About this Research Topic
Recent scholarly discussions highlight the urgency to reevaluate intuition and clinical judgment as remedies for the limitations of psychiatric nosography. Reliance on statistical manuals and standardized interviews rooted in behaviorism has minimized the importance of subjectivity in both patient and clinician experiences.
Currently, a paradigm shift in social neuroscience towards a second-person perspective, coupled with advancements in computational psychiatry, is refining how we understand psychopathological phenotypes by factoring in time, context, and interaction. Additionally, ongoing philosophical debates are reassessing the role of intuitions, emotions, and "atmospheric feelings" in knowledge acquisition and clinical justification. These debates suggest it might be time to overhaul the ways we think about diagnostic and clinical reasoning in psychiatry and psychology.
Clinical judgment, a blend of personal sensitivity, theoretical knowledge, and diverse clinical experiences, plays a crucial role in psychiatric evaluations. The interplay of these elements, alongside the clinician’s behavior and emotional state, significantly influences patient outcomes. Recent advances in phenomenological psychiatry and social neuroscience propose redefining diagnostic and clinical reasoning as primarily social and interactive processes—a shift towards understanding diagnosis as a mutual, responsive exercise between clinician and patient.
This redefinition involves acknowledging how social interactions underlie psychiatric disorders, making diagnostic processes a fusion of empirical knowledge and emotional, intuitive patient engagement. To address these complex dynamics, there's a pressing need to expand the theoretical bases of psychopathology to include both second-person neuroscientific findings and computational methodologies. These innovations can bridge the gap between traditional intuitive practices and modern neurobiological insights into the 'social brain.'
In light of these insights, this Collection seeks contributions that probe the philosophical underpinnings and theoretical frameworks influencing diagnostic and clinical reasoning. We aim to explore the profound role of intuitions, emotions, and sensory perceptions in shaping clinical judgments, emphasizing a robust, inter-subjective approach to understanding these interactions.
• Exploration of Intuitions and Emotions: How do intuitions and emotions function in clinical reasoning, and how do they interact with analytic thinking?
• Role of Intuitions and Emotions in Clinical Judgement: In what ways can intuitions, emotions, and "atmospheric" feelings be developed and taught to enhance clinical judgment?
• Impact of Second-person Neuroscientific Approaches: What contributions do second-person neuroscientific approaches make to diagnostic and clinical thinking?
• Diagnostics as a Medical Art: How is the intuitive understanding of patients integrated into the training of clinicians?
• Combining Computational and Neuroscientific Approaches: Can computational models be merged with second-person neuroscientific approaches to better define psychopathological phenotypes?
• Inclusion of Clinician’s Subjective Experiences in Models: Is it feasible to integrate clinicians' subjective experiences, such as intuitions, into computational models to improve psychopathological definitions?
• Managing Deceptive Intuitions: What are the causes of misleading intuitions, and how can they be managed? Can social interaction models help in resolving the conflicts between empirical data and intuitive judgments?
In aiming to bridge the gap between traditional frameworks, recent advancements in neurobiology, and emerging neuroscientific and computational methodologies, this Research Topic will provide a platform for rigorous exploration and innovative dialogue. Contributions are encouraged from diverse perspectives to fully explore the intricate balance of intuition, emotion, and rational analysis in shaping the future of psychiatric and psychological practice.
Currently, a paradigm shift in social neuroscience towards a second-person perspective, coupled with advancements in computational psychiatry, is refining how we understand psychopathological phenotypes by factoring in time, context, and interaction. Additionally, ongoing philosophical debates are reassessing the role of intuitions, emotions, and "atmospheric feelings" in knowledge acquisition and clinical justification. These debates suggest it might be time to overhaul the ways we think about diagnostic and clinical reasoning in psychiatry and psychology.
Clinical judgment, a blend of personal sensitivity, theoretical knowledge, and diverse clinical experiences, plays a crucial role in psychiatric evaluations. The interplay of these elements, alongside the clinician’s behavior and emotional state, significantly influences patient outcomes. Recent advances in phenomenological psychiatry and social neuroscience propose redefining diagnostic and clinical reasoning as primarily social and interactive processes—a shift towards understanding diagnosis as a mutual, responsive exercise between clinician and patient.
This redefinition involves acknowledging how social interactions underlie psychiatric disorders, making diagnostic processes a fusion of empirical knowledge and emotional, intuitive patient engagement. To address these complex dynamics, there's a pressing need to expand the theoretical bases of psychopathology to include both second-person neuroscientific findings and computational methodologies. These innovations can bridge the gap between traditional intuitive practices and modern neurobiological insights into the 'social brain.'
In light of these insights, this Collection seeks contributions that probe the philosophical underpinnings and theoretical frameworks influencing diagnostic and clinical reasoning. We aim to explore the profound role of intuitions, emotions, and sensory perceptions in shaping clinical judgments, emphasizing a robust, inter-subjective approach to understanding these interactions.
• Exploration of Intuitions and Emotions: How do intuitions and emotions function in clinical reasoning, and how do they interact with analytic thinking?
• Role of Intuitions and Emotions in Clinical Judgement: In what ways can intuitions, emotions, and "atmospheric" feelings be developed and taught to enhance clinical judgment?
• Impact of Second-person Neuroscientific Approaches: What contributions do second-person neuroscientific approaches make to diagnostic and clinical thinking?
• Diagnostics as a Medical Art: How is the intuitive understanding of patients integrated into the training of clinicians?
• Combining Computational and Neuroscientific Approaches: Can computational models be merged with second-person neuroscientific approaches to better define psychopathological phenotypes?
• Inclusion of Clinician’s Subjective Experiences in Models: Is it feasible to integrate clinicians' subjective experiences, such as intuitions, into computational models to improve psychopathological definitions?
• Managing Deceptive Intuitions: What are the causes of misleading intuitions, and how can they be managed? Can social interaction models help in resolving the conflicts between empirical data and intuitive judgments?
In aiming to bridge the gap between traditional frameworks, recent advancements in neurobiology, and emerging neuroscientific and computational methodologies, this Research Topic will provide a platform for rigorous exploration and innovative dialogue. Contributions are encouraged from diverse perspectives to fully explore the intricate balance of intuition, emotion, and rational analysis in shaping the future of psychiatric and psychological practice.
Keywords: Diagnosis, Intuition, Cognitive feelings, Emotions, Clinical judgement
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
