Psychopathology

Question 1

OCD – Biological explanations (Genetic)

Answer 1

• OCD is 5 times more likely to develop in first degree relatives with the disorder than those that don’t.
• Twin studies (Billet et al 1998) show a concordance rate of 57% for monozygotic but only 22% for dizygotic twins.
• Don’t explain the differences between obsessions and compulsions.
• Too simplistic there is a gene for OCD due to it potentially being a learnt behaviour (Two Process Model).

Question 2

OCD – Biological explanations (Neural)

Answer 2

• Brain imaging of people with OCD shows hyperactivity in the orbitofrontal cortex which plays a role in learning and decision making compared to those without the disorder.
• Max et al (1995) A young adolescent developed OCD after traumatic brain injury and damage in the frontal and temporal lobe was discovered (linked to development of OCD)
• Correlational relationships don’t imply causation.
• Scientific evidence
• Small sample can’t be generalised
• Individual differences
• Aylward et al (1996) patients with OCD showed no structural or functional differences in caudate nucleus

Question 3

OCD – Biological explanations (Drug Therapies)

Answer 3

• Anti-anxiety drugs (anxiolytics) like Valium increase levels of GABA which inhibits neurons and helps people calm down.
• Anti-depressants like sertraline help boost mood and reduce tendency to worry.
• Soomro et al (2008) reviewed 17 studies and SSRIs proved to be effective in the short term (3 months)
• Side effects of drug therapy (mild)
• Take 4-6 weeks to take effect.
• Large sample
• Practical applications
• Treats symptoms not the case
• Koran et al (2007) CBT should be used first to provide long-term effects.

Question 4

Phobias – Behavioural explanations (Little Albert - Watson and Raynor 1920) (P&F)

Answer 4

• Classical conditioning causes the development of phobias.
• Watson argued that environmental factors are significant to the development of behaviour which was contradictory to Darwin’s evolutionary theory.
• Little Albert was classically conditioned to fear rats following the association to a frightening loud noise.
• The loud noise was the unconditioned stimulus that caused an unconditioned response of fear.
• The white rat was the neutral stimulus but became the conditioned stimulus to cause little Albert fear.
• This fear was associated to other stimuli eg. Fur coat and father’s Christmas mask.
• Pavlov added conditioned associations can fade if not reinforced (extinction) and this conditioned association can be linked to wider stimuli (generalised).
• Albert was withdrawn from experiment before the conditioned responce could be reversed.

Question 5

Phobias – Behavioural explanations (Little Albert - Watson and Raynor 1920) Evaluation

Answer 5

• No control subject/no objective measurement of fear responce
• Low external validity (Albert’s enviroment isn’t representative leading to a unique response)
• Lack of consent
• Lack of protection from psychological harm
• Reductionist limiting it to stimulus responce
• ignores mental processes (cognitive)
• Tomarken et al (1989) presented snake and neutral images to phobic and non-phobic participants, Phobics overestimated the number of snake images.
• Seligman (1970) Biological preparedness developed due to evolution (adaptive to past)