CLINICAL TRAINING heterogeneous, higher-order constructs based on patterns of association. This method is hardly new: Thomas Disquiet in Nosology: APrimer on an Emerging, Moore in the 1930s analyzed the intercor- relations among 32 Empirically Based Approach to Classifying related to psychosis to understand how they could be more parsimoniously Mental Illness and Implications for Training grouped into higher-order factors. Many others,notably Achenbach and colleagues Camilo J. Ruggero, Jennifer L. Callahan, Allison Dornbach-Bender, (Achenbach, 1966; Achenbach, Ivanova, & University of North Texas Rescorla, 2017), followedsuit with increas- ing sophistication and precision (Kotov, Jennifer L. Tackett, Northwestern University 2016). The most recent large-scale effort in this Roman Kotov, Stony Brook University movement toward empirically based clas- sification emerged in the spring of 2015. Forty scholarsworking in the area of quan- titative nosology started aconsortium Prevailing Mental Health rymple, 2015). Reliability is often too low (now close to 100 members) devoted to Nosologies:ACaution (Chmielewski, Clark, Bagby, &Watson, articulating an empirically based quantita- 2015; Regier et al., 2013), and evidence tive nosologyofmental illness. Their initial Paul Meehl (1986) warned more than 30 overwhelmingly suggests psychopathology proposed model—the Hierarchical Taxon- years ago of a“scientific malignancy” falls along acontinuum, with no clear omy of Psychopathology(HiTOP; Kotovet worth recalling: the tendency by some to zones of rarity (Wright et al., 2013). Finally, al., 2017)—provides amarked departure reify diagnoses, as thoughthe criteria that it is notalwaysclear from surveys how clin- from nosologysystems like DSM. operationalize adisorder in the Diagnostic ically useful clinicians find the prevailing andStatistical Manual of MentalDisorders nosology beyond its relevance for billing HiTOP: APrimer (DSM; APA, 2013) describe its essence. (First et al., 2018). 1 HiTOP’s empirically based model Diagnoses, instead, are open constructs. Despite these concerns, nosology remains awork in progress (remember Most of us, when pressed, easily acknowl- remains foundational for anyone whose Meehl’s admonitions!) and the consortium edge the difference. The core motivation work intersects with mental health (Blash- is actively working to revise the model as behind the National Institute of Mental field &Burgess, 2007). At minimum, it new evidence emerges (Krueger et al., Health’s Research Domain Criteria (Cuth- gives us alinguafranca to talk about symp- 2018), but major, replicated contours of bert &Insel, 2013) underscores this point. toms and how they present. But ideally it this nosology are already clear.The model Yet whennot pressed, too often the criteria would do so much more: it would guide is hierarchical, with homogenous signs, can slip into becoming the disorder. It ourtreatments, forecast the course of ill- would be unfair to blame DSM for this symptoms, and traits at the bottom. There ness, and create afoundation for research habit (cf. Kraemer, Kupfer, Clarke, are over 100 of these dimensions, andthey into the causes of illness (Mullins-Sweatt, Narrow, &Regier, 2012), yet its opera- consist of symptom components, such as Lengel &DeShong, 2016). For studentsin tionalization of criteria risks making us insomnia, and traits, such as submissive- training, DSM’s lexicon, and the assump- forget that articulating auseful mental ness. These are organized into higher- tions behind it, get woven into their cur- health nosologyremains ongoing. order components that are increasingly riculum and shape conceptualizations of Prevailing classification approaches broad until one reaches what is called the psychopathology (e.g., Amazon ranks have other problems. Disorders are pre- spectra level—of which there are six (i.e., DSM second in psychology reference sumed distinct, yet the predominance of Internalizing, Somatoform, Thought Dis- books,only behind the American Psycho- raises obvious questions order, Disinhibited Externalizing, Antago- logical Association’s stylemanual). about the validity of their borders (e.g., nistic Externalizing, and Detachment). Brown, Campbell, Lehman, Grisham, & Next-GenerationApproach Above this, one can aggregate higher all the Mancill, 2001; Kessler, Chiu, Demler, & way up to ageneral factor (i.e., so-called “p- Walters, 2005; Ormeletal., 2015; Teesson, DSM’s hegemony over classification factor;” Caspi et al., 2014). Figure 1pre- Slade, &Mills, 2009). Or, categories can has overshadowed an acceleratingbody of sents portions of the model, reprinted and have markedheterogeneity,such thattwo research happening in the wings of mental revised with permission. individuals with the same diagnosis have health, largely driven by psychologists: How does this differ from the DSM? entirely different sets of symptoms (Clark, quantitative nosology. At its core, this With traditional nosology, symptoms Watson, &Reynolds, 1995; Hasler, approach creates adata-driven, empirically related to depression, generalized anxiety Drevets, Manji, &Charney, 2004; Zimmer- based classification. It starts with diverse disorder, and social phobia, to take one man, Ellison, Young, Chelminski, &Dal- arrays of highly homogenous signs and example, constitute three putatively dis- symptoms of mental health problems (e.g., tinct categories of mental illness. In con- dysphoric mood). Statistical procedures trast, with HiTOP they all fall under the like factor analyses and hierarchical rubric of an internalizing spectrum. A 1This can be debated, of course agglomerative clustering are then used to provider can focus on this higher-level (see Wakefield, 2004). organize elements into increasingly more spectrum, recognizing that all three syn-

