My Article For Paper Psychopathology Resick P A Bovin M J Ca

My Article For Paperpsychopathology Resick P A Bovin M J Call

My article for paper: Psychopathology Resick, P. A., Bovin, M. J., Calloway, A. L., Dick, A. M., King, M. W., Mitchell, K. S., & Wolf, E. J. (2012). A critical evaluation of the complex PTSD literature: Implications for DSM-5. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 25(3), 241-248. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.2169

The purpose of an article review is to provide the academic community with a description, summary, and evaluation of the completed work. For the article review, students will assume the role of an expert who is critically evaluating contemporary research in the field of psychology. Students will incorporate material from across the course, analyzing and applying theories and principles of psychology into a cohesive and well-written article review. This learning activity will facilitate the development of research skills, critical thinking, and writing skills that are necessary to success in the field of psychology. The article for review was chosen in Week Two of the course and must be used in this review.

Paper For Above instruction

The selected article by Resick et al. (2012) critically examines the literature on complex post-traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD), discussing its conceptualization, diagnostic criteria, and implications for the upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). This article falls firmly within the field of clinical psychology, particularly emphasizing trauma-related psychopathology. The work involves professionals such as clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and trauma researchers, all of whom play roles in diagnosing, treating, and understanding trauma-related disorders. The article accurately portrays these roles by addressing how trauma assessments are conducted, the importance of diagnostic refinement, and the integration of trauma-informed care into clinical practice.

The theoretical perspective underpinning the article is rooted in trauma psychology and psychopathology, emphasizing how traumatic experiences can lead to distinct psychological disorders, including PTSD and C-PTSD. The authors argue that while traditional PTSD criteria capture many symptoms, they do not encompass the full spectrum of trauma's impact, which has led to the development of C-PTSD as a separate diagnostic entity. Their hypotheses center around the conceptual differentiation between PTSD and C-PTSD, proposing that C-PTSD includes additional symptom clusters related to affect dysregulation, negative self-concept, and relational disturbances.

The study is primarily a literature review rather than empirical research involving human participants. Nevertheless, it critically evaluates existing research studies—often derived from clinical samples and trauma assessments—analyzing how different studies define, measure, and differentiate PTSD and C-PTSD. The article discusses how these studies were conducted across various settings, including academic research environments, military and clinical contexts, and healthcare institutions.

In terms of ethical considerations, the authors reflect on the importance of ethical trauma research, such as ensuring informed consent, respecting participant confidentiality, and avoiding retraumatization. Although the article does not involve new data collection, it emphasizes that trauma research must adhere to the APA Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct, particularly in protecting vulnerable populations and ensuring that clinical assessments are conducted ethically.

The article summarizes findings that support the conceptual distinction between PTSD and C-PTSD, suggesting that C-PTSD encompasses broader symptomatology resulting from prolonged or repeated trauma, especially in captivity or abusive environments. The authors highlight that several empirical studies reveal that C-PTSD symptoms are distinct and significant, warranting separate diagnostic consideration. While the literature is still evolving, the evidence supports the hypothesis that C-PTSD should be clinically recognized as a separate disorder in DSM-5, which would enhance diagnostic clarity and improve treatment approaches.

Strengths of the article include its thorough review of prior research, clarity in explaining complex psychological constructs, and its timely discussion of diagnostic implications. Its weaknesses involve the reliance on existing literature, which still lacks comprehensive empirical validation for C-PTSD as a separate disorder, and the potential for overlapping symptoms to confound clinical differentiation. The authors acknowledge these limitations and call for further empirical studies to validate C-PTSD's distinctiveness.

In terms of contemporary application, recognizing C-PTSD as a distinct disorder could significantly impact clinical practice and trauma treatment. It could facilitate tailored interventions that address affect dysregulation and relational issues beyond traditional PTSD symptoms. This distinction might also influence trauma assessment tools, informing clinicians about the need for more comprehensive diagnostic criteria and personalized therapy plans. Policies within mental health services could be adapted to better identify and support individuals suffering from complex trauma exposure, ultimately leading to improved mental health outcomes.

In conclusion, Resick et al. (2012) provide a critical and timely review of the complex PTSD literature, advocating for clearer diagnostic boundaries within trauma-related psychopathology. Their work underscores the importance of refining diagnostic criteria to encapsulate the multifaceted impact of prolonged trauma exposure. The article enriches the understanding of trauma psychopathology and underscores the necessity of ongoing research, emphasizing the vital role of clinical psychologists and mental health professionals in advancing trauma-informed care.

References

  • Resick, P. A., Bovin, M. J., Calloway, A. L., Dick, A. M., King, M. W., Mitchell, K. S., & Wolf, E. J. (2012). A critical evaluation of the complex PTSD literature: Implications for DSM-5. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 25(3), 241-248. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.2169
  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
  • Mollica, R. F., McInnes, K., & Sarajian, T. (2002). Dose and duration: Traumatic exposure and mental health outcomes among Cambodian refugees. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 3(4), 316-330.
  • Herman, J. L. (1992). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.
  • Herman, J. L. (2015). Complex PTSD: A syndrome in survivors of prolonged and repeated trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 28(4), 319-324.
  • Courtois, C. A. (2013). Complex trauma, complex reactions: Assessment and treatment. Psychiatric Clinics, 36(3), 365-383.
  • Levenson, J. C. (2014). The posttraumatic syndromes of long-term captivity: DSM-V and ICD-11. Traumatology, 20(2), 118-124.
  • Herman, J. L. (1997). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—from domestic abuse to political terror. Basic Books.
  • Herman, J. L. (2018). Trauma and the body: A psychoanalytic perspective. Psychology Today.
  • van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body's response to trauma: A review. National Institute of Mental Health.

Related Assignments