Psychopathology Flashcards
Definition of Abnormality
A psychological/ behavioural state leading to impairment of interpersonal functioning and/or distress to others.
Definitions of Abnormality: Statistical infrequency
Statistical norms: any commonly seen behaviour or characteristic amongst the population.
Statistical infrequency: rare occurrences among the population.
-Someone is abnormal if their trait, thinking or behaviour is statistically rare & infrequent.
-This is an objective, mathematical method.
Normal distribution
A symmetrical spread of data frequency that forms a bell-shaped pattern.
The mean, median & mode are all located at the highest peak.
IQ & intellectual disability disorder
-Average IQ is set at 100.
-Most people (68%) have a score ranging from 85-115.
-Only 2% have a score below 70.
-These individuals are ‘abnormal’ and can receive a diagnosis of a psychological disorder - intellectual disability disorder (IDD).
-95% fall within 2 standard deviations of the mean.
Strength of SI: Useful in clinical practice
-Used in clinical as part of formal diagnosis & to assess severity of symptoms.
-E.g. IDD requires an IQ of below 70z
-Beck depression inventory tool is used to assess severe depression with a score of 30+ (top 5%) of respondents.
Shows value of SI criterion is useful in diagnosis.
Limitation of SI: Unusual characteristics can be positive
Statistical infrequent characteristics can be positive too.
-People with an IQ above 130 is also unusual, but not considered abnormal.
-Being unusual at one end of the psychological spectrum does not necessarily someone abnormal.
Not sufficient as a sole basis to define abnormality.
Strength of SI: Benefits of ‘abnormality’
-Someone who has a low IQ and is diagnosed with IDD can access support services or someone with high BDI may access therapy.
-Counter: Not all statistically unusual people benefit from labels. Someone with a low IQ who can cope with their lifestyle may not need a label. Leads to social stigma & self-fulfilling prophecy.
Definitions of Abnormality: Deviation from social norms
Social norms: unwritten rules for acceptable behaviour, but also can be policed by laws.
Deviation from social norms: defines abnormality by behaviour thats different from the accepted standards in society (against the norm).
Norms are culturally specific
-Few behaviours that would be considered universally abnormal on the basis that they breach social norms.
-E.g. homosexuality was considered abnormal in our culture and is still viewed that way in some cultures & is even illegal.
-> April 2019, Brunei introduced law that make sex between men and women offence punishable by stoning to death.
Example: antisocial personality disorder
-A person with this is impulsive, aggressive & irresponsible.
-According to DSM-5 (manual by psychiatrists to diagnose mental disorder), an important symptom of antisocial personality, is absence of pro social internal standard (failure to conform to lawful/acceptable behaviour).
-Social judgement that psychopaths abnormal for not conforming to our moral standards.
Strength of Deviation from social norms: Useful in clinical practice
-Key defining characteristic of antisocial personality, is failure to conform to acceptable behaviour (ie. recklessness,aggression).
-These are deviating from norms.
-Also plays part in diagnosis of schizotypal personality disorder where the term ‘strange’ is used to characterise the thinking, behaviour & appearance of people with the disorder.
Shows value in psychiatry.
Limitation of Deviation from social norms: Cultural & situational relativism
Limited due to variability between norms in diff cultures and situations.
-A person from 1 cultural group may label someone from another group abnormal to their standards.
-E.g. hearing voices is the norm in some cultures as messages from ancestors/religious messages, but would be a sign of abnormality in UK.
-E.g. Finishing food on a plate is respectful in British culture, but in India, it’s a sign of hunger.
-Aggressive and deceitful behaviour is not acceptable in family, but more so in context of corporate deal-making.
Difficult to judge deviations across cultures and situations.
Limitation of Deviation from social norms: Norms change
A behaviour that broke social norms in 1950, may be normal today.
-E.g. an unmarried mother in 40s, would break norms and classified abnormal, and these women were sectioned as ‘moral imbeciles’ and society demanded they give up their babies.
-women being attracted to working class men was considered a disorder called nymphomania
-The individuals don’t change, but the classification of behaviour does.
Lacks reliability as it doesn’t consistently produce an accurate definition of aboral behaviour over time.
Definitions of abnormality: Failure to function adequately
Maladaptiveness: failure to fucntion adequately.
-States abnormal behaviour is when an individual can’t cope with everyday life.
-Acknowledges people may act differently if they can’t manage everyday life.
Rosenhan & Seligman (1989) - 7 features
Focusses on; no conforming to standard interpersonal rules, severe personal distress and irrational behaviour.
