PSYCHSTORY

View Original

THE RELIABILITY AND CLASSIFICATION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA

Rebecca Sylvia

SPECIFICATION

The Reliability and Validity in the Diagnosis and Classification of Schizophrenia. Including Reference to Co-Morbidity, Culture and Gender bias, Symptom overlap

The specification roughly translates to the following questions:

  • Is schizophrenia a valid classification, e.g., is it a disorder or a social construct?

  • Is schizophrenia a reliable classification, e.g., has the classification of schizophrenia remained stable over time?

  • Is a diagnosis of schizophrenia valid and reliable, e.g., will other doctors diagnose schizophrenia too?

  • Do factors such as co-morbidity, culture and gender bias, and symptom overlap compromise the validity and reliability of schizophrenia? Please refer to them when answering questions 1-3.

VALIDITY

IS VALIDITY SCHIZOPHRENIA A VALID CLASSIFICATION? IS IT A DISORDER OR A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

INTRODUCTION

Is schizophrenia a chronic and severely disabling brain disease? John Read (2004) argues that the classification of schizophrenia lacks a strong scientific foundation and questions its relevance as a diagnostic label. He challenges whether schizophrenia is truly a distinct brain disease, suggesting that its classification may need revision.

Since 1911, when the illness was first described as Dementia Praecox, there has been considerable debate over which symptoms should define it, highlighting the difficulty in establishing a valid definition. Psychologists such as Crow question the broad categorisation of schizophrenia, arguing that it may encompass at least two fundamentally different disorders. Crow proposes a classification where individuals with positive symptoms and a sudden onset are classified as Type One schizophrenics. In contrast, those with negative symptoms and a gradual onset are identified as Type Two schizophrenics.

Given these ongoing shifts in understanding, research based on early 20th-century definitions of mental illness—such as the meta-analysis conducted by Gottesman and Shields—may no longer align with contemporary insights. This suggests that findings from past studies may be outdated or incompatible with modern conceptions of schizophrenia.

The characteristics defining schizophrenia have evolved significantly over time. The DSM-III's criteria for diagnosis differed notably from those outlined in DSM-V, reflecting the continuous revision of psychiatric classifications. This shifting framework underscores how psychiatry is undergoing a transformative phase, with changes in diagnostic criteria shaping the way schizophrenia is understood and treated.

If schizophrenia is not a stable, valid diagnosis, it poses a serious challenge for psychiatrists and clinicians attempting to diagnose the disorder. A reliable classification system must have a stable set of criteria that clearly differentiate the disorder from other conditions. When the definition is fluid or unreliable, it complicates the diagnostic process, making it difficult for professionals to identify and categorise schizophrenia in patients confidently. This uncertainty has profound implications for diagnosis, treatment, and research.

A lack of diagnostic stability increases the risk of misdiagnosis, leading to inappropriate treatment choices. Patients may be prescribed antipsychotics that do not match their specific condition, exposing them to unnecessary side effects. Conversely, individuals who require treatment may be overlooked or misclassified, failing to receive the care they need. This mismatch between diagnosis and actual condition can also distort research outcomes, leading to unreliable statistics on treatment effectiveness. If studies include misdiagnosed participants, the results may present an inaccurate picture of schizophrenia’s treatment success rates, ultimately hindering scientific progress in understanding the disorder’s causes and developing effective interventions.

The fluidity in diagnostic criteria also impacts participant selection for research studies. If schizophrenia's definition continues to change, it raises concerns that studies may include individuals who do not have the disorder or exclude those who do, leading to inconsistent findings. This further complicates efforts to determine the true nature of schizophrenia and develop tailored treatment strategies.

The argument for classifying schizophrenia into distinct categories rather than treating it as a single disorder is supported by research showing that individuals with different types of schizophrenia respond differently to treatment. Studies indicate that antipsychotic medication and mindfulness-based interventions are more effective for managing positive symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions. In contrast, negative symptoms may require alternative therapeutic approaches, such as Expressed Emotion (EE) management in families. However, despite this evidence, clinicians often diagnose schizophrenia without differentiating between positive and negative symptom subtypes. This generalised approach can lead to ineffective treatment plans, as what benefits one group may not be suitable for another. Without clear diagnostic distinctions, patient outcomes may suffer due to inappropriate treatment selection.

The decision in DSM-V to remove schizophrenia subtypes was based on the realisation that many patients did not fit neatly into predefined categories. This led to the adoption of a more generalised schizophrenia diagnosis, eliminating classifications such as paranoid schizophrenia or catatonic schizophrenia. However, this shift may neglect the specific needs of different patient groups. For example, families of individuals with paranoid schizophrenia may require targeted support, such as training in managing Expressed Emotions (EE), which helps in reducing relapse rates.

Research suggests that families often interpret negative symptoms, such as avolition (lack of motivation) or apathy, as behaviours within the patient’s control. This can result in higher hostility and criticism towards the affected individual. In contrast, positive symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions, are more commonly recognised as inherent aspects of the illness, leading to lower levels of Expressed Emotion. These differences highlight the importance of a more nuanced classification of schizophrenia, as a one-size-fits-all diagnosis may fail to address the specific challenges faced by patients and their families.

DO FACTORS SUCH AS CO-MORBIDITY, CULTURE, GENDER BIAS, LACK OF OBJECTIVE TESTS, DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ICD AND DSM AND LACK OF HOMOGENEITY IN SYMPTOMS COMPROMISE THE VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF SCHIZOPHRENIA  

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ICD-11 AND DSM-5 IN DIAGNOSING SCHIZOPHRENIA AND THEIR IMPACT ON VALIDITY

Schizophrenia is diagnosed using two primary classification systems: ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision) and DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition). While both systems aim to provide a structured framework for diagnosis, they differ in symptom duration requirements, symptom classification, and the inclusion of functional decline as a diagnostic criterion. These differences have significant implications for the validity of schizophrenia as a distinct disorder, as they affect the consistency of diagnosis across clinicians and healthcare settings.

One of the key differences between ICD-11 and DSM-5 is the duration of symptoms required for a diagnosis. According to ICD-11, symptoms need to be present for at least one month for a schizophrenia diagnosis to be made, whereas DSM-5 requires symptoms to persist for a minimum of six months, including at least one month of active-phase symptoms such as hallucinations, delusions, or disorganised speech. The shorter timeframe in ICD-11 allows for an earlier diagnosis, enabling clinicians to initiate treatment sooner, potentially improving patient outcomes. However, DSM-5’s longer duration requirement seeks to ensure more excellent diagnostic stability, reducing the risk of misdiagnosing transient psychotic episodes as schizophrenia. The discrepancy in duration weakens the reliability of the diagnosis, as a patient may qualify for schizophrenia under ICD-11 but not under DSM-5, creating inconsistencies in who is diagnosed and when.

