psychopathology 1 Flashcards
what is abnormality?
behaviour which is considered deviant from what is considered normal
what are definitions of abnormality?
ways to identify if a person’s behaviour deviates from normal behaviour
what are the four definitions of abnormality?
-statistical infrequency
-deviation from social norms
-failure to function adequately
-deviation from ideal mental heath
what does the statistical infrequency definition argue?
that behaviours that are statistically rare should be seen as abnormal
when is something classed as statistically rare?
it depends on normal distribution:
-most people will be around the mean for the behaviour, with declining amounts of people away from the mean
-any individual who falls outside ‘the normal distribution (usually about 5% of the population) are perceived as being abnormal
how is abnormality determined?
(statistical infrequency)
abnormality is determined by looking at the distribution of a particular behaviour within society
example of statistical infrequency as a definition:
IQ
statistical infrequency: IQ
-if we took a representative sample of adults in the UK, we would find approx 65% of adults with n IQ score somewhere between 85 and 115 (considered normal as it is what most people score)
-only 2.5% of the sample would have scores that fall at either extreme of the normal distribution curve
(eg: there would be 2.5% with a very low score and 2.5% with a very high score)
ends of the IQ spectrum:
-both ends of the spectrum would be considered “abnormal” because so few people achieve these scores
-those in the bottom 2.5% are likely to be labelled as having intellectual disability disorder (mental retardation)
statistical infrequency
(percentages)
-around 68% of people fall between 15 points of 100
-around 95% of people fall between 30 points of 100
-less than 5% are at the extremes
strength of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality:
an objective measure of abnormality and a useful assessment tool
ao3 / strength - an objective measure of abnormality and a useful assessment tool
P - an objective measure of abnormality and a useful assessment tool
E - due to its mathematical nature, it’s clear what’s defined as abnormal (2.5%)
↳ in assessing those with mental illness there is usually a measure of the severity of symptoms to compare to statistical norms
↳ eg: in the Beck depression inventory (BDI), a score of 30+ (top 5% of respondents) is widely interpreted as indicating severe depression
L - this is strength because statistical deviation is a useful part of clinical assessment and it is not based on subjective opinion so it is free from bias
criticisms of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality:
-the definition fails to distinguish between desirable and undesirable behaviours (not all infrequent behaviours are abnormal)
-not all abnormal behaviours are infrequent
-there is no consideration of cultural differences
ao3 / criticism - the definition fails to distinguish between desirable and undesirable behaviours
P - not all infrequent behaviours are seen as abnormal
E - IQ scores over 130 are just as unusual as those below 70, but we wouldn’t think of super-intelligence as an undesirable characteristic that needs treatment
↳ just because very few people display certain characteristics (statistically abnormal) doesn’t mean it requires treatment to return to normal
L - this is a serious limitation to the concept of statistical infrequency and means it would never to used alone to make a diagnosis
ao3 / criticism - not all abnormal behaviours are infrequent
P - not all abnormal behaviours are infrequent
E - some behaviours are seen as abnormal even though they are statistically frequent
↳ (eg: depresssion) 27% of elderly people are thought to suffer from depression and 25% of the population will experience depression or mental illness at some point in their lives
L - therefore the statistical infrequency definition of abnormality is not always accurate as it can’t always identify abnormal behaviour
ao3 / criticism - there is no consideration of cultural differences
P - there’s no consideration of cultural differences
E - beliefs about abnormality differ between cultures, what is acceptable in one culture may be seen as abnormal in another
↳ this definition argues that the population of the world are contained within the normal distribution
↳ this means that an abnormality could be seen as widespread in one culture because of its comparison with the rest of the world (eg: hearing voices of spirits is highly valued in some cultures but a western society would view this as abnormal behaviour)
L - therefore the definition of statistical deviation is culturally relative
what are social norms and who are they set by & followed by?
rules that society has about how people should think and behave
↳ set by that social group, and followed by those socialised in that group
what two things can social norms be?
explicit (set down as conducts or laws, breaking these rules may result in punishment)
implicit (understood but not stated formally)
what is cultural relativism?
the idea that cultural norms and values are culture specific and no-one culture is
superior to another culture
↳ this means there are few behaviours would be considered universally abnormal on the basis that they breach social norms
what is deviation from social norms as a definition of abnormality?