208 the Behavior Therapist CLASSIFYING MENTAL ILLNESS dromes share elements. Or, one can cas- HiTOP May AdvanceResearch align with models like HiTOP compared to cade down the model, with, for example, andTreatment traditional nosology (Conway et al., 2019). depression and generalized anxiety symp- HiTOP also proposes potentially toms coalescingunder a“distress” subfac- HiTOP proposes to accelerate mental greater clinically utility (Ruggero et al., tor and social phobiahewing more closely health research (Conwayetal., 2019). Use 2018). Dimensions are more reliable than to a“fear” subfactor. Or one can cascade of continuous dimensions, as opposed to traditional categories (e.g., 15% increased even further down, focusing on highly categories, has well-known benefits for sta- reliability in meta-analyses; Markon, homogenous symptoms or traits, such as tistical power of research to detect effects Chmielewski, &Miller,2011) and may be suicidality. (Cohen, 1983). Compared to categorical preferred over categories by clinicians Unlike DSM, HiTOP does not delineate phenotypes, dimensionalones double the (Morey, Skodol, &Oldham,2014). More- a“one size fitsall” boundary between “ill- power to predict avariety of clinical out- over,HiTOP higher-level spectra may have ness” and “not illness,” afeature supported comes (Kotov et al., 2019) and produce increased prognostic power, for example predicting suicide attempts, future psy- by years of taxometric research (Haslam, more “hits” in genetic research(Otowa et chopathology and other clinical outcomes Holland &Kuppens, 2012). Rather,clinical al., 2016),for example. more than disorder-specific variation alone decisions areguided by rangesofseverity But the hierarchical structureinand of (Eaton et al., 2013; Kim &Eaton, 2015). on each dimension of the model. Until itself provides anovel frameworkfor pur- HiTOP may also better align with treat- work validates these in different popula- suing . Mechanisms, or ment planning. Early evidence suggests outcomes, may operate at different levels of tions, theycan remain statistical (e.g., 2SD clinician-prescribing practices track more below the mean), such as with intelligence this mental illness hierarchy, from broad closely to aHiTOP-based model compared testing, or can be tailored to the needs and and diffuse effectstomorenarrow and spe- to aDSM one (Waszczuk et al., 2017). Sim- resources available within agiven setting or cific ones.HiTOP’s hierarchy provides one ilarly, emerging trandiagnostic approaches population.Kotov et al. (2017) reviews evi- map to different levels that may be relevant, to the treatment of mental health (e.g., dence supporting the model, while Rug- and at minimum new phenotypic targets Barlow et al., 2017) align well with HiTOP’s gero et al. (2018) provides adescription of on which to test proposed mechanisms. conceptualization of upper-level spectra its integration into clinical care. Already, work in genetics, neurobiology, that share featuresand potential etiologies. and psychosocial contexts point to how Finally,HiTOP providesflexibility to adapt recent findings in these fields may better clinical ranges based on their purpose,

Fig. 1.HiTOP model (reformatted and revised with permission from Kotov et al., 2017). Note.Not all of the model components, traits and related disorders are presented.