Another significant distinction is the symptom criteria used for diagnosis. While both systems require at least two symptoms to be present, they differ in classifying and prioritising them. ICD-11 includes positive symptoms, negative symptoms, and cognitive impairments, reflecting a broader approach to schizophrenia’s clinical presentation. In contrast, DSM-5 requires at least one positive symptom (hallucinations, delusions, or disorganised speech) to be present, meaning that individuals with predominantly negative symptoms—such as avolition, emotional flattening, and social withdrawal—may not meet the diagnostic threshold for schizophrenia under DSM-5, even if they experience significant impairment. The ICD-11’s broader symptom criteria acknowledge the importance of cognitive dysfunction, which is increasingly recognised as a core component of schizophrenia. However, the difference between the two systems further reduces diagnostic agreement, as a patient with primarily cognitive or negative symptoms may be diagnosed with schizophrenia under ICD-11 but not under DSM-5.

Historically, schizophrenia was classified into subtypes, such as paranoid, disorganised, and catatonic schizophrenia. Both ICD-11 and DSM-5 have removed these rigid subtypes, recognising that symptom presentation often changes over time and that the subtypes lack clinical utility. Instead, both systems now allow clinicians to describe prominent symptom patterns within schizophrenia, reflecting a more flexible, individualised approach. While this change improves diagnostic flexibility, it also further weakens the validity of schizophrenia as a distinct disorder, as the removal of subtypes reinforces the idea that schizophrenia is a broad and variable condition rather than a well-defined illness.

Another key difference is the role of functional decline in diagnosis. DSM-5 explicitly requires that schizophrenia must cause significant functional impairment in work, relationships, or self-care, whereas ICD-11 does not make functional decline a necessary diagnostic criterion. However, it acknowledges that impairment is common. By excluding functional decline as a requirement, ICD-11 allows for earlier diagnosis, which may benefit intervention. However, it also increases the risk of false positives, potentially diagnosing individuals whose symptoms do not significantly impact daily functioning. DSM-5’s inclusion of functional decline may help prevent unnecessary diagnoses. However, it could also delay treatment for individuals who meet all other symptom criteria but can still function at a relatively high level.

These differences between ICD-11 and DSM-5 have significant implications for the validity of schizophrenia as a diagnosis. First, the lack of consistency between the two systems reduces reliability, as patients may receive different diagnoses depending on which classification system is used. If schizophrenia were a clearly defined and distinct disorder, one would expect both diagnostic systems to have consistent criteria. Yet, their differences indicate ongoing uncertainty about how schizophrenia should be defined and identified.

THE LACK OF HOMOGENEITY IN SCHIZOPHRENIC SYMPTOMS

Schizophrenia is diagnosed based on a broad and variable range of symptoms, making it one of the most inconsistent psychiatric disorders in terms of presentation. Unlike many other medical and psychological conditions, schizophrenia has no pathognomonic symptom—a unique identifying feature that distinguishes it from all other disorders. This lack of a defining characteristic means that individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia may exhibit completely different symptoms, making classification difficult and, at times, unreliable.

For example, while hallucinations and delusions are often considered hallmarks of schizophrenia, research indicates that only about 75% of diagnosed individuals experience these symptoms. This means that one in four people with schizophrenia do not display what are often regarded as its most characteristic features. Furthermore, many of the symptoms associated with schizophrenia are also present in other mental health disorders, such as bipolar disorder, substance-induced psychosis, and severe depression.

The DSM-5 and ICD-11 classify schizophrenia based on the presence of at least two symptoms from a broad list that includes positive symptoms (such as delusions and hallucinations) and negative symptoms (such as avolition and social withdrawal). However, this criterion allows for an individual to receive a schizophrenia diagnosis despite having very different symptom profiles from other diagnosed individuals.

For example:

  • One patient may experience severe auditory hallucinations and paranoia, leading to extreme distress.

  • Another patient may primarily display disorganised speech and erratic behaviour but no hallucinations or delusions.

  • A third may withdraw socially and exhibit avolition without any overt psychotic symptoms.

Despite these individuals exhibiting entirely different clinical presentations, they may all receive the same schizophrenia diagnosis. This lack of consistency in symptom expression undermines the reliability of schizophrenia as a diagnosis, as it groups individuals with vastly different experiences under one label.

This variability has also led to concerns about misdiagnosis. Patients who predominantly exhibit negative symptoms—such as a lack of motivation, emotional flatness, and social withdrawal—might be misclassified as having depression rather than schizophrenia. Similarly, those who present with severe manic episodes and psychosis could be diagnosed with bipolar disorder instead of schizophrenia, depending on the clinician's interpretation of their symptoms.

THE IMPLICATIONS OF SYMPTOM INCONSISTENCY

The fact that schizophrenia does not have a consistent set of symptoms suggests that it may not be a single, unified disorder but rather an umbrella term covering a range of conditions with overlapping features. This has led to growing acceptance of the idea that schizophrenia is aetiologically heterogeneous, meaning that it likely arises from multiple different causes rather than a single underlying mechanism.

Unlike some medical conditions that have clearly defined subtypes, schizophrenia's classification has remained broad and ambiguous. While attempts have been made to categorise subtypes—such as paranoid schizophrenia, disorganised schizophrenia, and catatonic schizophrenia—these distinctions have proven unreliable, as many patients display symptoms that change over time or do not fit neatly into one category. As a result, DSM-5 removed these subtypes and instead grouped schizophrenia under the broader classification of a spectrum disorder.

However, this reclassification has not resolved the underlying issue—schizophrenia remains a highly variable diagnosis, which may overlap significantly with other psychotic and mood disorders. The lack of a clear, distinct identity for schizophrenia as a condition raises concerns about its validity as a diagnostic category. Some critics argue that schizophrenia, as currently defined, is too broad to be helpful and may encompass multiple separate disorders that require distinct classifications and treatments.

Schizophrenia's lack of homogeneity means that individuals with entirely different symptoms—ranging from hallucinations and delusions to avolition and emotional withdrawal—can receive the same diagnosis.

