Definitions of abnormality (Psychopathology)
There are various different methods of defining abnormality. These include: the statistical infrequency definition; the deviation from social norms definition; the failure to function adequately, and deviation from ideal mental health.
Definition 1: The statistical infrequency definition.
Under this definition, abnormality is defined as any substantial deviation from the statistically calculated average (±2 standard deviations away from the mean, in a normal distribution). Therefore any behaviour that occurs rarely in relation to the entire population is viewed as "abnormal".
For example, the average IQ score is 100, and only 2% of the entire population have a score of 70 or less - and so, these individuals, under this definition would be considered "abnormal" and would be liable to receive a diagnosis of a psychological disorder (intellectual disability disorder).
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strength: One strength of this definition is that it provides a quantitive measure of abnormality, and therefore it is an objective method as it is not affected by an individuals personal feelings or views - and so, it is more likely to be reliable and consistent with the findings.
Strength: This definition also has real life applications, for example: it can be used as a diagnostic tool for the clinical assessment of a patient. This definition is widely used in the mental health field to highlight any characteristics that aren't 'normal' and therefore this will only have positive implications for the sufferer as it can lead to a diagnosis - which, in turn, means they will be able to discover ways and strategies to deal with their disorder, consequently leading to an improved quality of life.
Weakness: However, some mental disorders are not statistically rare enough to be defined as 'abnormal' under this definition. For example, lots of people have phobias and therefore it isn't viewed as an 'abnormality''. This is a weakness as it means that people with phobias, who are at the top of the severity scale, wouldn't be highlighted as having a problem, even though they clearly do and so this leads to many problems - for example, the sufferer wouldn't receive the treatment that they need, meaning that they are unable to be provided with the correct support that is vital for a high-quality of life to be maintained (they will continue to suffer from phobias, which will potentially grow progressively worse if untreated).
Weakness: A further weakness is that some statistically infrequent behaviours are, in fact, desirable characteristics. For example, having a very high IQ, compared to the rest of the population. This is a weakness as this can lead to a misdiagnosis - they are being labeled as 'abnormal' when, in reality, it is a trait that many people wish they possessed.
Weakness: Additionally, if someone is living a happy and fulfilled life, there is absolutely no benefit to them being labeled as 'abnormal', regardless of how unusual their behaviours/characteristics may be. For example, someone with a very low IQ, but who is not distressed and quite capable of working (ect) would simply not need the label of not being 'normal'/having a 'disorder'. This may just instead have a negative effect of the way that other people view them and, in turn, how they view themselves (self-fulling prophecy).
Definition 2: The deviation from social norms definition
According to this definition, a person is abnormal if they violate the (unwritten) rules of their society. Behaviour that deviates from the social norms can make others feel threatened or uncomfortable as it violates 'moral standards' and differs from what the majority of people do.
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strengths: One strength of this definition is that it has an extensive range of useful practical applications - such as it can help to identify people who are in the need of psychiatric help. For example, someone who is hearing constant voices that aren't there would most likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic, as this is not typical behaviour within our society. This is a strength as it can lead to a diagnosis for the sufferer and therefore they are able to be provided with an explanation for what is happening to them and be given ways to deal with their disorder and hereby improve the overall quality of their life.
Weakness: This definition carries limitations as social norms are culture specific and therefore what is seen as 'normal' in one culture may be considered to be 'abnormal' in another. A popular example to demonstrate this is lip-plates: in many South-American countries, women, once they reach a certain age, pierce their lower lip in order to insert plates into it, hereby stretching it. To us, this appears very strange and 'abnormal' but to them, it is a tradition that their society follows and views as completely normal. This is a weakness as there is such a variation between cultures than it can be extremely unclear to us whether a behaviour is accepted in another society or not.
Weakness: A further weakness is that social norms change over time. For example, up until 1967, homosexuality was classed as a mental illness, whereas nowadays it is considered to be legal and is widely accepted. This is a limitation as it leads to a lack of consensus between generations - for example, the much older generation would've grew up with homosexuality being frowned upon and classed as an illness and so, they are likely to maintain these views, despite it being common and acceptable nowadays. So, not only does this definition cause unclarity between what is 'normal' and not between different cultures, but it also causes this problem between different generations within the same society.
