Definitions of abnormality Flashcards
what is statistical infrequency?
- someone is mentally abnormal if their condition is rare in the population
- rarity is judged using objective stats
- comparing the individuals behaviour to the rest of the population
what is a normal distribution curve?
- populations average spread of characteristics
- mean median and mode all at highest point= most common
- at each end there are fewer ppl with those charcateristics
how to use a normal distribution curve to find abnormal behaviour?
- compare individuals to the population and identify those at extreme ends
Evaluating statistical infrequency: strength, those being assessed have been evaluated objectively
- individuals who are assessed as being abnormal have been evaluated objectively
- better than subjective opinion of a clinician
- deciding if a client is coping or not is a vague concept, 2 observers may disagree
Evaluating statistical infrequency: limitations, the psychological community decides the cutoff for what is statistically infrequent
- get to decide what is rare enough to be statistically infrequent to be abnormal
- this is a subjective decision with real implications
- defining intellectual disability as 70 IQ and under
- means those just above 70 dont get support
Evaluating statistical infrequency: limitations, theres a range of common psychopathologies
- anxiety and depression= common psychopathologies
- NHS found 17% of people surveyed met the criteria for common mental health disorders
- definition isnt appropriate in considering societies high incidence of mental health disorders
Evaluating statistical infrequency: limitations, not all statistically infrequent traits are negative
- this definition would include those who are on the other end of the scale
- 130 IQ is just as statistically rare as 70 IQ
- good definition of abnormality shouldnt include people with high intelligence
- saying they have psychopathology and need additional support
what is the failure to function adequately?
- abnormal if they cant cope in their daily lives
- including their ability to interact with the world and meet their challenges
Rosenhan and Seligman’s features of failure to function adequately:
- maladaptive behaviour
- personal anguish
- observer discomfort
- irrationality
- unconventionality
what is maladaptive behaviour?
- individuals behave in ways that goes against their long-term interests
what is personal anguish?
- the individual suffers from anxiety and distress
what is observer discomfort?
- individuals behaviour causes distress to those around them
what is irrationality?
- difficult to understand the motivation behind the individuals unexpected behaviour
what is unconventionality?
- behaviour doesnt match what is commonly expected by society
Evaluating failure to function adequately: limitations, decision as to whether someone is coping is subjective
- it is based off the clinicians opinion
- their judgement may be biased
- two observers my not agree if someone is managing
Evaluating failure to function adequately: limitations, only includes people who cant cope
- psychopaths can function in society in ways that benefit them personally
- lower empathy can lead to success in business and politics
- they may feel no distress themselves
- psychopathy gives negative implications for the people around them
Evaluating failure to function adequately: limitations, not all maladaptive behaviour is an indication of mental illness
- extreme sports, eating unhealthy and drinky alchy= risk individuals health so potentially maladaptive
- most people would disagree that these behaviours= mental illness
Evaluating failure to function adequately: strength, respects individual and their own experience
- considering individuals situations is something statistical infrequency and deviation from social norms doesnt consider
- this definition is based on what is normal to the rest of the population
what is deviation from social norms?
- people who deviate from social expectations may be seen as abnormal or deviant
what is a social norm?
- unwritten expectation of behaviour
- can vary culture to culture
- can change over time
- what is acceptable in one context may not be in another
Examples of abnormalities that vary between cultures based on deviation from social norms:
- homosexuality
- face and hair covering
- food and how to eat it
- modesty in clothing
- public displays of emotion
Evaluations of deviation from social norms: strength, doesnt impose a western view on non- western cultures
- doesnt impose a western view on non- western cultures
- diagnosing abnormality according to social norms isnt ethnocentric
- respects cultural differences between societies
Evaluations of deviation from social norms: limitation, inappropriate to define someone who moved to a new culture abnormal based no their new cultural norms
- people from afro caribbean heritage who moved to the uk are 7x more likely to be diagnosed with SZ than someone from the uk or afro caribbeans who live in their nations
- due to category failure
- for afro caribbeans hallucinations and conversations w angels is part of religious experience in their culture
- uk doctor more likely to diagnose
what is category failure?
- western definition of mental illness is applied to someone who isnt acting according to western cultural norms