As a result, misdiagnosis remains a significant concern, leading to inconsistent treatment approaches and uncertainty in predicting patient outcomes. Without greater clarity on how schizophrenia is defined and distinguished from other disorders, its validity as a diagnostic category will continue to be questioned.

CO-MORBIDITY & SYMPTOM OVERLAP IN SCHIZOPHRENIA

Schizophrenia is a complex mental disorder with symptoms that often overlap with other psychiatric conditions, making diagnosis and classification challenging. The existence of co-morbidity, where a patient meets criteria for multiple disorders, further complicates this process. Overlapping symptoms can lead to misdiagnosis, delayed treatment, and inconsistency between classification systems such as the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) and the ICD (International Classification of Diseases). This raises concerns about the validity of schizophrenia as a distinct condition and suggests that some disorders may share underlying biological or genetic mechanisms.

Critics argue about the importance of the clinical practice of psychiatry in recognising and assessing symptoms and syndromes that, even though not directly related to the “core” clinical features of schizophrenia, may complicate the course and the long-term management of the disease. Disorders that are comorbid with Schizophrenia are obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, depression/suicide risk, and drug dependency.

Recognising that Schizophrenia is a comorbid condition defies the view of schizophrenia as a standardised and single category and proposes a more reliable approach to the disease’s diagnosis and treatment.

MENTAL ILLNESSES WITH SYMPTOM OVERLAP

DEPRESSION

Schizophrenia’s negative symptoms, such as avolition (lack of motivation), social withdrawal, and neglect of personal hygiene, closely resemble the symptoms of depression. This makes it difficult for clinicians to determine whether a patient is suffering from schizophrenia with negative symptoms or a primary depressive disorder.

Most importantly, though, recognising that Schizophrenia is comorbid means again that patients who, for example, may be at risk of committing suicide receive appropriate treatment for this as well as their Schizophrenia. It also begs the question of why so many Schizophrenics are depressed. Is Schizophrenia that is comorbid with depression another disorder? Or is it a product of being mentally ill? Either way, it needs to be qualitatively treated differently, say Schizophrenics who present with drug abuse.

BIPOLAR DISORDER

There is significant symptom overlap between schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, particularly in positive symptoms such as delusions and hallucinations, as well as negative symptoms such as avolition. The issue of classification arises when different diagnostic systems assign distinct labels to the same set of symptoms. The ICD may diagnose a patient with schizophrenia, while the DSM may classify the same symptoms as bipolar disorder, leading to inconsistencies in treatment approaches.

DISSOCIATIVE IDENTITY DISORDER (DID)

DID and schizophrenia both involve disturbances in identity and perception, leading to diagnostic confusion. Individuals with DID may experience hallucinations, disorganised thinking, and identity disturbances, all of which are commonly associated with schizophrenia. Some research suggests that DID patients exhibit more schizophrenic symptoms than those formally diagnosed with schizophrenia, further questioning the validity of these diagnostic categories.

SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS (E.G. COCAINE ABUSE)

Substance-induced psychosis, particularly from stimulant drugs like cocaine, often mimics schizophrenia’s positive symptoms, such as hallucinations and paranoia. Although this overlap can lead to misdiagnosis, research indicates that experienced clinicians can typically distinguish between schizophrenia and substance-induced psychosis.

POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

Schizophrenia and PTSD share overlapping symptoms, particularly paranoia, emotional detachment, and cognitive disturbances. Trauma-related psychotic symptoms may be mistaken for schizophrenia, leading to potential misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment.

OBSESSIVE-COMPULSIVE DISORDER (OCD)

OCD and schizophrenia share features such as intrusive thoughts and ritualistic behaviours, which can resemble the delusions and compulsions present in schizophrenia. However, a key distinction is that individuals with OCD typically recognise their thoughts as irrational, whereas schizophrenia patients may firmly believe in their delusions.

PANIC DISORDER

Panic disorder and schizophrenia both involve distorted perceptions, fear of persecution, and heightened anxiety. Acute episodes of panic disorder may be misinterpreted as early-stage schizophrenia, increasing the risk of misdiagnosis.

KEY RESEARCH ON CO-MORBIDITY & SYMPTOM OVERLAP

NEWSON ET AL. (2021)

  • A meta-analysis of 107,349 cases found that the DSM-5 struggles to differentiate schizophrenia from co-morbid disorders, particularly depression clearly.

  • The study uses secondary data, making it cost-effective and large-scale.

  • However, it does not explain why symptom overlap occurs, reducing its explanatory power.

BUCKLEY ET AL. (2009)

  • Found high rates of co-morbidity in schizophrenia:

    • 50% Depression

    • 47% Substance Abuse Disorder

    • 29% PTSD

    • 23% OCD

    • 15% Panic Disorder

  • Supports the significance of co-morbidity as a diagnostic issue.

  • However, it does not clarify why depression has a higher co-morbidity rate compared to other disorders.

CONCLUSION: THE RELIABILITY AND CLASSIFICATION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA

The significant overlap between schizophrenia and other mental disorders raises concerns about the reliability and validity of its classification. The fact that different diagnostic systems, such as the DSM and ICD, can assign different diagnoses to the same set of symptoms undermines the consistency of schizophrenia as a distinct disorder. This lack of agreement among classification systems questions the reliability of the diagnosis, as patients may receive different labels depending on which criteria are used.

Symptom overlap, particularly with disorders such as bipolar disorder, depression, and DID, complicates the diagnostic process, making it difficult for clinicians to distinguish between conditions. While some research suggests that experienced clinicians can differentiate schizophrenia from substance-induced psychosis, the high rates of co-morbidity with disorders such as depression and OCD indicate that many patients could meet the criteria for multiple diagnoses simultaneously. This reduces the validity of schizophrenia as a separate condition, as it suggests that its symptoms may not be unique but instead part of a broader spectrum of psychiatric disorders.

Furthermore, misdiagnosis due to symptom overlap has serious consequences. As highlighted by Ketter (2005), delays in receiving the correct diagnosis can result in prolonged suffering, increased risk of suicide, and inappropriate treatment. If schizophrenia is frequently misclassified or mistaken for other conditions, patients may not receive the appropriate interventions, leading to poor long-term outcomes. Additionally, the high genetic overlap between schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, as found by Ophoff et al. (2011), further supports the argument that these conditions may not be entirely separate but rather share underlying biological mechanisms.

