Psycopathology Flashcards
statistical deviation-
A definition of abnormality that Implies that a disorder is abnormal if it deviates from the usual common characteristic/behaviour displayed in observations of humans.
A strength of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality is that it has real life application and so is beneficial when determining abnormal behaviour.
Statistical infrequency has been implicated to be an important part of clinical assessment and is almost always used in the clinical diagnoses of mental health disorders as a comparison with a baseline or ‘normal’ value. This is used to assess the severity of the disorder e.g., the idea that Schizophrenia only affects 1% of the general population. Thus, we can successfully distinguish between the severity of different mental disorders resulting in the correct treatment being provided.
However, a limitation of statistical infrequency as a definition is that it assumes that any abnormal characteristics are automatically negative, whereas this is not always the case.
For example, displaying abnormal levels of empathy (and thus qualifying as a Highly Sensitive Person) or having an IQ score above 130 (and thus being a genius) would rarely be looked down upon as negative characteristics which require treatment. Being examples of statistical infrequencies, they would induce the problem of unnecessary labels and so further problems are caused with how they view themselves and how others view them only because the definition determines them as abnormal. Therefore, statistical infrequency cannot be used alone in the diagnosis of abnormal behaviours and would need to be used in conjunction with another definition of abnormality for it to be considered an accurate measure of abnormality. Implications when using this definition would include the factor of it being time consuming for psychologists due to having to use it alongside other definitions for effective diagnosis.
Deviations from social norms-
A definition of abnormality suggests that ‘abnormal’ behaviour is based upon straying away from the social norms specific to a certain culture. There are general norms, applicable to the vast majority of cultures, as well as culture-specific norms.
A limitation to this definition of abnormality is due to its reliance on subjective social norms, meaning the definition also suffers from cultural relativism.
One such example would be the hearing of voices which have no basis in reality, or ‘hallucinations. Some African and Asian cultures in particular would look upon this symptom positively, viewing it as a sign of spirituality and a strong connection with ancestors, as opposed to a symptom of Schizophrenia. This therefore suggests that the use of this definition of abnormality may lead to some discrepancies in the diagnoses of mental health disorders, between cultures. This means that deviation from social norms is limited in its explanation for abnormality and so cannot be used alone when making a diagnosis of such behaviour.
Furthermore, Reliance on this definition of abnormality can lead to the systematic abuse of human rights and social control.
The fact that mental health diagnoses based on this definition vary so significantly between different cultures and has historically led to discrimination, as a mechanism for social control. For example, in the nineteenth century within Great Britain, ‘nymphomania’ described the mental health disorder suffered by women who demonstrated sexual attractions towards working-class men. In reality, this diagnosis was simply made to prevent infidelity, cement the differences between social classes and further discriminate against women, thus being a reflection of a patriarchal society. Consequently, a result of accepting and incorporating this definition can lead to some individuals suffering he detrimental effects of being labelled abnormal. Labelling will also affect the way the individual sees themselves and how others view them.
The failure to function adequately –
A definition of abnormality that was proposed by Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) and suggests that if a person’s current mental state is preventing them from leading a ‘normal’ life, alongside the associated normal levels of motivation and obedience to social norms, then such individuals may be considered as abnormal.
David Rosenham and Martin Seligman (1989)
The 7 aspects to not functioning adequately. #
unpredictability,
maladaptive behaviour,
personal distress,
irrationality,
observer discomfort,
violation of moral standards
unconventionality.
A Strength to this definition is that it considers the patient’s perspective and so the final diagnosis will be compromised of both the patient’s self-reported symptoms and the psychiatrist’s opinion.
The acknowledgement of the patient’s own experience is something that’s very important in assessment of abnormality and so because this definition accounts for it makes it one that captures the experience of many people that require help. This may lead to more accurate diagnoses of mental health disorders because such diagnoses are not constrained by statistical limits, as is the case with statistical infrequency. Thus, the definition, which determines abnormality by a wide range of perspectives including the actual patient, leads to an accurate diagnosis and effective treatment as a result.
However, a limitation to using this definition of abnormality is that it runs the risk of labelling where patients would be known as ‘strange’ or ‘crazy’, increasing the traditional negative stereotypes of abnormality.
