Paper 1: Psychopathology Flashcards
What are the definitions of abnormality?
- Deviation from social norms
- Failure to function adequately
- Statistical infrequency
- Deviation from ideal mental health
(AO1) - Deviation from social norms?
- Social norm = unwritten societal rule
- Indivi. seen as abnormal if they violate the rules + give and example…
(AO3) - points for deviation from social norms?
1) Cultural relativism. 75 countries homo. still illegal - abnormal. Rest world it normal. No global standard for defining.
2) Hindsight bias. Change overtime. UK - homo. mental. till 1973 - instituitilsation. Now violation rights. Theory not acknowledge change.
3) How far some1 deviates depend on context + severity. Some1 break rule norm once, may not deviate, persistent they are. Give example - beach clothes in office. Fails explain in its own right.
(AO1) - Failure to function adequately?
- abnormal if unable to cope with everyday + live independently in society
- Personal suffering or distress to others.
(AO3) - Points for failure to function adequately
1) Indivi. differences - Person OCD excessive rituals preventing them, but others ritual but still on time. Each person diagnosed diff despite behavioural + psychological similars.. according to def. - low validity.
2) Considers subjective personal experiences - Considers thoughts + feelings patient experience issue. Not simply make judge. without personal viewpoint into consider. Useful model for assessing psychological behaviour.
3) Confusion distinguishing failure & deviation - e.g. not able go to work may also be deviation by choosing live alternative lifestyle. Labels as ‘failures’ ignoring person. freedom. squashed.
4) Gender issues - societies stereotype men. Dont seek psycho help.
(AO1) - Statistical infrequency
- Statistically uncommon or not seen often
- Distribution of particular behaviour within society
- Normal distribution curve can be used to show proportions of pop. who share parti. characteristic.
(AO3) - Points for Statistical infrequency
1) Issue misdiagnosis - e.g. 10% pop. experience depression making it ‘normal’. High IQ uncommon. ‘abnormal’. - Desirable trait. Serious drawback on adopting + shouldn’t be used alone for diagnosis.
2) Labelling indivi. as abnormal unhelpful - e.g. some1 low IQ but able live happy life without harm/distress self or others. Label contribute poor self-image or discrimination = harm. Labelling could cause more distress.
3) Someone labelled as normal could be desirable - e.g.high IQ. Depression common. Def. needs to identify these avoid pitfall
4) Gender issues - females more likely to consult GP than males.
5) Cultural issues - Jewish mourn by tearing clothes. India mentally ill thought be cursed. USA 48% treated - make them ‘normal’
(AO1) - Deviation from ideal mental health
- Jahoda (1958), 6 principles:
1. High self-esteem, strength sense of identity
2. Personal growth & self-actualisation
3. Autonomous & self-regulating
4. Accurate view of reality
5. integrate & resist stress
6. Master environ. - If not demonstrate one = abnormal. give example e.g. depression negative view on self.
(AO3) - Points for deviation from ideal mental health
1) Unrealistic criteria - times everyone experience stress + negativity. Abnormal irrespective of circumstances outside of their control. High standards - How many need be absent for diagnosis???
2) Takes positive and holistic stance. Focus on pos./desirable behaviours rather than opposite. Secondly, considers whole person, take into account multitude factors could effect health. Strength, it is comprehensive covering broad range of criteria.
3) Cultural relativism - Western origin criteria - may be overtly self-centred in other countries favour community. Indepen. within collectivist cultures not fostered thus making def. cultural bound.
4) Nomothetic - everyone individually. some perhaps idiographic more suitable or
Ethnocentricity - ‘being independent + self-regulating’ applies particularly to individual. society. not selfish.
(AO1) - Define behavioural approach to explaining and treating phobias.
- Abnormal behaviour can be caused by:
1. Classical conditioning
2. Operant conditioning
3. Social learning theory
(AO1) - Psychologist for Behavioural approach to explain and treating phobias?
Mower (1947):
- Two-process model = Behaviours learned through classical and maintained through operant
(AO1) - Define classical conditioning.
- Learning associated with two stimuli.
- Associate something we do not fear (neutral stimulus) with something which triggers a fear response (unconditioned stimulus).
- After association formed, conditioned stimulus causes response of fear (conditioned response).
(AO1) - Key study for Behavioural approach?
Watson & Raynor (1920)
Aim: Wether fear response learned classical.
Method: 11 month baby. ‘Little Albert’. No fear to white rat. Struck metal bar with hammer behind head - very loud noise - startled him, when reach for rat. 3x.
Results: showed white rat he cried
Conclusion: Fear response can be induced by classical. Induced/generalised fear to other white fluffy things e.g. santa’s beard
(AO1) - Define operant conditioning.
- Phobias maintained through it
- Phobias can be negatively reinforced
- Unpleasant consequence is removed e.g. going up stairs to avoid lifts (Avoidance)
(AO3) - Points for Behavioural approach to explain and treating phobias?