Greater consistency in the criteria used across different diagnostic systems is required for schizophrenia to be classified and diagnosed reliably. Improved biological markers and genetic research may help refine diagnostic accuracy, reducing the reliance on symptom-based classification, which has proven problematic due to overlap with other conditions. Without addressing these issues, schizophrenia’s classification will continue to face challenges, impacting both research and clinical practice.

THE LACK OF OBJECTIVE TESTS FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA

Unlike many physical illnesses, there is no objective biological test to determine whether a person has schizophrenia. Diagnosis is made solely through clinical interviews, which rely on mental health professionals' subjective interpretation of symptoms. This has led to concerns about the reliability and validity of schizophrenia as a distinct condition. Some critics argue that if schizophrenia cannot be diagnosed through physical testing, such as brain scans or blood tests, then it may not be a concrete disorder but rather a socially constructed classification of mental distress.

THE DIFFICULTY OF PREDICTING OUTCOME OR RESPONSE TO TREATMENT

Predictive validity refers to the ability of a classification system to accurately predict the course of a disorder and how patients will respond to treatment. However, schizophrenia presents a significant challenge in this regard due to wide individual variations in its progression.

  • Around one-third of patients experience only one or a few brief episodes and fully recover.

  • Another one-third have occasional episodes but function relatively well in between.

  • The remaining one-third experience worsening symptoms over time, leading to severe impairment.

  • Between 10-15% of people with schizophrenia commit suicide, making outcome prediction not only unreliable but also a matter of life and death for many patients.

The inconsistencies in progression make schizophrenia’s long-term trajectory challenging to predict, turning treatment planning into a form of uncertainty or "lottery", where clinicians cannot guarantee the effectiveness of interventions for any given patient.

COUNTERARGUMENTS: SCHIZOPHRENIA AS AN AETIOLOGICALLY HETEROGENEOUS DISORDER

While schizophrenia has long been criticised for its lack of homogeneity, absence of objective tests, and unpredictable course, the latest edition of the DSM (DSM-5) has responded by redefining schizophrenia as an "aetiologically heterogeneous disorder". This term recognises that a single factor does not cause schizophrenia but instead arises from a complex interaction of genetic, neurobiological, and environmental influences.

Because of this aetiological heterogeneity, the DSM-5 now classifies schizophrenia as a spectrum disorder, acknowledging that symptoms and causes vary significantly between individuals. This classification mirrors the redefinition of autism as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), which reflects the diversity of symptoms within a broad diagnostic category.

By adopting this approach, the DSM-5 acknowledges that schizophrenia does not have one clear cause or defining set of symptoms. Instead, any combination of biological, psychological, and environmental risk factors may contribute to its onset and progression. The shift from rigid diagnostic categories to a spectrum-based model suggests that schizophrenia is best understood as a disorder with multiple potential origins and diverse presentations.

HOW SCHIZOPHRENIA IS DIAGNOSED TODAY

Despite the lack of biological tests, schizophrenia is still diagnosed using standardised clinical criteria. The DSM-5 and ICD-11 remain the primary diagnostic tools used by psychiatrists and mental health professionals worldwide.

DSM-5 Criteria:

Requires at least two of the following symptoms, with at least one being delusions, hallucinations, or disorganised speech:

  • Positive symptoms: Delusions, hallucinations, disorganised speech, disorganised behaviour

  • Negative symptoms: Avolition, social withdrawal, flat affect, reduced speech

Symptoms must persist for at least six months, with one month of active-phase symptoms

Excludes conditions caused by substance use or medical conditions

ICD-11 Criteria:

  • Uses a broader spectrum approach, acknowledging that schizophrenia varies in severity and presentation

  • Emphasises cognitive impairments and functional decline as key features

  • Allows for more flexible symptom classification, recognising overlap with other psychotic disorders

Neuroimaging, genetic testing, and cognitive assessments are sometimes used to support diagnosis, but they are not definitive diagnostic tools. Advances in biomarker research and artificial intelligence may improve diagnostic accuracy in the future.

CONCLUSION: A SHIFT TOWARDS A MORE COMPLEX UNDERSTANDING OF SCHIZOPHRENIA

The historical challenges in diagnosing schizophrenia—such as the absence of biological tests, variability in symptoms, and unpredictable outcomes—have led to a shift in how the disorder is classified and understood. The DSM-5’s redefinition of schizophrenia as an aetiologically heterogeneous disorder and a spectrum condition reflects an acknowledgement that it does not have a single cause or uniform presentation. Instead, it is viewed as a condition arising from multiple genetic, neurological, and environmental influences interacting uniquely for each patient.

This change moves away from strict categorical diagnosis and towards a more individualised and nuanced approach to understanding psychotic disorders. While there is still no definitive biological marker for schizophrenia, advances in genetics, neuroimaging, and the study of neurotransmitter systems may eventually lead to more precise diagnostic tools and personalised treatments. Until then, schizophrenia remains a complex, multi-faceted disorder, best understood through a combination of biological, psychological, and social perspectives.

RELIABILITY

IS SCHIZOPHRENIA A RELIABLE CLASSIFICATION, EG., HAS THE CLASSIFICATION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA REMAINED STABLE FOR TIME?

THE RELIABILITY OF THE MAJOR CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS (ICD AND DSM)

Perhaps the most critical issue concerning the validity and reliability of Schizophrenia is the differences between the two classification systems: ICD and DSM. 

The term reliability means that each time the two central classification systems (the International Classification System for Diseases (ICD) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)) are used, they should produce and provide the same classification and diagnosis. Reliability will be rugged to attain if validity is not certain.

Schizophrenia, as it is known today, has undergone significant changes in its classification over the past century. The term was first introduced in the early 20th century, replacing the older concept of dementia praecox, a term coined by Emil Kraepelin in the late 19th century. Kraepelin described dementia praecox as a chronic, deteriorating disorder that leads to irreversible cognitive decline and functional impairment. He believed it was fundamentally different from mood disorders (which he classified as manic-depressive illness) due to its progressive deterioration and poor prognosis. However, as research advanced, it became clear that not all individuals with schizophrenia experienced inevitable cognitive decline and that some patients showed episodic rather than continuous symptoms. This led to a shift in classification, where schizophrenia was seen as a heterogeneous disorder rather than a single degenerative disease.

CHANGES IN CLASSIFICATION IN THE DSM AND ICD

The classification of schizophrenia has evolved significantly in both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). While Kraepelin’s concept of dementia praecox heavily influenced early editions of both manuals, subsequent revisions have refined the criteria to reflect the diversity of symptom presentations better and improve diagnostic reliability.

