How Science Shapes ADHD
How Science Shapes ADHD
Science adds to our understanding of ADHD by working out mechanisms of causation, symptom production, and intervention. So far, despite alternative hypotheses, the sciences have also stood by models that align with DSM-defined ADHD. Why? In part because—allowing for significant gaps in scientific knowledge—the data fit, by and large. But science’s commitment to certain reasoning patterns and methodologies also encourages adherence. For example, sticking with the same model makes it simpler to demonstrate data convergence across fields: researchers can be more certain that they are comparing apples to apples. Similarly, the common focus on difference (typically difference of “ADHD” from “non-ADHD”) meshes well with the DSM’s categorical portrayal of ADHD. These under-recognized effects of methodology, among other factors, slow down exploration of alternatives. Common methodologies and scientific goals also encourage dichotomization, reductionistic biological perspectives, and reification of ADHD—three aspects of the predominant view that contribute to intolerance.
Keywords: ADHD, reductionism, scientific method, operationalization, mechanisms, statistical reasoning, scientific progress, scientific hypothesis, reification
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