-any behaviour that varies from social norms in that community may be seen as abnormal hat socie
what is the difference between statistical infrequency and deviation from social
norms?
the deviation from social norms definition distinguishes between socially desirable and undesirable behaviours
what is an example of deviation from social norms?
antisocial personality disorder (or psychopathy)
how does a person with antisocial personality disorder act?
the person is impulsive, aggressive and only pleases themselves
an important symptom of antisocial personality disorder:
(in the DSM)
an absence of prosocial internal standards and a failure to conform to lawful or culturally ethical behaviour
why do we define psychopaths as abnormal based on deviating from social norms?
psychopaths don’t conform to our moral standards
strengths of deviation from social norms:
-the definition is flexible dependent on the situation and time
-it is a useful definition
ao3 / strength - the definition is flexible dependent on the situation and time
P - the definition depends on the situation and time, it allows the consideration of the social dimensions and desirability of a behaviour (statistical infrequency doesn’t)
E - a social norm is to wear full clothing whilst out shopping, but a bikini is acceptable on a beach
L - this is a strength because it allows for our understanding that a behaviour may be normal or desirable in one situation but not another
↳ this means that this definition may be preferred over statistical infrequency
ao3 / strength - it is a useful definition
P - one strength of deviation from social norms is its usefulness
E - deviation from social norms is used in clinical practice
↳ the key defining characteristic of antisocial personality disorder is the failure to conform to culturally normal ethical behaviour
↳ these signs of the disorder are all deviations from social norms
L - this shows that the deviation from social norms criterion has value in psychiatry
criticisms of deviation from social norms:
-the definition is culturally relative
-social norms change over time
ao3 / criticism - the definition is culturally relative
P - the definition is culturally relative
E - cultural relativism means it applies to culture where the definition was created.
↳ social norms and judgements will always vary from culture to culture
↳ what is considered normal in one culture may be abnormal in another
↳ (eg: the experience of hearing voices is the norm in some cultures (as messages from ancestors) but would be seen as a sign of abnormality in the UK
L - this suggests that this definition cannot be applied universally to label abnormal behaviour because every culture is different, which could lead to different assumptions of what abnormality is
↳ this means that this definition of abnormality is not standardised
ao3 / criticism - social norms change over time
P - an issue is that social norms change over time
E - this means that behaviour that would have been defined as abnormal in one era is no longer defined as abnormal in another
↳ eg: homosexuality was considered a psychological disorder by the World Health Organisation until 1992, but today it is not
↳ this is an example of groups of people being called abnormal for simply failing to meet social norms → problematic
L - this means that we cannot truly define any certain act as ‘abnormal’ because as norms change, therefore so must our beliefs about what constitutes’ abnormal’ behaviour
Mark is a practising Pagan. He lives alone and works as an IT consultant, doing most of his work at home and communicating via the Internet. His IQ is 145 (placing him in the top 1% of the population) and measures of depression are around average.
- Based on statistical deviation and deviation from social norms, would you say that there is a case for judging Mark to be abnormal? Explain your answer.
According to the statistical infrequency criterion, there is a case for Mark being abnormal.
↳ his IQ places him in the top 1% of the population, which is very unusual
According to the deviation from social norms criterion Mark may also be considered abnormal
↳ he has relatively little direct contact with other people and practises a religion that is low in social acceptability (in most circles)
- why is there a good case for not classifying Mark as abnormal at all?
