family dysfunction explanations

Question 1

schizophrenogenic mother

Answer 1

• sz is from being reared by a cold and dominant mother who is both overprotective and rejecting
• the mother appears self-sacrificing but uses the child for their own needs
• these children develop sz as they are confused about their mothers contradicting nature
• this hypothesis is rejected by most researchers as this mothering style is implicated in multiple disorders

Question 2

double bind

Answer 2

• sz is a reaction to a pathological parent who gives their child a ‘no-win’ situation, created by contradictions between tone of voice and content
• prolonged exposure to this can prevent the child developing an internally coherent construction of reality, which can present as sz symptoms like flattening affect, delusions, hallucinations, incoherent thinking and speaking

Question 3

expressed emotion

Answer 3

• a family communication style where family members of someone with sz talk about them in a critical or hostile way, indicating emotional over-involvement or overconcern
• when returning to their families they react to the EE by relapsing and experiencing pos symptoms
• research found high EE levels are more likely to influence relapse rates (a sz returning to a high EE family is 4x more likely to relapse). this suggests the strong neg emotions in these families lead to stress beyond what they can cope with, triggering an episode

Question 4

give a strength of double bind
1/2

Answer 4

supporting research. berger (1965) found those with sz reported a higher recall of double bind statements by their mothers that those without sz, supporting the idea that double bind can cause sz.

COUNTER = this evidence may not be reliable however as patient recall may be affected by their illness

Question 5

give a strength of double bind
2/2

Answer 5

supporting research. bateson (1956) reported a case study where someone with sz was visited in hospital by his mother. he embraced her but she stiffened and then said “don’t you love me anymore”, supporting the idea of double bind.

COUNTER = since this is a case study this is argued as weak evidence as it lacks population validity and generalizability

Question 6

give a limitation of double bind
1/1

Answer 6

there is research that contradicts this theory. liem (1974) measured parental communication is families with a sz child and found no difference compared to normal families. this reduces the validity of double bind, suggesting other factors must work alongside it to cause sz

Question 7

give a strength of EE
1/1

Answer 7

research support. hooley et al (1998) did a meta-analysis of 26 studies and found sz’s returning to a high EE family had more than 2x the average relapse rate. this was further supported by kavanagh (1992) who did a meta analysis and found the relapse rate for those returning to high EE families was 48% compared to 21% for those returning to low EE families. these support the idea that high levels of EE may be responsible for a patients relapse

Question 8

give a limitation of EE
1/1

Answer 8

not all patients in high EE families release and not all patients in low EE families avoid relapse, individual differences play a role in how they respond to EE. altorfer et al (1988) found 1/4 of the patients they studied showed no physiological response to high EE from family, perhaps suggesting the vulnerability to high EE may be psychologically based. therefore not everyone with sz is equally vulnerable to high EE so individual differences must be accounted for

Question 9

give a limitation of family dysfunction theories
1/2

Answer 9

having a sz family member can be stressful and problematic, it may be that rather than dysfunction causing sz, the sz may lead to dysfunction. there is an overall lack of support for family dysfunction as a causal factor for sz, there is in fact for chance it is a maintenance factor

Question 10

give a limitation of family dysfunction theories
2/2

Answer 10

family dysfunction theories don’t explain why some children in dysfunctional families don’t develop sz. if they were the sole cause of sz, all children raised in this environment would have the disorder. since this isn’t the case, family dysfunction cannot be the only cause of sz. it may be that people have a biological predisposition to sz and this dysfunction combines with it to cause the sz (like the diathesis-stress model)