It fails to accept that not everyone with a mental health disorder is incapable and so do not need a diagnosis, especially if they live a high-quality life and the illness does not impact themselves or anyone else. Furthermore, labelling also increases the individual’s risk of facing discrimination and prejudice from employers and other people they may meet.
Yet another limitation to this definition of abnormality is that the Failure to function adequately (FFA) may not be linked to abnormality but in fact other factors, such as alternative lifestyles.
For example, new age travellers do not live-in permanent accommodation and may not work. Similarly, spiritualists communicate with the dead. Therefore, reliance of this definition could be mislabelling individuals as abnormal. This again could lead to discrimination and as a result having to experience the negative effects of labelling and limits personal freedom.
FFA is also context dependent and cannot be applied in all situations.
For example, not eating does not describe the inability to function adequately when it comes to prisoners on hunger strikes as a form of protesting. Therefore, in practice other factors will need to be considered and evaluated before using the sole definition of the FFA to determine abnormality.
Deviation from ideal mental health -
A definition of abnormality, proposed by Jahoda (1958). Instead of focusing on abnormality, Jahoda looked at what would comprise the ideal mental state of an individual.
The criteria include being able to (PRAISE)
self-actualise (fulfill one’s Potential, in line with humanism!),
Having a Realistic view of the world
having an Accurate perception of ourselves,
Having Independence
Environmental mastery
A strength of this definition of abnormality as opposed to many others is that it considers and takes into account many aspects in its diagnosis of abnormality.
Including having independence environmental mastery and many other aspects makes the criteria broad when assessing abnormality with this definition. This makes it a good tool when thinking of mental health as its all reasons someone would seek mental health help. Its inclusive assessment criteria ensure an accurate diagnosis and so effective treatment as a result.
A limitation to this definition of abnormality is that Jahoda may have had an unrealistic expectation of ideal mental health, with the vast majority of people being unable to acquire, let alone maintain, all of the criteria listed.
This means that the majority of the population would be considered abnormal, even if they have missed a single criterion e.g. being able to rationally cope with stress. Therefore, deviation from ideal mental health may be considered a very limited method of diagnosing mental health disorders and so cannot be used as a sole definition when diagnosing.
Furthermore, the definition suffers from cultural relativism and so is culturally bound.
For example, the concept of self-actualisation, which suggests that we must each put ourselves first in order to achieve our full potential, may be viewed as selfish in collectivist cultures (e.g. China) where the needs of the group are valued more than the needs of the individual. On the other hand, self-actualisation may be a more popular concept in individualist cultures (e.g. the UK), where personal achievement is celebrated, and the needs of the individual are greater than the needs of the group. This suggests that deviation from ideal mental health would only be accepted as a definition for abnormality in some (individualist) cultures.
The 3 Characteristics of phobias
Behavioural characteristics
Emotional characteristics
Cognitive characteristics
Behavioural characteristics
of phobias
Panic – suffering of heightened response upon exposure to phobic stimulus (screaming, freezing.crying)
Avoidance – making daily life harder by carrying out a series of measure to avoid the unpleasant consequence of exposure to the phobic stimulus.
Endurance – when the patient remains exposed to the phobic stimulus for an extended period and experiences heightened levels of anxiety.
Emotional characteristics of phobias
Anxiety (as a response to the panic being experienced)
Unawareness that the anxiety being endurance is irrational.
Emotional response of fear
Prevents the patient from being able to relax.
The reaction is disproportionate to the fear being posed by the phobic stimulus.
Cognitive characteristics of phobia
Selective attention – the patient remains focused on the phobic stimulus even when it causes them severe anxiety *could be a result of irrational beliefs/cognitive distortions = hard to look away
Irrational beliefs – may be a cause of unreasonable responses of anxiety towards the phobic stimulus due to the patient’s incorrect perception of the danger posed by the phobic stimulus causes fear and pressure.
Cognitive distortions - the patient does not perceive the phobic stimulus accurately therefore it could appear distorted to the individual.
Mowrer’s (1960) two process model
Suggested that phobias are acquired through classical conditioning and reinforced by operant conditioning.
PROCESS
phobics practice avoidance behaviours, meaning that they avoid the phobic stimulus.
By avoiding this phobic stimulus, they avoid the associated fear.
