the interactionist approach Flashcards
(15 cards)
what is the interactionist approach?
broad approach explaining SZ , acknowledging range of factors (biological, psychological, social)
not one cause identified. consider all areas
eg of biological influence on SZ?
- genetic vulnerability
- dopamine hypothesis
eg of psychological triggers for SZ?
- family dysfunction
- dysfunctional thoughts
- substance abuse
- life event
what is the diathesis stress model?
explains that a vulnerability (diathesis) and a stress trigger is needed for SZ to develop
diathesis-> inherited disposition to develop
+
stress-> parental trauma, childhood sexual abuse, family conflict
=development of disorder
Meehl
- was believed there was one single ‘schizogene’ (modern research suggests polygenic 108)
- if someone had schizogene then chronic stress in childhood/adolescence will trigger development of SZ
if a person does not have a schizogene they cannot develop SZ no matter how much stress
what does Meehl’s model believe that the main stressor for SZ is?
parenting/family dynamics
what is our modern understanding on SZ?
- vulnerability isnt just down to one gene
- view diathesis involves range of factors eg dopamine, brain area that increases vulnerability beyond genetics
- stress can be defined as anything that triggers SZ eg EE, trauma, substance abuse
research between cannabis use (stress) and SZ
- cannabis + psychotic disorders co-occur too much to be chance
- cannabis linked to psychotic symptoms that resemble SZ eg lack motivation
- increase in cannabis use but incidence of SZ remaind consistent
counter-> cant imply causation as evidence is contradictory
what are the interactionist treatments?
combination of biological and psychological treatments- antipsychotics and CBT
different combinations are used depending on circumstances eg family therapy if dysfunctional home life
what does the biological treatment do?
- reduces symptoms so psycholgoical can be more effective, treats any residual symptoms
its unusla to use psychological treatments alone
evaluation points
- supporting evidence for diathesis stress model
- successful application
- treatment causation fallacy
- incomplete explanation
what supporting evidence is there for diathesis stress model?
Tineari et al
- large-scale longitudinal study 19K Finnish children whose bio mothers had SZ (high genetic risk) compared to control group without family history (low genetic risk)
- low levels of empathy and high criticism in families were strongly linked with development of SZ but only in high genetic risk group
- both genetic component and trigger needed
longtitudional- drop out
Finnish- culture bias
what successful application of treatments is there?
Tarrier - 315 p’s randomly allocated treatments either: medication + CBT, medication + counselling, medication only (control g)
- combination groups = best outcomes in 18 months, higher reduction in symptoms compared to drug alone group
how is it treatment-causation fallacy?
- saying that treament is successful to justify explanation is illogical
- eg increased alcohol use= reduction in shyness, so does lack of alcohol cause shyness
- therefore, cannot assume expl is correct
how do we still have an incomplete explanation?
- understand that underlying vulnerabilites can be triggered by stress leading to SZ
- but doesnt explain how symptoms of SZ appear and how both vunerability and stress produce them
- gain little knowledge about process of symptoms arising. questioning the validity
however this is more complete than just looking at biological or psychological explanation on its own
