Psypath: defs. of abnormality AO1 + AO3 Flashcards
limitation SD -> some abnormal behaviours are desirable
e- e.g. few ppl have IQs of 150+, infrequent, not undersirable. are also common but undesirable
e- e.g. depression= common but considered abnormal + underdesirable
l- can’t distinguish between un/desirable behaviours
strength SD-> appropriate in some circumstances
e- e.g. IQ measured in terms of normal distribtion (high= 2+ SDs away from mean)
e- means def. has real life application- used as irl measure for some behaviours
l-increases validity of def. for use as measure of defining abnormality
limitation DSN-> social norms chance over time (inconsistent)
e- e.g. gay is acceptable in most western countries, but was a class in DSM + illegal in past
e- if someone is defined as abnormal is dependent on prevailing social + moral attitudes
l- can make inconsistent results across history- lacks temp.valid
strength deviation from soc.norms (DSN)-> useful for clinical prac.
e- key def. characteristics of antisocial personality disorder is failure to conform to culturally acceptable ethical standards
e- DSN is helpful in diagnosing schizotypal personality disorder (‘strange’ beliefs/behaviour)
l- means DSN is useful in psychiatric diagnosis
limitation failure to function adequately (FTFA)-> requires objective judgement of a way of life
e-some may not see having a job as FTFA, but those w/alternative lifestyle may disagree (e.g. extreme sports- may also be seen in a maladaptive way)
e-if we treat these as ‘failures’ of adequate functioning, may limit personal freedom/discriminating minority groups
l-challenges def., depends who is making judgement, not behaviour
limitation deviation from ideal mental health (DIMH)-> sets unachievable standards for mental health
e-few ppl reach ‘self actualisation’, changes for each person- so DIMH says many ppl have abmormal aspects
e-criteria=hard to measure, e.g. how easy to assess if some1 has capacity for personal growth?
l- so def. may not be useful, but could be better in positive psych. field at criteria to strive for
strength FTFA-> takes into account pts (patients) perspective
e-can view mental disorder from POV of person experiencing it
e-easy to judge objectivity- can list behaviours (e.g.cook/shower) + check if a person is functioning
l-so if treatment/support is needed, can be specific to pt’s needs
strength DIMH-> criterion is highly comprehensive
e-Jahoda’s concept includes a wide range of criteria + most reasons why ppl get MH support
e-allows MH to be discussed meaningfully w/range of professionals w/diff. theoretical views (psychiatrist/CBT therapist)
l-means ideal MH gives checklist we can assess/discuss psychological issues against
limitation DIMH-> cultural relativism (CR)
e- some of Jahoda’s criteria are specific to European/American cultures- cultural bound (e.g. self-actualisation more common in individualistic cultures, collectivists may see independence as negative)
e- so by generalising the decision may be seen as ethnocentric- judging ‘normal’ by western + individualistic standards
l- so is problematic, not universal explanation of abnormality
limitation SD-> cultural relativism (CR)
e-e.g. hearing symptoms of schiz are common + not seen as abnormal in some cultures, but it is seen less in others
e-some behaviours can be more statistically infrequent in some cultures than others
l-so SD doesn’t consider cultural diffs, not universal explanation of abnormality
limitation DSN-> cultural relativism (CR)
e- e.g. DSM is based on Western soc.norms
e-what is classed as abnormal is based on those norms, ignored eastern soc.norms/values, so is ethnocentric to use DSM to classify ppl from eastern cultures
l-so DSN doesn’t consider cultural diffs, not universal explanation of abnormality
limitation FTFA-> cultural relativism (CR)
e- idea of if pt is functioning is related to cultural ideas of how ppl should live their lives + how it could be class dependent
e-may explain why lower class/non white pts are diagnosed more often, diff. lifestyles to those making the decisions
l-so FTFA doesn’t consider cultural diffs, not universal explanation of abnormality
statistical infrequency
individual has less common characteristic than most of pop.- less seen behaviour
deviation from social norms
any behaviour which differs from ‘normal’
society established ‘norms’ of behaviour, how ppl should act- done thru ‘socialisation’
ppl act diff to expected
failure to function adequately
unable to deal w/demands of everyday life
failure to maintain basic nutrition/hygiene/relationships/employment
