As psychology journals continue to have greater international contributions, having two different major classification systems creates more confusion regarding diagnoses. This confusion is somewhat tempered by the fact that the DSM–IV is used more internationally with researchers than with clinicians; however, this increases the gap between international research and practice. Furthermore, although the DSM-5 is fairly atheoretical, the classification of illnesses allows it to be more openly applied to disorders and clinicians with theoretical backgrounds. However, the atheoretical classification system may fail to explain the power as to the classification of some disorders, which can affect how patients are treated. The classification system is also based on cultural factors but not all cultures. DSM-5 mainly focuses on American research; thus, illnesses from other cultures may be misrepresented and
As psychology journals continue to have greater international contributions, having two different major classification systems creates more confusion regarding diagnoses. This confusion is somewhat tempered by the fact that the DSM–IV is used more internationally with researchers than with clinicians; however, this increases the gap between international research and practice. Furthermore, although the DSM-5 is fairly atheoretical, the classification of illnesses allows it to be more openly applied to disorders and clinicians with theoretical backgrounds. However, the atheoretical classification system may fail to explain the power as to the classification of some disorders, which can affect how patients are treated. The classification system is also based on cultural factors but not all cultures. DSM-5 mainly focuses on American research; thus, illnesses from other cultures may be misrepresented and