Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLamont, Peter
dc.contributor.authorBöröndi, Anita
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-17T14:14:31Z
dc.date.available2016-08-17T14:14:31Z
dc.date.issued2014-03-12
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1842/16133
dc.description.abstractUnderstandings of mental disorders have changed over time and related concepts are often contested and definitions. This project used discourse analysis to analyse how the official definition of substance related disorders have changed in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders in comparison with the previous fourth edition (APA, 2000, 2013a). In particular, the analysis focused on how the changes are presented as justified in academic discourse. Three recurrent themes were identified: (a) presenting the previous version as problematic; (b) presenting the benefits of implementing certain changes; and (c) presenting the changes as being based on strong scientific evidence. The analysis of the themes revealed that the justifications are built up through various discursive and rhetoric features within the text, such as consensus formulation and empiricist discourse. The implications of the findings are discussed and future research directions are also discussed.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherThe University of Edinburghen_US
dc.subjectdiagnosisen_US
dc.subjectdiscourse analysisen_US
dc.subjectDSMen_US
dc.subjectfact constructionen_US
dc.subjectmadnessen_US
dc.subjectmental disorder classificationen_US
dc.subjectsubstance use disordersen_US
dc.titleConstructing Madness. Discourse analysis of changes in the DSMen_US
dc.typeThesis or Dissertationen_US
dc.type.qualificationlevelUndergraduateen_US
dc.type.qualificationnameUndergraduateen_US
dcterms.accessRightsRestricted Accessen_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record