7 features:
1. Personal distress i.e depression + anxiety
2. Maladaptive behaviour: stops them from attaining their goals
3. Unpredictability: (impulsive behaviour)
4. Irrationality
5. Observer discomfort
6. Violation of moral standards
7. Unconventionality
Intellectual disability disorder
-One definition isn’t enough to make a diagnosis, an individual must also be failing to function adequately before being given a diagnosis.
-Elements from all 4 definitions should be used.
Strength of FTFA: Represents threshold for help
Represents a sensible threshold for when people need professional help.
-Most of us have symptoms of mental disorder from time to time.
-Charity mind says around 25% will experience a MH issue.
-Tends to be when it’s extremely severe, and we can’t function, that people seek help.
Criteria means treatment & services can be targeted to those who need them most.
Limitation of FTFA: Discrimination & social control
Easy to label non-standard lifestyle choices as abnormal.
-Hard to say who’s functioning inadequately & who simply deviates from norms.
-E.g. someone who doesn’t have a job/address might be FTF but some may want to live “off-grid.”
-E.g. some people favour high risk leisure activities which could be classed irrational.
Means people who make unusual choices are at risk of being labelled abnormal and their freedom of choice may be restricted.
Limitation of FTFA: FTF may not be abnormal
Some circumstances where most of us fail to cope for a period of time (ie. Bereavement).
-Might be unfair to label someone because of how they react to difficult circumstances.
-However, someone’s distress, irrational ti etc is no less real simply due to a clear cause.
-And, some may require professional help to adjust to circumstances like bereavement.
Sometimes necessary to label someone abnormal, but not always clear when to do so.
Definitions of abnormality: Deviation from Ideal mental health
-Another way to look at this is to ignore abnormality and focus on what makes anyone ‘normal’.
-Once we have an idea of how psychologically healthy we can be, we can see who deviates from this.
Ideal mental health - Jahoda (1968)
Good mental health if:
-No symptoms or distress
-Rational and perceive selves accurately
-Self-actualise
-Cope with stress
-Realistic view of the world
-Good self-esteem & lack guikty
-Independent
-Successfully work, love & enjoy leisure
Strength of IMH: Comprehensive definition
-Jahoda’s definition included criteria for distinguishing MH from mental disorder.
-Covers most the reasons why we might seek help with MH.
-Means MH can be discussed with professionals who take diff theoretical views (ie. Medically trained psychiatrist might focus on symptoms whereas a humanistic counsellor might focus on self-actualisation).
Means IMH provides checklist against which we can assess ourselves against.
Limitation of IMH: Culture-bound
Different events are not equally applicable across a range of cultures.
-Some of Jahoda’s criteria are based on context of US & Europe.
-Concept of self-actualisation is central to individualist cultures rather than collectivist cultures who prioritise community.
-In Germany, there’s more independence but in Italy, there’s less.
-Definitions of success, socially and economically differs.
Means it’s difficult to apply concept of IMH across cultures.
Limitation of IMH: Extremely high standards
-Few of us achieve all of his criteria for MH, and probably none acheuve all of them at the same time or keep them up for long.
-Disheartening to see an impossible set of standards to live up to.
-However, having a comprehensive set of criteria to live up to may be of practical value to help someone improve their MH.
Phobias
Phobia: irrational fear of an object or situation.
-a part of ‘anxiety disorders’.
-virtually any object can become a fear object.
DSM-5 categories of phobia
-Specific phobia: phobia of an object, (animal or body part) or of situation (flying).
-Social anxiety (social phobia): phobia of social situation (public speaking/toilet).
-Agoraphobia: phobia of being outside or in a public place.
Behavioural characteristics of Phobia
Panic:
-may cry, scream, run away.
-children might freeze, cling etc.
Avoidance:
-unless person makes conscious effort to face their fear, they tend to make an effort to avoid contacting phobic stimulus.
-makes it hard to go about daily life.
-E.g. person who fears public toilets, may limit their time outside.
Endurance:
-opposite of avoidance.
-person remains in presence of phobic stimulus.
-E.g. person with arachnophobia may remain in room with spider and keep a wary eye on it.
Emotional characteristics of Phobias
Anxiety:
-involve an emotional response of anxiety (unpleasant state of arousal).
-prevents a person relaxing and makes hard to experience positive emotions.
-long term.
Fear:
-immediate & extremely unpleasant response we experience when we encounter/ think about phobic stimulus.
-more intense but lasts shorter periods than anxiety.
Emotional response is unreasonable:
-anxiety/fear is much greater than is ‘normal’ & disproportionate to any threat posed.
-E.g. a person with arachnophobia will have a strong emotional response to a tiny spider.
