2 - (SYM 89) Consistent Evidence That Clinicians Find Dimensional Models of Psychopathology More Useful Than Categories

Opposition from clinicians and lack of clinical utility are often held up as potential pitfalls of dimensional models and cited in arguments for clinging to categorical models. This is highly ironic because research over the past 20 years has consistently demonstrated that practicing clinicians of all theoretical orientations prefer dimensional models and find them more useful for clinical decision making than the current DSM-5 categories. This presentation will first summarize the literature on clinical utility for dimensional models of personality disorder. We will then highlight newer research demonstrating that dimensions of psychopathology more broadly (e.g., HiTOP) are also preferred by clinicians, including in a subsample of clinicians who had never previously been exposed to the HiTOP dimensions. Going beyond preferences, the talk will then illustrate why clinicians see these dimensions as so valuable in treatment. Citing evidence from a large meta-analysis, we will highlight the helpful role that dimensional traits play in empirically-based treatment. For example, dimensional traits allow for a more comprehensive and validating case conceptualization that sees clients as unique individuals rather than fitting them into bins. Will also illustrate how dimensional traits assessed at the beginning of therapy are empirically linked with a variety of clinically relevant processes (e.g., therapeutic alliance) and outcomes (e.g., symptom reduction). In the context of the compelling evidence that dimensional models are more clinically useful than categories, we’ll again explore possible reasons for the resistance to dimensions among some parts of our field.