psychological explanations for sz
family dysfunction
double-bind communication
expressed emotion
cognitive explanation
deficits in metarepresentation
deficits in central control
evaluation
other explanations- biological
crtitisiced for being socially sensitive as places blame on family or individual patient which can lead to further stress, pressure and distress therefore psychologists must be cautious when interpreting and publishing findings
practical applications- family therapy and CBT therefore research has positive impact in real world
'no win' situations when child receives mixed messages about relationship where one contradicts the other
child feels trapped and does not know how to respond, as whatever they do they feel they will be wrong
can lead to following symptoms of sz
paranoid delusions stemming from individual always looking for hidden meanings
disorganised thinking resulting from seeing the world as confusing and hard to make sense of
supporting evidence- compared family experience of patients with diagnosis of sz compared with a control group without diagnosis and found patients with sz had a higher recall of double bind statements in their childhood showing there is a relationship between double-bind communication and sz
the level of emotion, in particular negative, expressed towards a patient by their carers
involves
exaggerated emotional involvement in the life of the patient
high levels of control and verbal criticism
serious source of stress for patient
may be a source of stress that can trigger the onset of sz in a person who is already vulnerable
primarily explanation of relapse in patients
evaluation
evidence to support the role of expressed emotion in the relapse rates of patients with sz. meta-analysis of 27 studies of the expressed emotion outcome relationship in sz found relapse rates were double in patients with high levels of expressed emotion in the family. suggesting family dysfunction has a role in the relapse rates of sz
limitation- issues with studying the family as Family dysfunction may be the result of a child’s disturbing behaviour rather than the cause of schizophrenia, which makes it difficult to establish cause and effect. additionally recall of childhood may be inaccurate meaning caution must be taken when interpreting findings and may lack validity
focuses on impaired information processing
metarepresentation= the ability to reflect on thoughts and behaviour.
disrupt a persons ability to distinguish whether their thoughts originate from within themselves or from their external validity
explains hallucinations and delusions
central control= ability to suppress automatic responses while we perform deliberate actions instead
disorganised speech could result from the ability to suppress these automatic thoughts and speech triggered by other thoughts
evaluation
strength- supporting evidence, compared 86 people with sz and 86 controls. researchers carried out 13 different computerised tests e.g. pressing a response key whenever a cross appears on the screen and the Stroop test. found that people with sz performed significantly worse on tasks that required sustained and focused attention, showing relationship between impaired information processing and sz
limitation- contradictory evidence found ppl with sz do not seem to be any easier to distract than people without sz when engaged on cognitive tasks which challenges the idea that schizophrenia is the result of cognitive deficits. In addition, although cognitive explanations have evidence to support the existence of dysfunctional thought processes, they do not reveal anything about origins of those dysfunctional cognitions. Therefore, cognitive explanations can account for the symptoms but not the origins of the disorder