Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Psychopathology - Definitions of Abnormality (Failure to Function…
Psychopathology -
Definitions of Abnormality
Deviation from Social Norms
Social norms are expected, unspoken behaviours within society
ex: manners, respecting personal space
implicit social norms: unwritten norms that everybody follows
explicit social norms: strictly spoken rules/laws
abnormal behaviour = behaviour that violates or does not conform to social norms
ex: showing inappropriate emotion (laughing at death)
Evaluation
Strengths
ensures people get help as it is easy for people to establish whether someone is violating social norms, whether or not the individual is aware
situational (environment) and developmental (age) norms are taken into account
Weaknesses
social norms are subjective and are at best based on the majority opinion, or at worst, the ruling class in society
social norms change over time as they are based on morals, which also change (e.g. homosexuality, racism)
culture bias: largely based on the social norms of a western society - other cultures may not see abnormal behaviours as abnormals (ignores cultural relativity)
can lead to ethnocentric bias in diagnosis :red_flag: Cochrane: black people in Britain more often diagnosed with schizophrenia, whereas very rare in Jamaica
Failure to Function Adaquately
regards abnormality to be an inability to cope with day-to-day living
individuals are unable to perform everyday tasks, form/maintain relationships or attend to own physical needs
:red_flag: Rosenhan and Seligman: 7 abnormal features
personal distress (experienced with depression/anxiety)
maladaptive behaviour (stops individual from attaining life goals)
unpredictability (loss of control)
irrationality (behaviour that cannot be rationally explained)
unconventionality (unusual/eccentric behaviour)
observer discomfort
violation of moral standards (goes against social norms)
the more features one has, the more abnormal
clinicians often use the GAF scale, which rates social, psychological and occupational functioning from 1 to 100
Evaluation
strengths
most people seek help when the behaviours start to interfere with everyday life
recognises personal experience, does not generalise sufficient functioning
weaknesses
abnormality is not always accompanied by a dysfunction (psychopaths can appear very normal and functioning)
some of the 7 features are subjective, different characteristics equate to adequate functioning depending on the person (social norms, maladaptive behaviour)
cultural bias: features of abnormality are based on western culture, adequate functioning may vary between cultures
Deviation from Ideal Mental Health
:red_flag: Jahoda looked at the positives of mental health rather than mental illness
identified 6 criteria for ideal mental health
positive attitude towards oneself (self-respect and good self-concept)
self-actualisation (achieved full potential)
autonomy (able to be independent and self-reliant)
resisting stress (having effective coping strategies and cope with everyday anxiety-provoking situations)
accurate perception of reality (non-distorted, objective and realistic)
environmental mastery (being competent with all aspects of life and having flexibility to adapt)
if someone does not meet all six aspects, they are seen as abnormal
relies on self-reports
Evaluation
strengths
emphasises the importance of mental health
identifies what is needed for normality, allows the creation of personal goals
weaknesses
has an over-demanding criteria that most people don't meet
self-reports are subjective, difficult to measure and vauge
culturally biased (different cultures value different things - individualist = autonomy, collectivist = communal goals)
Statistical Infrequency
considers behaviours/characteristics to be statistically rare in order to be abnormal
therefore have to be able to be measured and assigned a value/score
any score has to be more than 2 standard deviations away from the mean
only occurs in 5% of the population
Evaluation
strengths
quantative data is objective as it based on real, unbiased data
no value judgements as an abnormality is just considered less frequent, not wrong/unacceptable
weaknesses
2 people who are only one score apart will be labelled as completely different
not all infrequent behaviours are abnormal, ex = high intelligence
not all abnormalities are infrequent, ex = depression in 20%