In DSM-I (1952) and DSM-II (1968), schizophrenia was still largely based on psychoanalytic concepts, with a broad definition that included a wide range of psychotic symptoms. It was classified into subtypes such as paranoid, catatonic, and hebephrenic schizophrenia. However, inter-rater reliability was low, meaning different clinicians often diagnosed the same patient differently. The criteria were vague and open to interpretation, leading to widespread diagnostic inconsistency.

A major shift occurred with DSM-III (1980), which introduced specific diagnostic criteria and a more standardised, symptom-based approach. Schizophrenia was now diagnosed based on positive symptoms (e.g., hallucinations, delusions, disorganised speech) and negative symptoms (e.g., avolition, flattened affect, social withdrawal). This marked a departure from Kraepelin’s focus on cognitive decline and toward a symptom-focused model, allowing for greater consistency in diagnosis.

Subsequent editions of the DSM refined it further. DSM-IV (1994) continued the symptom-based approach, but DSM-5 (2013) introduced a major structural change by removing schizophrenia subtypes. Research has shown that subtypes lacked predictive validity (i.e., they did not reliably predict treatment response or prognosis) and that many patients displayed overlapping or changing symptoms over time. Instead, DSM-5 redefined schizophrenia as a spectrum disorder, acknowledging the heterogeneity of symptoms and causes.

Similarly, the ICD classification has undergone comparable changes. In ICD-6 (1949) and ICD-7 (1955), schizophrenia was described in broad terms, mirroring Kraepelin’s dementia praecox. By ICD-8 (1965) and ICD-9 (1978), the classification had expanded to include various subtypes similar to those in the DSM. ICD-10 (1992) introduced clearer diagnostic criteria, aligning more closely with DSM-IV by emphasising positive and negative symptoms.

The most recent update, ICD-11 (2019), eliminated subtypes following DSM-5’s approach. It also broadened symptom criteria to include cognitive impairments, which were increasingly recognised as core features of schizophrenia. Unlike DSM-5, however, ICD-11 does not require functional decline for a diagnosis, allowing for a more flexible classification that acknowledges the variability of symptom severity and impairment.

HAS THE CLASSIFICATION OF SCHIZOPHRENIA REMAINED STABLE OVER TIME?

The classification of schizophrenia has not remained stable over time, reflecting ongoing uncertainty about how best to define and diagnose the disorder. While early definitions focused on progressive cognitive deterioration, modern classifications recognise that schizophrenia presents in a variety of ways and may not always lead to severe functional impairment. The removal of subtypes in DSM-5 and ICD-11 highlights the fact that previous classifications were too rigid and did not reflect the fluid nature of symptoms.

Despite these changes, challenges remain. The shift to a spectrum model acknowledges the complexity of schizophrenia, but it also makes the boundaries between schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders less distinct. This has led some critics to argue that schizophrenia is not a single disorder but a broad diagnostic category encompassing multiple conditions.

THE RELIABILITY OF SCHIZOPHRENIA DIAGNOSIS IN ICD AND DSM

One key goal of modern classification systems is to improve the reliability of schizophrenia diagnosis. A diagnosis is reliable if different clinicians can consistently identify the disorder in the same patients. The introduction of structured diagnostic criteria in DSM-III and beyond helped improve reliability, as clinicians now had clearer guidelines to follow.

However, despite these improvements, reliability remains an issue. Studies have found moderate inter-rater reliability, meaning that while diagnosis has become more consistent, differences in clinician interpretation still occur. One major factor is symptom overlap with other disorders, such as bipolar disorder and schizoaffective disorder, which can lead to misdiagnosis. Additionally, the lack of a biological test for schizophrenia means that diagnosis still relies on subjective clinical judgment, making complete reliability challenging to achieve.

The differences between ICD-11 and DSM-5 further affect reliability, as patients may receive different diagnoses depending on which system is used. For example, ICD-11 allows for earlier diagnosis (after one month of symptoms), whereas DSM-5 requires six months of symptoms before schizophrenia can be confirmed. This means that some patients who meet the ICD-11 criteria for schizophrenia may not yet qualify for a DSM-5 diagnosis, leading to inconsistencies in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION: SCHIZOPHRENIA AS A CHANGING AND UNSTABLE CLASSIFICATION

The classification of schizophrenia has changed significantly since the concept of dementia praecox. The shift from a rigid, degenerative model to a spectrum-based approach reflects advancements in research but also uncertainty about the disorder’s true nature. The removal of subtypes and the introduction of broader diagnostic criteria have improved flexibility but have also blurred the boundaries between schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders.

The reliability of schizophrenia diagnosis has improved over time, particularly with the introduction of structured diagnostic criteria in DSM-III and later editions. However, differences between ICD and DSM, symptom overlap with other disorders, and the absence of biological markers mean that diagnostic reliability remains imperfect. Schizophrenia, as a classification, continues to evolve, and future revisions of DSM and ICD may further refine its definition. Until a more precise method of diagnosis—such as a biological marker—is established, schizophrenia will likely remain a broad and debated category in psychiatric classification.

If the two major classification systems cannot agree, then issues of Schizophrenia being viewed as a valid scientific term remain questionable.

RELIABILITY OF DIAGNOSIS BETWEEN DOCTORS

IS A DIAGNOSIS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA VALID AND RELIABLE, E.G., WILL OTHER DOCTORS DIAGNOSE SCHIZOPHRENIA TOO?

Reliability refers to the consistency of a measuring instrument (e.g., a questionnaire or scale) in assessing and diagnosing schizophrenia. The reliability of such tools can be measured in terms of:

  • Inter-rater reliability – Whether two independent assessors give similar diagnoses.

  • Test-retest reliability – Whether tests to deliver these diagnoses are consistent over time.

Early versions of classification manuals (DSM and ICD) suffered from low reliability due to vague and inconsistent symptom definitions. For a diagnosis to have clinical utility, it must be reliable, meaning that individuals are diagnosed consistently by different clinicians. However, research has found that schizophrenia diagnosis has never been highly reliable.

EARLY RESEARCH AND CHALLENGES (1960s – 1990s)

📌 Beck et al. (1962)

  • Findings: Agreement on diagnosis for 153 patients (where two psychiatrists assessed each from a group of four) was only 54%.

  • Implication: Low inter-rater reliability due to unclear diagnostic criteria and inconsistencies in data collection.

📌 Cooper et al. (1972)

  • Findings: U.S. psychiatrists were far more likely to diagnose schizophrenia than U.K. psychiatrists.

