Schizophrenia - The interactionist approach

Question 1

what does the interactionist approach main models

Answer 1

Diathesis - stress model

Meehl’s model

Question 2

Explain the diathesis stress model

Answer 2

vulnerability + trigger = SZ

original - diathesis was entirely the result of a single schizogene

Question 3

Explain Meehl’s model

Answer 3

Meehl argued that someone without the schizogene should never develop SZ no matter how much stress they were exposed to but a person will this gene is vulnerable to the effects of chronic stress
The schizogene is necessary but not sufficient for the development of SZ

Question 4

What is the modern understanding for diathesis

Answer 4

diathesis is not due to a single schizogene gene and that many genes increase venerability and it dosent have to be genetic it could be early psychological trauma affecting brain development e.g. child abuse increases stress?

Question 5

What is the modern understanding for stress

Answer 5

anything that risks triggering SZ e.g cannabis as it interfere with the dopamine system

Question 6

What treatment for SZ according to the interactionist approach

Answer 6

Antipsychotic medication and CBT

Question 7

What study looks at treatment

Answer 7

Turkington et al (2006) suggests it is possible to believe in the biological causes for SZ and still practice CBT to relive psychological symptoms this requires adopting an interactionist approach not purely biological as you cannot tell someone their symptoms are biological and then treat them with CBT

Question 8

Give four evaluation points of the interactionist approach

Answer 8

1. support for the joint role of vulnerability + stress
2. we dont know exactly how diathesis and stress work
3. usefullness of the interaction approach in treatment
4. treatment-causation fallacy

Question 9

Explain support for the joint role of vulnerability + stress using a study

Answer 9

Tienari et al (2004)

Question 10

What did Tienari et al (2004) do

Answer 10

studied adopted kids from SZ mothers

parenting styles were assessed + compared with control group of adoptees with no greater risk

Question 11

What did Tienari et al (2004) find

Answer 11

A child-rearing style with high levels or criticism and conflict and low levels of empathy was implicated in the development of SZ but only for children with a high genetic risk

Question 12

Tienari et al (2004) so what?

Answer 12

This is strong direct support for the IA as it shows genetic vulnerability and family-related stress combine in the development of SZ

Question 13

explain we dont know exactly how diathesis and stress work as a limitation

Answer 13

we don’t understand mechanisms by which symptoms of SZ appear and how both vulnerability + stress produce them it docent undermine the approach but it does mean we have an incomplete understanding of the actual mechanism

Question 14

Explain treatment-causation fallacy as a limitation

Answer 14

it means that the superior outcomes of combined therapies should not be over-interpreted in terms of supporting the interactionist approach.
e.g. drugs help with SZ but it doesn’t mean SZ is biological in origin

Question 15

Explain usefulness of the interaction approach in treatment as a strength using a study

Answer 15

Tarrier et al 2004

Question 16

What did Tarrier et al 2004 do

Answer 16

randomly allocated 315 patients to eight medication CBT + group or medication + supportive counselling or a control group

Question 17

What did Tarrier et al 2004 find

Answer 17

Patients in the 2 combined groups showed lower symptom levels than those in the control group (medication only) - but no difference in hospital readmission

Question 18

What does Tarrier et al 2004 and studies like this show

Answer 18

there is a clear practical advantage to adopting interactionist approach in the form of superior outcomes