Psychopathology- Phobias Flashcards
When does a person cross the line between ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ in terms of functioning?
A person crosses the line when they can no longer cope with the demands of everyday life and fail to function adequately.
What are some signs that a person is not functioning adequately?
-Unable to maintain basic standards of nutrition and hygiene.
-Cannot hold down a job.
-Struggles to maintain relationships with people around them.
What signs did Rosenhan & Seligman (1989) propose to identify when someone is not coping?
-When a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules (e.g., maintaining eye contact, respecting personal space).
-When a person experiences severe personal distress.
-When a person’s behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous to themselves or others.
How does intellectual disability disorder relate to failure to function adequately?
A diagnosis of intellectual disability disorder is not based on low IQ alone (statistical deviation). The individual must also be failing to function adequately to receive a diagnosis.
How does deviation from ideal mental health define abnormality?
Instead of focusing on abnormality, this approach defines what makes someone ‘normal’ and identifies those who deviate from this ideal.
What criteria for ideal mental health did Marie Jahoda (1958) propose?
-No symptoms or distress.
-Rational thinking and accurate perception of oneself.
-Self-actualisation (reaching one’s potential).
-Ability to cope with stress.
-A realistic view of the world.
-Good self-esteem and lack of guilt.
-Independence from other people.
-Ability to work, love, and enjoy leisure successfully.
How do failure to function adequately and deviation from ideal mental health overlap?
Both definitions can apply to certain situations. For example, an inability to keep a job could be seen as a failure to cope with work pressures or as a deviation from the ideal of successfully working.
What is a strength of failure to function adequately?
It includes the subjective experience of the individual, making it a useful criterion for assessing abnormality.
Why is the inclusion of subjective experience important?
Although distress is difficult to measure, acknowledging the individual’s experience makes this definition relevant for those who need help.
How can failure to function adequately overlap with deviation from social norms?
Some behaviours (e.g., unemployment, alternative lifestyles, extreme sports, religious beliefs) could be seen as failing to function, but this may actually be a matter of personal freedom and not abnormality.
What is a problem with using this definition to classify behaviours as abnormal?
It risks limiting personal freedom and discriminating against minority groups.
Why are subjective judgments an issue in defining failure to function adequately?
A psychiatrist or clinician must judge whether a person is distressed, but some individuals may feel distressed even if they are not diagnosed as suffering.
How do professionals try to make judgments about functioning more objective?
They use checklists such as the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale to assess a person’s ability to function.
What is a key issue with allowing professionals to make judgments about a person’s functioning?
It gives them the power to determine if someone is abnormal, which can lead to misdiagnosis.
What is a strength of deviation from ideal mental health?
Why is comprehensiveness a strength?
It includes most reasons why someone would seek help or be referred for treatment, making it a useful tool for assessing mental health.
What is a limitation of Jahoda’s criteria in terms of cultural relativism?
Many of her ideas about mental health are specific to Western cultures and do not apply globally.
How does cultural bias affect the definition of ideal mental health?
* Self-actualisation (personal achievement) is valued in individualistic cultures but seen as self-indulgent in collectivist cultures.
* Independence is viewed positively in Western cultures but negatively in many non-Western societies that prioritise community and family.
Why does this definition set an unrealistically high standard for mental health?
Few people meet all of Jahoda’s criteria, and most do not achieve them all at the same time or maintain them consistently.
What is a positive aspect of setting high standards for mental health?
It highlights areas where individuals could benefit from seeking treatment, such as counselling.
What is a negative consequence of setting such high standards?
It may label almost everyone as abnormal, making the definition impractical.
How can labelling be a problem in failure to function adequately?
Diagnosing someone as failing to cope can create a lasting label that impacts their future (e.g., employment, relationships, financial stability).
Why might labelling someone as abnormal be unhelpful?
If someone is struggling due to a temporary situation (e.g., job loss, relationship breakup), labelling them as abnormal can worsen their difficulties instead of helping them.
This set includes every detail from your original text while breaking down long answers into clear, concise questions and responses. Let me know if you want any further adjustments!
It is a comprehensive definition that covers a broad range of criteria for mental well-being.
