In a thoughtful commentary in this journal a decade ago, Michael Rutter reviewed 25 years of progress in the field before concluding that developmental psychopathology (DP) initiated a paradigm shift in clinical science. This deduction requires that DP itself be a paradigm. According to Thomas Kuhn, canonical paradigms in the physical sciences serve unifying functions by consolidating scientists’ thinking and scholarship around single, closed sets of discipline-defining epistemological assumptions and methods. Paradigm shifts replace these assumptions and methods with a new field-defining framework. In contrast, the social sciences are multiparadigmatic, with thinking and scholarship unified locally around open sets of epistemological assumptions and methods with varying degrees of inter-, intra-, and subdisciplinary reach. DP challenges few if any of these local paradigms. Instead, DP serves an essential pluralizing function, and is therefore better construed as a metaparadigm. Seen in this way, DP holds tremendous untapped potential to move the field from zero-sum thinking and scholarship to positive-sum science and epistemological pluralism. This integrative vision, which furthers Dante Cicchetti’s legacy of interdisciplinarity, requires broad commitment among scientists to reject zero-sum scholarship in which portending theories, useful principles, and effective interventions are jettisoned based on confirmation bias, errors in logic, and ideology.

中文翻译：

---

发展精神病理学作为元范式：从零和科学到理论和研究的认识论多元化

十年前，Michael Rutter 在该杂志上发表了一篇深思熟虑的评论，回顾了该领域 25 年的进展，然后得出结论，发展精神病理学 (DP) 引发了临床科学的范式转变。这个推论要求DP本身就是一个范式。根据托马斯·库恩的说法，物理科学中的规范范式服务于统一其功能是通过围绕单一的、封闭的学科定义认识论假设和方法来巩固科学家的思维和学术。范式转变用新的领域定义框架取代了这些假设和方法。相比之下，社会科学是多范式的，思想与学术统一本地围绕开放的认识论假设和方法，具有不同程度的学科间、学科内和亚学科影响力。DP 几乎没有挑战这些地方范式。相反，DP 服务于一个基本的复数化函数，因此更好地解释为元范式。从这个角度来看，DP拥有巨大的未开发潜力，可以将这个领域从零和思维和学术转向正和科学和认识论多元化。这种综合愿景进一步弘扬了但丁·西凯蒂的跨学科遗产，需要科学家们做出广泛的承诺，拒绝零和学术，即基于确认偏差、逻辑错误和意识形态而抛弃预示理论、有用原则和有效干预措施。