  • Implication: Cultural differences significantly impact diagnostic reliability.

📌 Rosenhan (1973) – ‘On Being Sane in Insane Places’

  • Findings: Healthy individuals faked auditory hallucinations to gain admission to psychiatric hospitals, after which they behaved normally. However, they were still diagnosed with schizophrenia and treated as patients.

  • Implication: Lack of reliability in schizophrenia diagnosis, where normal behaviours were interpreted as symptoms once a diagnosis was assigned.

📌 Klosterkötter (1994)

  • Findings: Positive symptoms (hallucinations, delusions) were more useful in diagnosis than negative symptoms (social withdrawal, avolition).

  • Implication: Individuals with few positive symptoms, such as those with Hebephrenic Schizophrenia, were more poorly diagnosed compared to those with Paranoid Schizophrenia.

📌 Whaley (2001)

  • Findings: Inter-rater reliability correlations for schizophrenia diagnosis were as low as 0.11.

  • Implication: Extreme variation in diagnostic decisions among clinicians.

PROBLEMS WITH DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA (2000s – 2010s)

📌 Cheniaux et al. (2009)

  • Findings: Two psychiatrists assessed 100 patients using DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria.

    • One psychiatrist diagnosed 26 patients with schizophrenia using DSM-IV and 44 using ICD-10.

    • The other psychiatrist diagnosed 13 using DSM-IV and 17 using ICD-10.

  • Implication: Inconsistent classification criteria between ICD and DSM reduce diagnostic reliability.

📌 Wilkes et al. (2010)

  • Findings: Schizophrenic patients were tested using two different cognitive screening tests over intervals ranging from 1 to 134 days.

  • Implication: Test-retest reliability was 0.84, demonstrating high consistency in cognitive screening despite low inter-rater reliability for diagnosis.

📌 Prescott et al. (2016)

  • Findings: Measured attention and information processing in 14 chronic schizophrenic patients over six months. Performance remained stable, indicating high test-retest reliability.

  • Implication: While inter-rater reliability remains problematic, cognitive assessments within individuals show strong reliability over time.

RECENT STUDIES AND IMPROVEMENTS (2020s – Present)

📌 Gomes da Rocha Neto et al. (2023)

  • Findings: A meta-analysis comparing structured diagnostic interviews (SDIs) and non-structured diagnostic interviews (NSDIs) found only “fair” agreement between the two methods.

  • Implication: The interview method itself significantly affects schizophrenia diagnosis, further reducing reliability.

  • Source: ResearchGate

📌 DSM-5 Changes (2013 – Present)

  • Modifications to Criterion A:

    • Bizarre delusions and first-rank auditory hallucinations were removed as standalone diagnostic markers due to low inter-rater reliability.

    • New requirement: At least one core symptom (delusions, hallucinations, or disorganised speech) must be present.

  • Implication: Aim to increase diagnostic consistency by removing poorly defined symptoms.

  • Source: American Psychiatric Association

📌 ICD-11 Changes (2019 – Present)

  • Key modifications:

    • Removal of schizophrenia subtypes to improve reliability.

    • Greater alignment with DSM-5 criteria to ensure more consistent cross-cultural diagnosis.

  • Implication: Expected to increase diagnostic agreement between ICD and DSM.

  • Source: PubMed

SYMPTOM OVERLAP AND CLASSIFICATION CHALLENGES

Schizophrenia is difficult to distinguish from other disorders, affecting both reliability and validity.

  • Schizoaffective Disorder vs. Bipolar Disorder – DSM-5 includes Schizoaffective disorder, acute & transient psychosis, and Schizophreniform disorder within the schizophrenia spectrum, while ICD-11 classifies them separately under mood disorders.

  • Delusional Disorders – Persistent delusional disorder, acute and transient psychotic disorder, and substance-induced psychotic disorder all share overlapping symptoms with schizophrenia.

  • Unclear Boundaries – There is no clear explanation for symptom overlap, such as why some individuals experience both mania and schizophrenia-like symptoms while others do not.

CONCLUSION

The reliability of schizophrenia diagnosis has remained low historically, with inter-rater agreement frequently falling below acceptable levels. Improvements have been made with DSM-5 and ICD-11, but significant discrepancies remain, particularly due to:

  • Differences between DSM and ICD classifications (e.g., DSM considers Schizoaffective disorder part of schizophrenia, whereas ICD classifies it under mood disorders).

  • The difficulty of distinguishing between schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders due to symptom overlap.

  • Variability in interview methods, as structured diagnostic interviews yield different results from non-structured interviews.

  • Low inter-rater reliability, particularly in distinguishing between bizarre and non-bizarre delusions.

  • Higher test-retest reliability in cognitive screening tests, which may serve as a more consistent diagnostic tool in future research.

While modern classification systems are becoming more aligned, the persistence of symptom overlap, cultural bias, and diagnostic subjectivity continues to undermine the reliability of schizophrenia diagnosis.

GENDER BIAS IN DIAGNOSIS

Gender bias in the diagnosis of schizophrenia occurs when clinicians make judgments based on stereotypes rather than symptoms. This can lead to misdiagnosis or underdiagnosis, particularly for women, due to preconceived notions about gender and mental illness.

One example of this bias is alpha bias, where a female patient presenting with schizophrenic symptoms may not receive a diagnosis because her behaviour is perceived as hysteria or emotional instability rather than a sign of psychosis. This can lead to misclassification under disorders such as borderline personality disorder (BPD) or depression, delaying appropriate treatment.

Alternatively, beta bias occurs when clinicians apply male-based diagnostic models to female patients, failing to account for gender differences in schizophrenia presentation. Women with schizophrenia tend to show less severe negative symptoms, experience later onset, and have better social functioning than men, which may contribute to their underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis. Since risk factors for schizophrenia differ between men and women, a one-size-fits-all diagnostic approach may not be appropriate.

KEY RESEARCH

📌 Hambrecht et al. (1993)

  • Findings: Men and women have an equal risk of developing schizophrenia, but women are underdiagnosed.

  • Strength: The sample was representative, helping to address gender bias concerns.

  • Limitation: The study does not provide a clear explanation for why women are underdiagnosed or how to correct this issue.

📌 Fischer and Buchanan (2023)

  • Findings: A study involving 467 psychiatrists using standardized case vignettes found that schizophrenia was diagnosed more frequently in male patients, even when symptom presentations were identical.

