for School Psychologists

Abstract

Previous editions of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) have had questionable relevance for school psychologists. DSM-IV has a sounder empirical basis: within the limits of data and resources, changes were based on extensive literature reviews, reanalyses of existing data sets, and empirical field trials. New theoretical developments allow the criteria to be viewed within a psychological test, rather than medical, model, and provide new directions for validation, familiar to school psychologists as the many sources of internal and external validity for a construct. These advances are best exemplified in the criteria for attention-deficit and disruptive behavior disorders, which showed improved psychometric properties over those in DSM-III-R after rigorous data modeling in a national field trial. These enhancements, along with socially driven trends to address the needs of students with ADHD and other disorders, make DSM-IV more relevant to psychologists facing an expanded assessment role.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Keith McBurnett

Keith McBurnett, PhD, is a licensed clinical psychologist and Assistant Professor in the Division of Child Development, Pediatrics Department, University of California at Irvine. He served as a site director for the DSM-IV Field Trials for Attention-Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders, and he continues to research diagnostic and psychobiological aspects of child behavior and emotional problems. His work as director of the City of Irvine Risk Prevention Program in the Irvine Unified School District keeps him involved with school psychology issues.