Defining psychopathology Flashcards
statistical infrequency
How often is a behaviour observed? What is common is normal
Deviation from social norms
Defining abnormality can also be done based on the impact of an individuals behaviour on others.
People behaving in a socially deviant and apparently incomprehensible way should be regarded as abnormal.
failure to function adequately
Not being able to cope with the the demands of everyday life.
Martin and Seligman propose certain indicators for when somebody is not functioning adequately.
-When a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules, for example maintaining eye contact and respecting personal space
When a person experiencing personal distress
When at person’s behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous to themselves or others.
deviation from ideal mental health
- Having a positive view of yourself (high self-esteem) with a strong sense of identity
- Being capable of personal growth and self-actualisation
- Being independent of others (autonomous) and self-regulating
- Having an accurate view of reality
- Being able to integrate and resist stress
- Being able to master your environment (love, friendships, work, and leisure time)
Evaluation-statistical infrequencies
The Issue of Labelling-
Not every individual who displays a statistically infrequent trait will benefit from a label, particularly if they are not experiencing any distress.
Statistically infrequent behaviours can be desireable.
-For example having a very high IQ, is uncommon, yet celebrated, whereas. having depression is statistically more common and not celebrated.
A further issue with the statistical infrequency definition of abnormality is that labelling an individual as abnormal can be unhelpful or even detrimental.
This is especially true, for example, of someone with a low IQ since they may be able to live quite happy and relatively normal lives without distress to themselves or others.
Such a label may contribute to a poor self-image, such an individuals starting to view themselves at “stupid” “worth less than somebody else”. The label could even become an invitation for discrimination eg being told that you are “stupid” or a
“waste of space”
This means that being labelled as statistically infrequent could cause the person more distress than the condition itself and so may in fact not be an appropriate thing to do.
Evaluation-Deviation from social norms
Cultural Relativism-
Social norms differ from culture to culture. Unfair to judge someone from another culture by anything but the standard of that culture.
Degree of Severity and Context-
When someone breaks a social norm once this may not be deviant behaviour, but the persistent repetition of such behaviour could be evidence of psychological disturbance.
How far an individual deviates from a social norm is mediated by the degree of severity and the context.
For example, when someone breaks a social norm once this may not be deviant behaviour, but the persistent repetition of such behaviour could be evidence of psychological disturbance.
Someone walking topless on a beach would be considered normal but, on the other hand, adopting the same attire for the office would be viewed as abnormal and possibly an indication of an underlying mental health problem. Equally, somebody not wanting, or being able to get out of bed at the weekend may not be considered abnormal, whereas somebody who can never face getting out of bed may be considered abnormal.
As a consequence, this definition fails to offer a complete explanation in its own right since it is related to degree and context. The more severe and out of place the behaviour is the more abnormal it should be considered.
Evaluation-failure to function adequately
Patients Perspective-
This definition considers the thoughts and feelings of the person experiencing the issue and does not simply make a judgement
Is it different from deviation from social norms
-Alternative lifestyles or doing extreme sports may be an example of both. It is therefore difficult to ascertain if this behaviour should be considered maladaptive
There is often confusion with distinguishing between failure to function adequately and deviation from social norms.
On occasion, a behaviour which appears to be a failure to function adequately, such as not being able to go to work, may in fact also be a deviation from the social norm.
This is particularly the case should that person be choosing to live an alternative lifestyle out of the common system for that society, for example new age travellers who do not live in permanent accommodation and may not work or base jumpers who take part in an extreme sport with a high mortality rate.
It is therefore difficult to ascertain if this behaviour should be considered maladaptive and by labelling individuals who make such choices as ‘failing to function’, personal freedom may be being quashed.
evaluation-deviation from ideal mental health
Unrealistic Criteria-
There are times when everyone will experiences periods of negativity and stress
- according to the definition, these people would be classed as abnormal.
Cultural Relativism-
A lot of Jahoda’s criteria are based around western ideas of ideal mental health - other cultures may not place as much emphasis on Jahoda’s critera.
One weakness of the deviation from ideal mental health definition is the unrealistic criteria proposed by Jahoda.
For example, experiencing stress and negativity, can common consequence of a particularly difficult week at work or experiencing the loss of a loved one. Or having a negative view of yourself can come after the breakdown of a relationship, or even after simply experiencing a negative comment about yourself.
Experiencing a lack of one or multiple of Jahoda’s criteria is a fairly common occurrence in our lives and can often come as a consequence of both daily hassles and large life changes. However, according to this definition, people who experience a lack of Jahoda’s criteria would be classified as abnormal, irrespective of the circumstances causing it, which are often outside their control.
With the high standards set by these criteria, how many need to be absent for diagnosis to occur must also be questioned.