  • Implication: Suggests that gender biases influence diagnostic decisions, potentially leading to underdiagnosis in women.

📌 Abel et al. (2010)

  • Findings: A meta-analysis examining sex differences in schizophrenia risk found that men have a slightly higher risk of developing schizophrenia compared to women.

  • Limitation: The study was inconclusive regarding the underlying factors contributing to these differences, indicating the need for further research.

IMPLICATIONS OF GENDER BIAS IN DIAGNOSIS

The presence of gender biases in schizophrenia diagnosis weakens diagnostic reliability and validity. If clinicians rely on stereotypes or outdated diagnostic models, patients from certain groups may not receive an accurate diagnosis or appropriate treatment. This can lead to:

  • Underdiagnosis in women, delaying or preventing treatment.

  • There is an increased risk of misdiagnosis, where women with schizophrenia may instead receive diagnoses of mood or personality disorders, such as bipolar disorder or BPD.

  • Lack of gender-sensitive diagnostic approaches leads to poorer clinical outcomes for women who do not receive early intervention.

These findings underscore the importance of developing gender-sensitive diagnostic criteria and training programs for clinicians to mitigate biases. Addressing these issues is essential for improving the accuracy of schizophrenia diagnoses, ensuring that both men and women receive appropriate and timely mental health care.
CUL

CULTURAL BIAS IN DIAGNOSIS

Cultural bias arises when clinicians misinterpret symptoms due to a lack of understanding of cultural differences. These biases can lead to misdiagnosis, over-diagnosis, or inappropriate treatment, particularly in ethnic minority populations.

EXAMPLES OF CULTURAL BIAS

  • Ukuthwasa – In some African cultures, ukuthwasa refers to a spiritual calling that involves experiences like hearing voices or seeing visions. Within this cultural context, these experiences are not considered pathological. However, clinicians unfamiliar with these traditions may interpret them as symptoms of schizophrenia, leading to misdiagnosis and unnecessary medical intervention.

  • Beliefs in Witchcraft or Spiritual Possession – In many cultures, belief in witchcraft, spirits, or possession is common. When clinicians lack cultural competence, these beliefs may be mistaken for delusions, leading to over-diagnosis of schizophrenia in individuals whose experiences align with their cultural background.

  • Expression of Emotional Distress – In some Caribbean cultures, it is common to express grief or emotional distress openly, including speaking to deceased relatives. If a clinician misinterprets this behaviour as evidence of psychosis, a misdiagnosis of schizophrenia may follow.

KEY RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTING CULTURAL BIAS

📌 Schwartz and Blankenship (2014)

  • Findings: African Americans are 2.4 times more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia than White individuals.

  • Implication: Diagnostic biases, potentially stemming from cultural insensitivity among clinicians, contribute to racial disparities in diagnosis.

  • Source: PubMed

📌 Copeland et al. (1971)

  • Findings: A patient description was given to 134 U.S. and 194 British psychiatrists.

    • 69% of U.S. psychiatrists diagnosed schizophrenia.

    • Only 2% of British psychiatrists diagnosed schizophrenia.

  • Implication: Highlights significant cultural differences in diagnostic practices, demonstrating that schizophrenia is diagnosed more frequently in the U.S. than in the U.K., even with the same patient presentation.

  • Source: Tutor2U

📌 Harrison et al. (1997)

  • Findings: Schizophrenia incidence rates were 8 times higher in African-Caribbean individuals (46.7 per 100,000) compared to White individuals (5.7 per 100,000) in the UK.

  • Implication: Suggests that cultural and linguistic differences contribute to misdiagnosis, further questioning the validity of schizophrenia classification across cultures.

REASONS FOR CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN DIAGNOSIS

Multiple theories attempt to explain why Black individuals and other ethnic minority groups are diagnosed with schizophrenia at disproportionate rates in White-majority societies. These include sociopolitical, medical, and biological perspectives.

THEORY 1: SOCIAL DISADVANTAGE AND RACIAL PREJUDICE

One explanation is that Black individuals in White-majority societies experience greater socioeconomic and racial inequalities, which may lead to higher rates of schizophrenia diagnoses. Studies suggest that factors such as police racial profiling, school exclusions, poorer job opportunities, and exposure to racial violence (Harralambous) contribute to higher levels of psychological distress, potentially leading to increased psychiatric referrals and diagnoses.

A counter-argument is that other marginalised ethnic groups, such as East Asians, do not exhibit similarly high schizophrenia rates. However, it has been argued that East Asian communities may underreport mental health issues due to cultural stigma, meaning their true incidence of schizophrenia may be underestimated.

THEORY 2: CLINICAL MISDIAGNOSIS DUE TO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES

Another theory suggests that psychiatrists misinterpret culturally specific behaviours as psychotic symptoms. Some examples include:

  • Spiritual beliefs in Caribbean and African communities (e.g., talking to deceased relatives) may be seen as hallucinations rather than everyday cultural practices.

  • Expressive emotional distress in Caribbean cultures may be mistaken for psychotic agitation rather than grief.

  • Lack of familiarity with African or Caribbean dialects and mannerisms may lead to communication barriers, making it more difficult for clinicians to assess symptoms accurately.

A critique of this theory is that many Black individuals in the UK and US are fully assimilated into Western culture, so cultural misunderstandings should not explain all cases of over-diagnosis. Furthermore, Black communities are diverse, with people originating from different continents, countries, and cultural backgrounds—making the idea of a single “Black culture” oversimplified.

THEORY 3: VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY IN BLACK MOTHERS DURING WINTER MONTHS

A biological explanation proposes that Black mothers who are six months pregnant during winter in Northern Hemisphere countries are at higher risk of giving birth to children who develop schizophrenia due to vitamin D deficiency.

  • Vitamin D is essential for foetal brain development, particularly around the sixth month of pregnancy, when significant cortical development occurs.

  • Black individuals have evolved to synthesise vitamin D more slowly, originating from sun-rich equatorial regions.

  • In Northern Hemisphere countries, Black individuals experience less sunlight exposure, potentially leading to vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy.

  • Studies suggest that children born to Black mothers who were six months pregnant during winter may be more likely to develop schizophrenia later in life.

  • Supporting evidence comes from research on El Niño weather patterns, where reduced sunlight exposure has been correlated with peaks in schizophrenia diagnoses 15 years later.