-on the other hand, measures of Mark’s mental health are in the normal range and he earns a good living
-his religion is best considered a lifestyle choice and although his IQ is unusual, it is a positive characteristic
↳ based on this information Mark would not be considered abnormal
what is failure to function adequately as a definition of abnormality?
this definition perceives individuals as abnormal when their behaviour suggests they cannot cope with the demands of everyday life
↳ if a person can’t cope with demands and is also experiencing distress (or others are distressed by their behaviour) then it is considered a sign of abnormality
examples behaviours of someone who is functioning adequately:
-eating regularly
-washing clothes
-being able to communicate with others
-having some degree of control over your life
what are examples of features of abnormality?
(+ who proposed them)
D - distress (someone’s behaviour causes distress to themselves or discomfort for others observing their behaviour)
U - unpredictable behaviour (when someone’s behaviour is unexpected and does not fit the situation)
M - maladaptive behaviour (where someone’s behaviour isn’t good for them)
↳ this characteristic is central to the FFA definition
I - irrational behaviour (a person’s behaviour doesn’t make sense to other people)
(rosenhan & seligman -1989)
(
what is an example of someone who meets the features of abnormality?
-someone who is suffering from depression may struggle to get out of bed in the morning and go to work & find it difficult to communicate with family
-consequently, they would be considered abnormal as their depression is causing an inability to cope with the demands of everyday life (going to work), while their behaviour may also causing distress and discomfort to family members and friends
which example do we use in exams for failure to function adequately?
schizophrenia:
-a person can have disturbing hallucinations which can lead to bizarre behaviour
-individuals experience distress and they can be irrational and unpredictable around other people
strength of failure to function adequately:
it’s relatively easy to judge objectively through an assessment of criteria
ao3 / strength - it’s relatively easy to judge objectively through an assessment of criteria
P - it’s relatively easy to judge objectively through an assessment of criteria (WHODAS)
E - individuals rate themselves on a scale of 1-5 on 36 measures → this gives a quantitative measure of functioning
↳therefore, practitioners can decide who needs psychiatric help (treatment) for their mental abnormality in an objective way
L - this improves the validity of this definition
criticisms of failure to function adequately:
-this definition does not apply to everyone whose behaviour is abnormal
-many people engage in behaviour that is maladaptive/harmful or threatening to self, but we don’t class them as abnormal
ao3 / criticism - this definition does not apply to everyone whose behaviour is abnormal
P - this definition does not apply to everyone whose behaviour is abnormal
E - abnormality is not always accompanied by dysfunction → eg: psychopaths can commit murder and still appear normal
↳ harold shipman was an English doctor (eventually diagnosed with psychopathy) who killed at least 215 patients over the 23 years whilst maintaining a respected appearance (he functioned adequately)
↳ therefore he would not meet the criteria for abnormality for this definition
E - some people with clinical depression, for example, are usually able to work, look after their families and behave rationally (therefore they wouldn’t meet the criteria)
L - this casts doubt on failure to function adequately as a valid measure of abnormality
ao3 / criticism - many people engage in behaviour that is maladaptive/harmful or threatening to self, but we don’t class them as abnormal
P - many people engage in behaviour that is maladaptive/harmful or threatening to self, but we don’t class them as abnormal
E - partaking in adrenaline sports, smoking, drinking alcohol, skipping classes doesn’t make someone abnormal
↳ behaviour must be considered in context before it can be judged as failure to function adequately
↳ eg: going on a hunger strike would cause personal distress but it is not necessarily psychologically abnormal
L - it is important to view a behaviour with the aspects that have lead to it (context) as solely looking at the behaviour may lead to the wrong conclusion
how does deviation from ideal mental health as a definition of abnormality work?
-rather than identifying what is abnormal, Jahoda researched and identified six characteristics considered as good signs of mental health
-an absence of these characteristics indicates abnormality
when is deviation from ideal mental health more extreme?
the more of the criteria an individual fails to meet, the further away from normality they are
what are jahoda’s characteristics of mental health?
-positive attitudes towards the self
-self actualisation of ones potential
-resistance to stress (coping strategies)
-personal autonomy (independence)
-accurate perception of reality
-mastery of the environment