September • 2019 209 RUGGERO ET AL. ratherthan requiring one-size-fits-all cut- treatment planning instruction, the HiTOP suffer shortcomings, including reification, offs common to DSM, removing from model was briefly reviewed, again drawing less than desired reliability, and questions nosology their reification that are not some content from the expert slides, before about the validity of proposed categories. empirically based (e.g., five of nine symp- engaginginhypothetical clinical decision- Quantitative nosology generally, and toms because five is more than half). None making exercises (e.g., using the HiTOP HiTOP as the latest synthesis of these of these advantages guarantee HiTOP’s framework to identify the salient spectra models in particular, offers adeparture clinical utility, but they provide impetus for that will become the focus of atransdiag- from prevailing nosologies, with arguably testing its utility and tackling the major nostic treatment; e.g., Barlow et al., 2017; more empirical support. Dimensions, not challenge of training students on thisnew Lundhal, Kunz, Brownell, Tollefson, & categories, are organized hierarchically. nosology. Burke, 2010). This new model’s flexibility provides novel Integration of HiTOPintothesetrain- targets and apowerfulframework for Training Implications ing components was seamless from the research, and may better align with treat- instructor’sperspective and end-of-course ment. Trainingremains achallenge for the Acaution againstcasuallyintroducing satisfaction evaluations suggest the mater- broader mental health field, but HiTOP any new nosology, particularly one based ial was well-receivedbystudents. Founda- can already be integrated intuitively into on dimensions, would be its implications tional HiTOP knowledge was assessed as psychology training curriculum. and cost for training given the major part of the midterm exam in the assessment investment already made in the useofDSM course with all students meeting the References (Firstetal., 2005). Although amajor con- threshold for at least adequate accuracy cern for fields less accustomed to dimen- American Psychiatric Association.(2013). (70% or greater). Sequencing of HiTOP’s sional models (e.g., ), students in Diagnosticand statistical manualof introduction (first psychopathology, then psychology are already well-trained in mentaldisorders (5thed.).Washington, assessment, and finally treatment plan- working with conceptualizations and mea- DC: Author.https://doi.org/10.1176/ ning) flowed intuitivelyand was consistent sures consistent with HiTOP (e.g.,MMPI- appi.books.9780890425596 with the larger curriculum. Given that the 2-RF, NEO-PI-3, PAI; Ben-Porath&Telle- Achenbach, T. M. (1966). The classifica- modelincludesmany DSM-like constructs, gen, 2008/2011; Costa &McCrae, 2010; tion of children's psychiatricsymptoms: albeit brokeninto smaller (symptom com- Afactoranalyticstudy. Psychological Morey, 2007).Nevertheless,ashift toward ponent) or larger (spectra) unitsinahier- Monographs,80(7), 1-37. HiTOP would impact courses related to archical fashion, it was feasible to teachstu- https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093906 foundational knowledge (i.e., psy- dents the DSM categories for practical and Achenbach, T. M.,Ivanova, M. Y.,& chopathology, assessment, and treatment perhaps temporarypurposes, whilefamil- Rescorla, L. A. (2017).Empirically based planning), as well as functional competen- iarizing them as well with evidence-based assessment and of psy- cies in the application of HiTOP via hierarchical models. chopathology for ages 1½-90+ years: practicum and internship or residency Finally, it is common for students to Developmental,multi-informant, and experiences. multicultural findings. Comprehensive learn how to apply cut scores along recog- We field tested training in HiTOP at Psychiatry, 79,4-18. https://doi.org/10. nized continua, suchaswith IQ or use of T- one of the author’s (JLC) own universities 1016/j.comppsych.2017.03.006 scores common to many measures. Thus, to better appreciate the feasibility of weav- Barlow, D. H.,Farchione, T. J., Bullis,J.R., students were taught to think about diag- ing HiTOP into foundational parts of a Gallagher, M. W., Murray-Latin,H., nostic cut scores for psychopathology diag- curriculum. An assessment instructor Sauer-Zavala,S., …Cassiello-Robbins, C. nosis in the same way: diagnostic thresh- (JLC) spoke with two members from the (2017). The Unified Protocol forTrans- olds areindicatorsnot of people whocan diagnostic TreatmentofEmotional Dis- HiTOP consortium (RK and CJR) about be classified as qualitativelydifferent from orderscompared withdiagnosis-specific the model. They provided training mater- the healthy, but of relative severity on con- protocolsfor anxietydisorders:Aran- ial, including slides for instruction. The tinua that suggest varying need for treat- domized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry, instructorthen developed curricular com- ment. These experiences remain anecdotal, 74(9), 875-884. https://doi.org/10.1001/ ponents for the three foundational knowl- but they demonstrate the feasibility of jamapsychiatry.2017.2164 edge areas. During the psychopathology weavingHiTOP training into existing psy- Ben-Porath,Y.S., &Tellegen, A. component, the HiTOP model was chology program curriculums. Impor- (2008/2011). MMPI-2-RF (Minnesota overviewed in class after introduction of Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2- tantly, this exercise found that HiTOP DSM. Duringthe structuredinterviewing RestructuredForm): Manual for adminis- training could be integrated without major component,challenges of aDSM approach tration, scoring,and interpretation.Min- cost (from additional texts or new mea- to assessment and case conceptualization neapolis: University of MinnesotaPress. sures) and without radical changes to the were presented, including concerns about Blashfield,R.K., &Burgess, D. R. (2007). core curriculum. reliability, heterogeneity, and comorbidity. Classification provides an essential basis The HiTOP model was presented as an for organizing mentaldisorders.InS.O. Conclusions Lilienfeld &W.T.O'Donohue (Eds.), emerging alternative that resolved some of Thegreatideasofclinical science: 17 prin- these problems, although remained How we classify mental illness is foun- ciplesthateverymental healthprofes- untestedwith respecttoits clinical utility. dational for psychologists, carrying pro- sional should understand (pp. 93–117). The lecture component concluded by found implications for the research and NewYork, NY: Routledge/Taylor & overviewing alist of measures routinely treatment of mental illness, as well as train- Francis. taught in the course and used in practicum ing of future psychologists. Prevailing Brown, T. A., Campbell, L. A.,Lehman,C. that are consistent with aHiTOP approach approaches lack the empirical support L.,Grisham,J.R., &Mancill, R. B. (2001). to case conceptualization. Finally, during often called for (Krueger et al., 2018) and Current andlifetime comorbidity of the