1) Support - ‘Little Albert’ explain it.
CP: Case study - difficult to generalise.
2) Application to therapy - used develop SD and Flooding. Explain them… using principles of classical and negative reinforcement. Effective in treating, support theory.
3) Ignores role of cognition - irrational thinking, not just learning. e.g. irrational some1 claustrophobic + being trapped in lift. Further., led to development of CBT, far more successful than behaviourist ones.
4) Not complete explanation of phobias - evolutionaryy psycho. factors may play role. Parituclary avoidance of particular stimuluses e.g. snakes. could caused death or pain to ancestors. Some innate - called Biological preparedness . Cast doubt on two-process.
(AO1) - Behavioural approach to treating phobias
- Flooding…
- Systematic desensitisation (SD)…
- Both aim for relaxation
(AO1) - Systematic desensitisation (SD)?
- Counter-conditioning to unlearn maladaptive response by exciting relaxation:
1. Fear hierarchy…
2. Relaxation therapy…
3. Reciprocal inhibition two emotional states cannot exist at same time)…
(AO3) - Points for Systematic desensitisation (SD)?
1) Support - 1990, found 75% patients with phobias such. treated with SD. Particularly in coming into contact with the feared stimulus. Effective, particularly in vivo (direct contact) techniques then simply imagining (vitro).
2) Support - 42 patients, with arachnophobia (fear of spiders). Treated 3x 45 min SD sessions. Examined 3 months & then 33 months later, SD group less fearful than control who only taught relaxation. Provides support.
CP: Not effective with all phobias. Develop through classical (personal expire.) i.e. fear of snakes. Also innate evolutionary. SD ineffective with treating innate.
3) Favoured compared to e.g. flooding, more ethical in nature - patients report preference for SD as not cause same levels of distress - fear-inducing stimulus. instantly providing low attrition rates - SD.
(AO1) - Define flooding
- exposes to anxiety-stimulus immediately
- unable to avoid (negatively reinforce) phobia, anxiety levels reduce. Extinction occur - time-limited with anxiety.
- New positive association with stimulus formed
(AO3) - Points for flooding?
1) Cost-effective - equally effective to SD, but takes less time. Cures phobia quicker + cost-effect. for health care providers.
CP: Considered highly traumatic. Case patient became increasingly anxious refereed hospitalisation. not unethical tho formed, but many not complete so waste money + time if not complete.
2) Less effective for social + agoraphobic phobias - Social caused y irrational thinking + not unpleasant experience not classical. More complex can’t be treated e.g. CBT more responsive.
3) Symptom substitution - Although phobia may have gone, another may replace it. Underlying cause may remain & simply resurface. CP: Research mixed and heavily disputed by Behaviourists.
4) Reductionist - overly simplest explain. for stimulus. environmental deterministic. Free will ignored. or
Nomothetic, more idiographic.
(AO1) - Biological approach to explaining and treating OCD?
- Addresses genetic + neural explanations
(AO1) - Biological approach to explaining OCD: Genetics?
- candiate genes
- OCD is Polygenic, several genes involved
- May others e.g. hoarding or obsession with religion
- COMT (regulating neurone. Dopamine. more common) and SERT (Serotonin causes lower levels of S. in brain. OCD + Depression) gene
(AO1) - Biological approach to explaining OCD: Neural explanations?
(Neurotransmitters):
- Serotonin regulates mood + lower levels. Mood disorders
- anti-depressants (SSRI’s) - Piggot (1990) found drugs increase Serotonin in synaptic gap effective.
- Higher levels Dopamine.
(Brain structure):
- Several regions in frontal lobes abnormal circuits in OCD patients e.g. Basal Ganglia and Orbitofrontal Cortex.
- Basal = cluster neurones i.e. co-ordiantion of movement. Those head injuries OCD.
Orbito = Coverts sensory info. into thought + action. PET scans - higher activity OCD patients when asked hold dirty item.
(AO3) - Points for Biological approach to explaining OCD?
1) Family studies - Lewis (1936), 37% patients OCD had parents with disorder + 21% siblings. Nestadt (2000) 5x more likely develop with first-degree relative. Provides support. CP: Not rule out environmental factors
2) Twin studies support - Billet (1998), meta-analysis 14 twin studies. MZ twins x2 risk, DZ if one pair had disorder.
CP: Concordance not always 100% - Diathesis. may be better explanation WHEREBY GENETIC VUN. INHERITED THEN TRIGGERED.
3) Issue understanding neural mech. in OCD - Research also other brains areas occasionally involved. No brain system consistently found. no cause and effect. Hard see if biological abnormalities cause or result of OCD.
4) Credible alternatives - Two-process model. Explain it. Behavioural treatment success of symptoms improving 60-90% of adults (Albucher 1998)
