Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Evaluation Of Gottesman 2011 - Coggle Diagram
Evaluation Of Gottesman
2011
Sample
The sample was 2.7 million people from Denmark. Although this seems a large sample, out of all these people only 196 couples within this both had schizophrenia (270 children) and only 86 couples both had bipolar disorder (146 children)
8006 couples (14,000 children) where one parent had schizophrenia.
12,000 couples (23,000 children) where one parent had bipolar disorder.
Being an entirely Danish sample means there is a debate whether it can be generalised to a wider population.
Contains both males and females, presumably from different socioeconomic backgrounds and career types. This allows it to be more generalisable.
Determinism
Labelling a child at a young age as being more likely to develop a mental disorder such as schizophrenia may have some deterministic effects. Despite having the intention to be precautionary, this may induce a self fulfilling prophecy. The child may start to display negative symptoms of schizophrenia such as self isolation due to the fact that they have been told they are at risk of becoming ill.
Socially Sensitive
Social sensitivity is massive within this research.
On one hand this is very good as it can be precautionary for parents who are more likely to have children who have a mental disorder- they can prepare and then look out for symptoms early on so the disorder can be managed with treatment and therapy.
HOWEVER, this may become a deterrent for people who are more likely to have children with a mental disorder. People who are 'high risk' may become shamed for choosing to have a child who may develop a disorder or encouraged to not have children. Even suggested to be sterilised so they cannot have children.
Ethnocentrism
On one hand you can argue that Gottesman's
research was ethnocentric in that it was completed only looking at Danish people. Therefore you can debate whether the results are able to be generalised to a wider population.
On the other hand you could state that this was not ethnocentric due to the fact that people around the world all have similar basic brain structure, brain chemistry and genetics regardless of where they are born.
However, despite the similarities in neurology, a person's environment and culture can massively influence the development of their brain. Therefore being raised in a Danish culture may make someone more or less susceptible to mental illness.
Debates
Reductionism vs Holism
The aim of people researching schizophrenia is to find a reductionist cause and reason for the mental disorder, this way they would be able to treat or prevent it more efficiently. However, research so far has discovered that schizophrenia is polygenus, meaning that there is more than one gene which is different in the people who have the mental illness- and therefore is not reductionist. Moreso, it is also considered to be aeitologically heterogeneous. Meaning that it is not all of the same genes which are different. It lacks consistency and therefore we lack a reductionit cause for the disorder.
Nature Nurture
As research so far has not seen a single genetic or chemical cause for schizophrenia, it brings the nature or nurture debate into question. Is the disorder caused by the brain, which would be suggested due to the increased risk if one or more biological parent also has the disorder. Or is it due to the environment the person grew up in, it may be possible that those which schizophrenic parents are more at risk of developing the disorder due the their parenting and how it may differ due to their illness.
Usefulness
This could be a very useful piece of research in that it identifies couples who are more at risk to have a child who is likely to develop schizophrenia. Meaning they could identify symptoms early on an get treatment and therapy.
Psychology as a Science
Using quantitative data, which is objective and easily comparable.