210 the Behavior Therapist CLASSIFYING MENTAL ILLNESS

DSM-IVanxiety andmooddisordersina Conway, C. C., Forbes, M. K., Forbush, K. First,M.B., Rebello, T. J., Keeley,J.W., large clinical sample. JournalofAbnor- T.,Fried, E. I.,Hallquist, M. N.,Kotov, Bhargava, R., Dai, Y., Kulygina,M., ... mal Psychology, 110(4), 585. R., ...Eaton, N. R. (2019). Ahierarchical Reed, G. M. (2018). Do mental health https://doi.org/10.1037/0021- taxonomy of psychopathologycan professionals usediagnosticclassifica- 843x.110.4.585 reformmental health research. Perspec- tions theway we think they do? Aglobal tivesonPsychological Science.[Advance survey. World Psychiatry, 17(2),187-195. Caspi, A., Houts, R. M.,Belsky, D. W., https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20525 Goldman-Mellor,C.J., Harrington,H., onlinepublication.] https://doi.org/10. Haslam, N., Holland,E., &Kuppens, P. Israel, S., …Moffitt, T. E. (2014). The p 1177/1745691618810696 (2012). Categories versus dimensions in factor: one generalpsychopathology Costa,P.T., &McCrae,R.R.(2010). The personality and psychopathology:A factor in thestructure of psychiatricdis- NEO PersonalityInventory:3.Odessa, quantitative review of taxometric orders? Clinical PsychologicalScience, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. research. PsychologicalMedicine, 42(5), 2(2), 119-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Cuthbert,B.N., &Insel, T. R. (2013). 903-920. https://doi.org/10.1017/ 2167702613497473 Towardthe future of psychiatric diagno- S0033291711001966 Chmielewski,M., Clark, L. A., Bagby,R. sis: Thesevenpillars of RDoC. BMC Hasler, G.,Drevets,W.C., Manji, H. K., & M., &Watson,D.(2015). Method mat- , 11,126–134.http://dx.doi.org/ Charney, D. S. (2004). Discovering ters:Understanding diagnostic reliability 10.1186/1741-7015-11-126 endophenotypesfor major depression. in DSM-IV andDSM-5. Journal of Eaton,N.R., Krueger, R. F., Markon,K.E., Neuropsychopharmacology, 29(10), 1765- AbnormalPsychology,124(3), 764-769. Keyes,K.M., Skodol,A.E., Wall,M., … 1781. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.npp. 1300506 https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000069 Grant,B.F.(2013). The structure and Clark, L. A., Watson,D., &Reynolds,S. predictivevalidity of the internalizing Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., & (1995). Diagnosisand classification of disorders. Journal of AbnormalPsychol- Walters, E. E. (2005). Prevalence, sever- ity,and comorbidity of 12-monthDSM- psychopathology: Challenges to thecur- ogy, 122(1), 86-92.https://doi.org/10. IV disorders in the National Comorbid- rent system andfuture directions. 1037/a0029598 itySurvey Replication. Archives of AnnualReview of Psychology, 46(1), 121- First,M.B.(2005).Clinical utility:Apre- General Psychiatry, 62(6), 617-627. 153. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps. requisite forthe adoptionofadimen- https://doi.org/10.1001/arch- 46.020195.001005 sional approachinDSM. Journal of psyc.62.6.617 Cohen J. (1983). The cost ofdichotomiza- Abnormal Psychology, 114(4), 560-564. Kim, H.,&Eaton,N.R.(2015).The hier- tion. Applied PsychologicalMeasurement, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021- archical structureofcommon mental 7,249-253. 843x.114.4.560 disorders:Connectingmultiple levels of