By avoiding such an unpleasant consequence, the avoidance behaviour is negatively reinforced and likely to be repeated again,
hence maintaining the phobia.
Classical conditioning
how a phobia is acquired.
Learning by association occurs by an unlearnt stimulus and a new stimulus are associated with each other.
The new stimulus produces the same response that was once produced by the unlearnt stimulus alone.
Operant conditioning –
Operant conditioning – how a phobia is maintained.
When a behaviour is rewarded or punished
Positive Reinforcement leads to the increased frequency of the behaviour.
Negative reinforcement = a person avoiding an unpleasant situation which is a pleasant response (as they do not experience the fear) - REPEATION of the avoidance behaviour and so the fear is maintained
Little Albert – John Watson and Rosalie Rayner (1920)
Watson and Rayner demonstrated how Little Albert associated the fear caused by a loud bang with a white rat.
He was exposed to a white rat (NS), producing no response.
When paired with the loud bang (UCS),
this produced the UCR of fear.
Through several repetitions, Albert made the association between the rat (CS) and fear (CR).
This conditioning then generalised to other objects e.g. white fluffy Santa Claus hats. Operant conditioning takes place when a behaviour is rewarded or punished.
There is supporting evidence for Mowrer’s two process model by a study conducted by Watson and Rayner in 1920.
Whilst researching phobia’s they created a phobia in a 9-month-old baby called ‘little albert’. ‘little albert’ not having any unusual anxiety to begin with was presented with a loud noise in combination to the presence of a rat to which they were able to condition an unconditioned stimulus with a conditioned response. This supports the two-process model which states the acquisition of a phobia is through classical conditioning as shown through the ‘little albert’ situation. This increases our confidence in Mowrer’s two process model and furthers our understanding in the acquisition of phobias. This has positive implications for society as it expresses the cause of phobias making us aware as a society and so actions can be taken to prevent phobia’s from arising in children.
Furthermore, the two-process model has good explanatory power which has been used to determine the mechanism behind the acquisition and maintenance of phobias, which classical or operant conditioning alone cannot do.
. This translates to practical benefits in systematic desensitisation and flooding. Mowrer emphasises the importance of exposing the patient to the phobic stimulus because this prevents the negative reinforcement of avoidance behaviour. The patient realises that the phobic stimulus is harmless and that their responses are irrational/disproportionate, thus translating into a successful therapy.
However, there are alternative explanations for avoidance behaviour.
For example, Buck suggested that safety is a greater motivator for avoidance behaviour, rather than simply avoiding the anxiety associated with the phobic stimulus. For example, he uses the example of social anxiety phobias - such sufferers can venture out into public but only with a trusted friend, despite still being exposed to hundreds of strangers which would usually trigger their anxiety. This means that Mowrer’s explanation of phobias may be incomplete and only suited for some and are limited when explaining the avoidance behaviour.
Furthermore, there is alternative explanations for the acquisition of phobias.
Seligman suggested that we are more likely to develop phobias towards ‘prepared’ stimuli. These are stimuli which would have posed a threat to our evolutionary ancestors, such as fire or deep water, and so running away from such a stimulus increases the likelihood of survival and reproduction, and so this behaviour has a selective evolutionary advantage. This means that alternative theories can explain why some phobias (i.e. towards prepared stimuli) are much more frequent than other phobias (i.e. towards unprepared stimuli) and limits Mowrer’s explanation which doesn’t take this into account and instead suggests that the phobia is learnt.
Systematic desensitisation
definition
Systematic desensitisation is a behavioural therapy designed to reduce phobic anxiety through gradual exposure to the phobic stimulus. It relies upon the principle of counterconditioning — learning a new response to the phobic stimulus - one of relaxation rather than panic.
systematic desensitisation STAGES
This works due to reciprocal inhibition; it’s impossible to be both relaxed and anxious at the same time.
Firstly, the patient and therapist draw up an anxiety hierarchy together, made up of situations involving the phobic stimulus, ordered from least to most nerve-wrecking.
The therapist then teaches the patient relaxation techniques e.g. breathing techniques and meditation, to be used at each of these anxiety levels.
The patient works their way up through the hierarchy, only progressing to the next level when they have remained calm in the present level.
The phobia is cured when the patient can remain calm at the highest anxiety level
