Eiko Fried Profile picture
Sep 24, 2021 9 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Just finished my keynote at @conference_2021 on "Mental health: studying systems instead of syndromes". You can find slides & new preprint here: osf.io/bm6r5/. Really enjoyed making a completely new presentation from scratch.

🧵
The first barrier to progress I talk about is diagnostic literalism and its consequences: while many of us don't believe in MDD or schizophrenia as "natural disease units" in the world, case-control research in our field is often carried out in that way.
I discuss some historical evidence on how arbitrary many of the categories and thresholds we have today in DSM-5 were, and that DSM-5 may look quite different today if minor things had gone differently.

This means diagnostic categories are not natural kinds.
But our field is not alone in having failed its ambitious mission to identify natural kinds: many nosologies are somewhat arbitrary (e.g. biological species, emotions, threshold for high blood pressure). That doesn't make these things less "real" or important.
The second barrier I talk about is reductionism, using the prominent example of biological reductionism. Reductionism is a useful heuristic tool, but has limited value in complex systems such as mental disorders.
Both barriers interact with each other in a vicious cycle: somewhat arbitrary diagnostic categories are reified because we identify (e.g. biological) correlates.
Moving forward, conceptualizing and studying mental disorders as complex systems offer many new opportunities because there is a rich field of complexity science with many theories and methods that may prove to be useful for mental research.
I discuss some features we can study from this perspective, such as emergence, early warning systems, phase transitions, stable states, and so on.

Thanks to @conference_2021 for inviting me to give a keynote; slides osf.io/bm6r5/.

/ 🧵.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eiko Fried

Eiko Fried Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @EikoFried

Sep 14
Two days ago, a lawfirm filed a federal antitrust lawsuit against 6 commercial publishers (incl Elsevier & Wiley) in the federal district court in New York.

They allege a 3-part scheme on part of publishers. 🧵

lieffcabraser.com/antitrust/acad…
First, an agreement to fix the price of reviewing at 0$ which coerces scholars into providing their labor for nothing.

Second, publishers agreed not to compete with each other by barring researchers to submit manuscripts in multiple jouranls simultaneously.
Third, the scheme entails prohibiting scholars from freely sharing the scientific advancements described in submitted manuscripts while those manuscripts are under peer review, a process that often takes over a year.
Read 4 tweets
Aug 11
The FDA rejected MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD treatment. This came as a surprise to noone, given that the FDA advisory panel voted 2:9 on efficacy & 1:10 on safety recently.
FDA followed the evidence. If you are angry, direct that at Lykos that carried our low quality trials.
Here a recent @scifri episode on the numerous problems of the Lykos/MAPS studies specifically from the perspective of 1) lived experience, 2) psychotherapy, and 3) clinical trial design.

sciencefriday.com/segments/fda-r…
@scifri For a big picture scientific review of issues in this literature, you can

1) read our recent review paper

2) or watch my 45 minute youtube summarizing these issues (for non-technical audiences) journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20…
Read 4 tweets
Jul 18
So in 2007, physicists wrote a paper that made the headlines: according to their calculations, human coin flips aren’t 50/50 - more like 51/49.

Why is that, and did students in Amsterdam really flip 350,000 coins to find out?

🧵
Diaconis et al 2007 showed that coins tend to land with the same side up that the coin started with ().
They were also able to adjust coin flipping machines flip to 100/0, “proving coin flip physics aren’t random”. info.phys.unm.edu/~caves/courses…

Image
Image
Now a group of students in Amsterdam flipped 350,000 coins in a preregistered study & painstakingly recorded the results. In fact, they video taped all coin flips and uploaded them with the paper, so their study is fully reproducible ;).

Below our heroes’ names.

The results? Image
Read 8 tweets
Jun 5
After careful consideration, the FDA advisory comission voted today 9:2 that MDMA has *not* been shown to be effective for treating PTSD, given massive concerns around validity threats in this literature. They also voted 10:1 that MDMA has *not* shown to be safe.
📄Many mentioned reasons overlap with those we summarized recently in our review paper:


📺 I also summarize them for a lay audience in this YouTube video:
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/20…
Some pretty wild things in the meeting honestly, thanks to @eturnermd1 for live tweeting.

Eg folks who were paid by the sponsor (big pharma) to speak on behalf of the product to be marketed did *not* have to declare they were being paid.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 29
1/8 New tutorial preprint led by @b_siepe in which we present different descriptive statistics & data visualization techniques with the goal to better understand EMA item functioning.

Preprint:

Brief overview thread 🧵: osf.io/preprints/psya…

Image
Image
2/8 EMA data collection is increasing exponentially, but there are many challenges:

🔎 data are complex
🔎 psychometric properties of EMA items often not investigated
🔎 most scales are neither standardized nor validated beyond face validity

So .. how *valid* are our data?
3/8 Validity is a very thorny issue, so instead we decided to write a tutorial on better understanding item *functioning* as a necessary precursor to discussing validity.

In other words: "Look at your data carefully" (a much repeated call over the last century).
Read 8 tweets
Jan 8
1/22 Our new paper led by @ashleylwatts (w @ashlgreene & @wesbonifay) is now published; I view it as the first critical evaluation of the statistical and theoretical p-factor & resulting literature. Here a brief overview of the core arguments in the paper. Image
We start by clearly differentiating the theoretical p-factor (from here on: P, thought to describe and perhaps cause variation in all forms of psychopathology) from the statistical 'general factor of psychopathology' (from here on: GFP, usually derived via latent variable models)
P has been taken to mean a variety of things, including an (unusually unspecified) causal mechanism, intellectual functioning, disordered thought, negative emotionality, emotion dysregulation, and others.
Authors use GFPs to derive P often don't specify what they mean with P.
Read 23 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(