INSTITUTE for BEHAVIOR THERAPY New York City Celebrating Our 47th Year Steven T. Fishman, Ph.D., ABPP | Barry S. Lubetkin, Ph.D., ABPP Directors and Founders

Since 1971, our professional staffhas treated over 30,000 patients with compassionate, empirically-based CBT. Our specialty programs include: OCD, Social Anxiety Disorder,Panic Disorder,Depression, Phobias, Personality Disorders, and ADHD-Linked Disorders, and Child/Adolescent/Parenting Problems. Our externs, interns, post-doctoral fellows and staffare from many of the area’smost prestigious universities specializing in CBT,including: Columbia, Fordham, Hofstra, Rutgers, Stony Brook, St. John’s, and Yeshiva Universities.

Conveniently located in the heart of Manhattan just one block from Rockefeller Center.Fees are affordable, and arange of fees are offered.

For referrals and/or information, please call: (212) 692-9288 20 East 49th St., Second Floor, New York, NY 10017 e-mail: [email protected] |web: www.ifbt.com

September • 2019 211 RUGGERO ET AL.

comorbidity, bifactor models, and pre- tistical questionsaboutreliabilityand https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2012. dictive validity. JournalofAbnormal Psy- construct validity in the grand strategy of 12070999 chology,124(4), 1064-1078. nosological revision. In T. Millon &G.L. Ruggero, C. J., Kotov,R., Hopwood, C. J., https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000113 Klerman (Eds.), Contemporarydirections First,M., Clark,L.A., Skodol, A. E.,… Kotov, R., Barch,D.M.,Barlow, D. H., in psychopathology (pp.215–231).New Zimmerman, J. (2018, August 18). Inte- Carpenter,W., Hasin,D.S., Heckers, York: Guilford Press. gratingaDimensional,HierarchicalTax- S.H.,...Zald,D.H. (2019). Why quanti- Moore,T.V.(1930).The empiricaldeter- onomy of Psychopathology intoClinical tative nosology is the bestinvestment in mination of certainsyndromes underly- Practice. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ mental healthtoday.Manuscript submit- ingpraecox and manic depressivepsy- r2jt6 ted for publication. choses. AmericanJournal of Psychiatry, 9, Teesson, M., Slade,T., &Mills,K.(2009). Kotov, R., Krueger, R. F.,Watson,D., 719-738. http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/ Comorbidity in Australia: findingsofthe Achenbach,T.M., Althoff, R. R., Bagby, ajp.86.4.719 2007 national surveyofmentalhealth R. M.,... Zimmerman,M.(2017). The Morey,L.C.(2007). Professional manual andwellbeing. Australianand New Hierarchical TaxonomyofPsy- forthe Personality Assessment Inventory ZealandJournal of Psychiatry,43(7), 606- chopathology (HiTOP): Adimensional (2nd ed.).Odessa, FL: Psychological 614. https://doi.org/10.1080/ alternativetotraditional nosologies. AssessmentResources. 00048670902970908 Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(4), 454-477. https://doi.org/10.1037/ Morey, L. C.,Skodol, A. E.,&Oldham, J. Wakefield,J.C.(2004). Themythofopen abn0000258 M. (2014).Clinicianjudgments of clini- concepts:Meehl’sanalysis of construct cal utility: AcomparisonofDSM-IV-TR meaning versusblack box essentialism. Kotov, R. (2016).The quantitative classifi- personality disordersand the alternative cation of mental illness: Emerging solu- Applied&Preventive Psychology,11,77- model forDSM-5personalitydisorders. tion to boundary problems. In E. Bromet 82. https://10.1016/j.appsy.2004.02.014 Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 123(2), (Ed.), Long-termoutcomes in psy- Waszczuk, M. A.,Zimmerman, M., Rug- 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1037/ chopathology research: Rethinkingthe sci- gero,C., Li,K., MacNamara, A.,Wein- a0036481 entific agenda (pp.140-157).New York, berg,A., ... Kotov, R. (2017).What do NY: Oxford UniversityPress. Mullins-Sweatt, S. N., Lengel,G.J., & clinicianstreat: Diagnoses or symptoms? Kraemer,H.C., Kupfer, D. J.,Clarke, D. DeShong,H.L.