Unraveling Networks: The Conceptual Incoherence of the Network Approach

The network approach to psychopathology promises (personalized) visualizations of the structure of mental disorders, in turn allowing for prediction of disorder development and identification of intervention targets. In this paper, we argue that these goals are problematized by conceptual incoherence between the approach's two pillars: the network theory of mental disorders, and the suite of methods known as "network psychometrics." First, we argue that, if it is to be clinically informative, network psychometrics requires (1) an embedding argument to justify that a causally sufficient set of variables has been modeled, and (2) a concomitant argument supporting the assumption that the human-environment system is near-decomposable. Then, we show that current versions of the network theory of psychopathology raise severe obstacles for such arguments, if not outright blocking them. In turn, the network approach to psychopathology appears to unravel unless changes are made to its pillars.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Published
2025-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaf037
Primary Topic
Mental Health Research Topics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unraveling Networks: The Conceptual Incoherence of the Network Approach

Markus I. Eronen, Freek J W Oude Maatman
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Mental Health Research Topics
article

Unraveling Networks: The Conceptual Incoherence of the Network Approach

Markus I. Eronen, Freek J W Oude Maatman
article en

Abstract

The network approach to psychopathology promises (personalized) visualizations of the structure of mental disorders, in turn allowing for prediction of disorder development and identification of intervention targets. In this paper, we argue that these goals are problematized by conceptual incoherence between the approach's two pillars: the network theory of mental disorders, and the suite of methods known as "network psychometrics." First, we argue that, if it is to be clinically informative, network psychometrics requires (1) an embedding argument to justify that a causally sufficient set of variables has been modeled, and (2) a concomitant argument supporting the assumption that the human-environment system is near-decomposable. Then, we show that current versions of the network theory of psychopathology raise severe obstacles for such arguments, if not outright blocking them. In turn, the network approach to psychopathology appears to unravel unless changes are made to its pillars.

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of MedicineVol. 51(2)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), University of Groningen (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 57%
Mental Health Research Topics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.