A counterpoint to this theory is that South Asian populations also have high melanin levels but do not exhibit the same disproportionately high schizophrenia rates. Possible explanations include:

  1. Dietary Habits – Traditional South Asian diets include foods rich in vitamin D, such as fatty fish and fortified dairy products, which help compensate for lower sun exposure.

  2. Cultural Practices—Certain South Asian communities have greater exposure to outdoor sunlight, particularly in early childhood, which reduces vitamin D deficiencies.

  3. Genetic Factors – South Asian populations may have different genetic adaptations for vitamin D metabolism, mitigating the risks associated with deficiency.

Additionally, a Danish study analyzing neonatal blood samples found that individuals with vitamin D deficiency at birth had a 44% increased risk of developing schizophrenia in adulthood (QBI, 2018). Further research also suggests that vitamin D supplementation in early childhood is linked to lower schizophrenia rates (PMC, 2012).

CONCLUSION

Cultural differences significantly impact the reliability of schizophrenia diagnosis, with Black individuals more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia in Western societies. This discrepancy is multifaceted, involving sociopolitical factors, clinical misdiagnosis, systemic biases, and biological influences. Addressing cultural biases in psychiatric training, improving diagnostic criteria, and promoting research into biological risk factors are essential to ensure more accurate and equitable mental health care across diverse populations.

ASSESSMENT

  1. What terms are used by psychologists to describe A and B below? (Total two marks)

    A When a person has two or more disorders at the same time.
    Answer:

    B When two different disorders have a symptom in common.
    Answer:

  2. What terms are used by psychologists to describe A and B below? (Total two marks)

    A   When a person has two or more disorders at the same time.

    B   When two different disorders have a symptom in common.

  3. In the context of schizophrenia, outline what is meant by co-morbidity. (Total two marks)

  4. Explain how symptom overlap might lead to problems with the diagnosis and/or classification of schizophrenia. (Total two marks)

  5. Briefly outline and evaluate one study on the validity of the diagnosis of schizophrenia. (four marks)

  6. MATCHING DESCRIPTIONS TO TERMS: For each description, choose a term that best represents that description.
    Write the correct letter alongside the relevant term in your answer for each description. (Total four marks)

    DESCRIPTIONS

    A – When a diagnosis is consistent between psychiatrists
    B – When a person has more than one condition at the same time
    C – When a psychiatrist diagnoses a condition correctly
    D – When two conditions have some effects in common

    TERMS

    Classification
    Co-morbidity
    Reliability
    Symptom overlap
    Validity

  7. Discuss the reliability and/or validity of the diagnosis and classification of schizophrenia. (Total eight marks)

  8. ‘In an important and influential criticism of the diagnosis of mental illness, Rosenhan (1973) showed that healthy ‘pseudopatients’ could gain admission to a psychiatric hospital by pretending to have auditory hallucinations. Although systems of classification and diagnosis have changed considerably since the 1970s, many people still have concerns about their accuracy and appropriateness.’ Discuss issues surrounding the classification and diagnosis of schizophrenia. (Total 16 marks)

  9. Discuss issues associated with the classification and/or diagnosis of schizophrenia. (Total 16 marks).

MARK SCHEME FOR A 16-MARKER

Advice from the AQA mark scheme on this question

Outline and evaluate issues surrounding the classification and diagnosis of Schizophrenia concerning reliability and validity.

AO1 = six marks

AO1 credit is awarded for describing issues concerning the classification and diagnosis of schizophrenia, most of which are related in some way to reliability and validity. Some issues are specifically relevant to schizophrenia, e.g., the range of symptoms / sub-types of schizophrenia and the difficulty of distinguishing between them. Other issues surrounding the classification and diagnosis of mental disorders, in general, can receive credit if they are made relevant to schizophrenia.

For AO1 credit candidates, they need to identify some of these issues. For example:

1)    The reliability of the major classification systems (ICD and DSM)

2)   The lack of homogeneity (consistency) in schizophrenic symptoms

3)   The problem of co-morbidity with depression4)   The availability of other diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia, e.g. Schneider criteria

5)   Cultural differences in symptom presentation

6)   The lack of objective tests for schizophrenia

7)   The difficulty of being able to predict outcome or response to treatment

8)   The question of whether schizophrenia is a mental disorder at all or a form of political control (Szasz)

Examiners should be mindful of a depth/breadth trade-off – candidates can describe a few issues in detail or more issues in less detail. There is considerable overlap between the problems of classification and diagnosis, so partial performance criteria do not apply. Candidates who offer lists of signs and symptoms of schizophrenia or who describe classification systems are not addressing the issues surrounding diagnosis and classification. Such material is rudimentary.

 AO2/AO3 = 10 marks

Candidates achieve AO3 credit by evaluating and offering commentary on the issues they have identified, for example, considering the consequences of the issue. They may discuss the advantages of using classification systems for effective treatment programmes and support and problems associated with classification and diagnosis. For example, the diagnosis might lead to labelling and stigmatisation (Scheff 1966), causing long-term problems in getting/keeping employment and leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy.

EXAMINER’S COMMENTS
Schizophrenia remains the most popular option, and this question was attempted by over half of students. Some schools and colleges had prepared their students for a question on issues regarding The Reliability and Validity in the Diagnosis and Classification of Schizophrenia. Including Reference to Co-Morbidity, Culture and Gender bias, and Symptom overlap, others appeared to have covered this in insufficient depth. AO1 credit was awarded for the identification/description of matters relating to classification and diagnosis, most of which can be placed under the headings of reliability and validity. Weaker answers often showed little evidence of organisation or planning, with students producing long lists of clinical characteristics without identifying issues relating to classification or diagnosis. This approach gained rudimentary AO1 credit.

A lack of focus on the question was also notable for AO2 / 3 with weaker students. Many focussed almost exclusively on Rosenhan’s 1973 study, ‘On being sane in insane places,’ often providing lengthy and detailed descriptions without linking this to an issue related to classification or diagnosis. Weaker students also focused on the methodological evaluation of this research study, which was of limited relevance to the question. There was little recognition that Rosenhan’s study is over 40 years old and has changed classification and diagnosis since then.

Stronger students approached the question by identifying an issue (such as the lack of reliability between ICD and DSM IV) and then considering possible consequences of this and/or research evidence regarding the reliability of diagnosis using the respective systems. There was some helpful discussion of the problems of co-morbidity, cultural differences and Szasz’s critique of the myth of mental illness in better answers. Higher AO2 / 3 marks went to students who evaluated each issue as they went through the essay. Those students who could consider various research evidence relating to reliability and validity were also rewarded.