(2016).The importance Comprehensive Psychiatry,79, 80-88. E., Narrow, W. E., &Regier,D.A.(2012). of considering clinical utility in the con- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych. DSM-5:how reliable is reliable enough? structionofadiagnostic manual. Annual 2017.04.004 Review of , 12,133- AmericanJournal of Psychiatry,169(1), Wright, A., Krueger, R.F., Hobbs,M.J., 13-15. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi. 155. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev- clinpsy-021815-092954 Markon, K. E.,Eaton, N. R.,&Slade, T. ajp.2011.11010050 (2013).The structureofpsychopathol- Krueger, R. F.,Kotov, R.,Watson,D., Ormel, J.,Raven,D., van Oort, F.,Hart- ogy:toward an expanded quantitative Forbes, M. K.,Eaton, N. R.,Ruggero, C. man,C.A., Reijneveld, S. A.,Veenstra, empirical model. Journal of Abnormal J., ...Bagby, R. M. (2018).Progress in R.,... Oldehinkel, A. J. (2015). Mental Psychology,122(1), 281-294. achieving quantitative classification of health in Dutch adolescents: ATRAILS https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030133 psychopathology. World Psychiatry, reportonprevalence, severity, age of Zimmerman, M., Ellison, W., Young, D., 17(3), 282-293. https://doi.org/10.1002/ onset,continuityand co-morbidity of Chelminski,I., &Dalrymple,K.(2015). wps.20566 DSMdisorders. PsychologicalMedicine, Howmanydifferent ways do patients Lundahl, B. W., Kunz, C., Brownell, C., 45,345-360. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0033291714001469 meet the diagnostic criteriafor major Tollefson, D., &Burke, B. L. (2010). A depressivedisorder? Comprehensive Psy- Otowa, T., Hek, K.,Lee, M., Byrne,E.M., meta-analysis of motivationalinterview- chiatry, 56,29-34. https://doi.org/10. ing:Twenty-fiveyears of empirical stud- Mirza, S. S.,Nivard, M. G., ...Fanous, A. 1016/j.comppsych.2014.09.007 ies. Research on SocialWorkPractice, (2016).Meta-analysis of genome-wide 20(2),137-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/ associationstudies of anxiety disorders. 1049731509347850 Molecular Psychiatry, 21(10),1391-1399. ... Markon, K. E., Chmielewski, M., &Miller, https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2015.197 C. J. (2011). The reliabilityand validity of Regier, D. A.,Narrow, W. E., Clarke, D. E., The authorshave no funding or conflictsof discrete andcontinuousmeasuresofpsy- Kraemer, H. C.,Kuramoto,S.J., Kuhl, E. interest to disclose. chopathology: Aquantitative review. Psy- A.,&Kupfer,D.J.(2013). DSM-5Field chological Bulletin, 137(5), 856. Trials in the UnitedStates andCanada, Correspondence to CamiloJ.Ruggero, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023678 Part II:Test-retestreliabilityofselected Ph.D.,University of North Texas, 1155 Meehl, P. E. (1986). Diagnostic taxa as categorical diagnoses. AmericanJournal Union Circle #311280, Denton, Tx 76203; open concepts:Metatheoretical and sta- of Psychiatry, 170(1), 59-70. [email protected]

It is with sadness that we inform you that David Teisler, our Director of Communications and Deputy Director, lost his wife, Mary Anne, to August 6. We know that many of you have worked with David in the past and thought you might be interested to know that friends have established a GoFundMe account. If you are so inclined to make adonation, here is the link: https://www.gofundme.com/teislerfund

212 the Behavior Therapist