Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Interactionist approach - Coggle Diagram
Interactionist approach
Explanation
Examines the complex interplay of a range of factors, including biological, psychological and social factors
Biological factors usually include genetic vulnerability, neurochemistry and neurological abnormality
Psychological factors include stress e.g resulting from life events or poor quality relationships within the family
Instead of arguing over which explanation is best, they figured to see SZ as developing through several interactions
Diathesis stress model
-
Meehl's model proposed there was a genetic vulnerability with a single 'schizogene', this interacted with the stressor which was the schizophrenogenic mother and this would trigger the onset of SZ, he believed that no matter how much stress there was in a family setting that if the person did not have the 'schizogene' they would not get SZ
A03
S: Evidence support the interactionist approach, Gottesman conducted a large scale family scale and found MZ twins had a concordance rate of 48% compared to 17% for DZ twins
L: Does not fully explain how risk factors contribute to interaction, while there is strong evidence to suggest some underlying vulnerability coupled with stress can lead to SZ, the mechanisms by which the symptoms of SZ appear and how both vulnerability and stress produce them is currently not understood, it is not known precisely how risks contribute to the diathesis stress interaction for any one person because specific causes for SZ may differ between individuals, this means research is needed to fully explain and treat SZ effectively
O: However the diathesis stress model is over simplified, the original model outlines a single schizogene and schizophrenic parenting style but research has indicated that there are multiple genes and environmental triggers, therefore vulnerability and stress do not have one single source as original predicted by the diathesis stress model
-
Treating SZ
-
Biological treatments would address the biological factors such as reducing the activity of dopamine and psychological therapies address the psychological symptoms simultaneously
Usually a patient will take the medication to reduce the symptoms so that they can engage with the psychological treatments
A03
L/S: May be more appropriate for people with SZ than receiving a single therapy, this combined treatment is considered more appropriate in the UK than in the USA as there is more conflict between psychological and biological models of SZ there, this may have led to slower adoption of interactionist treatments which means there is a culture bias in the way the treatments based on the interactionist approach are offered
S: Research by Tarrier randomly allocated 315 ppt to drugs + CBT, drugs +counselling and drugs alone (control group), ppt who had a biological and psychological therapies combined a showed lower symptom level than the control group this shows that there is a clear practical advantage to adopting the interactionist approach for treating SZ as iit improves the lives of people with SZ
O:
The interactionist approach to treating schizophrenia does not necessarily address the underlying cause of the disorder.
Just because a combination of drug therapy and psychological therapy is more effective than a single therapy, it is not possible to infer that an interaction is the basis of schizophrenia.
Suggesting that is does could be an error, which is known as the treatment causation fallacy.
However, as the combination of treatments reduces suffering in many people with schizophrenia it is beneficial for many people with the disorder and improves their quality of life.