The DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) offers standard criteria for the classification of mental disorders. It has been around for decades, and while the definitions of mental disorders kept expanding, basing the diagnosis on a combination of several symptoms alone has not always lead to the most reliable outcomes. For example, it is not uncommon for patients with bipolar disorder to get diagnosed with schizophrenia, which as you can imagine can have immense adverse consequences.
A new approach:
The US National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) believes that it’s time to transform this system. The newly proposed method of diagnosis focuses on looking at neurological abnormalities in the brain in order to understand the cause of the disorder, rather than relying on symptoms alone (self-reported and observed). In a nutshell, it’s about focusing on the underlying biological malfunctioning, rather than on the “label” of the mental illness. By utilising the hard evidence (a list of core brain functions and their associated neural circuitry) as opposed to reported information, the ideas is to eliminate errors due to misinterpretation. While this idea is still at its infancy, it arguably represents the future of mental healthcare based on neuroscience.
Segmentation – based on facts:
How does this approach relate to segmentation studies? Often, companies utilise self-reported consumer feedback alone to categorise people into segments. While self-reported behaviour is an important piece of information, it only provides one side of the story. By looking at the hard evidence – the transactional data of people’s actual behaviour (e.g.: where the go, what they buy, how much time they spend on each activity), marketers are able to get a far more accurate understanding of the situation than they could have obtained through speaking to consumers alone.
This is why we overlay “big data” with behavioural and emotional retrospective reports, in order to get a richer portrayal of each of the customer segments that is a far more accurate representation of the differences in the population. While reported information is always worth noting, categorising people based on evidence allows building a robust approach that companies can utilise with confidence in order to get a better understanding of their customers.
Written by: Lana Bruskina – Strategy and Insight Manager
For further information on THINK Global Research, please contact Kristy Ihle (Managing Director)- info@thinkglobalresearch.com.
(Ref: New Scientist, No2968, 10.05.2014)