Weakness: Another limitation of the deviation from social norms definition is that actions of certain individuals do violate our social norms, but these people are not usually regarded as abnormal in psychological terms. For example: prostitutes break a social norm by offering sexual services for payment, but they are not typically seen as needing psychiatric help - and so where do we draw the line?
Definition 3: The failure to function adequately definition
Under this definition. a person crosses the line between 'normal' and 'abnormal' when they are no longer able to cope with the demands of everyday life: this can include them being unable to maintain basic standards of nutrition and hygiene, having an inability to hold down a job and being unable to maintain relationships with people around them.
Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) proposed some signs that can be used to determine when someone is not coping:
1. when a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules, such as maintaining eye contact and respecting personal space.
2. when a person experiences personal distress (or if they cause their friends/family distress)
3. when a person's behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strength: A strength of this definition is that the 'abnormal' behaviour is observable. A persons failure to function adequately can be witnessed by people around them, for example: if the person is unable to get out of bed of a morning, or they're struggling to keep jobs. This is a strength as it means that problems can be picked up by others, and if the individual is incapable of realising that they need help, they can intervene and make sure they get the right treatment, if required.
Weakness: Abnormality is not always accompanied by dysfunction. Psychopaths (people with dangerous personality disorders) can cause great harm, but still appear completely normal. For example, Harold Shipman (an English doctor) murdered at least 215 of his patients, yet he came across to others as a completely respectable working man who displayed no signs of dysfunction.
Weakness: A further weakness is that there are times in a persons life where it is perfectly normal and acceptable to suffer from distress and stop functioning 'normally'. For example, losing a parent. This is a limitation of this definition as grieving is psychologically healthy to overcome loss, yet this definition doesn't acknowledge this and so it would seem that everyone, at some point in their life, would be classified as 'abnormal' under this definition, which is clearly inaccurate.
Weakness: Additionally, another limitation of this definition is that apparently 'abnormal' behaviour may actually be helpful for the individual. For example, a person with OCD who has to obsessively wash their hands may find that this behaviour, in fact, makes them happy and able to cope better with their day - this is not considered by this definition.
Definition 4: Deviation from ideal mental health
Unlike the other definitions, the deviation from ideal mental health looks at what makes a person 'normal' and anyone that deviates from these 'ideal' traits is considered to be abnormal.
Jahoda (1958) proposed that we are in good mental health if we meet 6 criteria points. These include:
Definition 1: The statistical infrequency definition.
Under this definition, abnormality is defined as any substantial deviation from the statistically calculated average (±2 standard deviations away from the mean, in a normal distribution). Therefore any behaviour that occurs rarely in relation to the entire population is viewed as "abnormal".
For example, the average IQ score is 100, and only 2% of the entire population have a score of 70 or less - and so, these individuals, under this definition would be considered "abnormal" and would be liable to receive a diagnosis of a psychological disorder (intellectual disability disorder).
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strength: One strength of this definition is that it provides a quantitive measure of abnormality, and therefore it is an objective method as it is not affected by an individuals personal feelings or views - and so, it is more likely to be reliable and consistent with the findings.
Strength: This definition also has real life applications, for example: it can be used as a diagnostic tool for the clinical assessment of a patient. This definition is widely used in the mental health field to highlight any characteristics that aren't 'normal' and therefore this will only have positive implications for the sufferer as it can lead to a diagnosis - which, in turn, means they will be able to discover ways and strategies to deal with their disorder, consequently leading to an improved quality of life.
Weakness: However, some mental disorders are not statistically rare enough to be defined as 'abnormal' under this definition. For example, lots of people have phobias and therefore it isn't viewed as an 'abnormality''. This is a weakness as it means that people with phobias, who are at the top of the severity scale, wouldn't be highlighted as having a problem, even though they clearly do and so this leads to many problems - for example, the sufferer wouldn't receive the treatment that they need, meaning that they are unable to be provided with the correct support that is vital for a high-quality of life to be maintained (they will continue to suffer from phobias, which will potentially grow progressively worse if untreated).
Weakness: A further weakness is that some statistically infrequent behaviours are, in fact, desirable characteristics. For example, having a very high IQ, compared to the rest of the population. This is a weakness as this can lead to a misdiagnosis - they are being labeled as 'abnormal' when, in reality, it is a trait that many people wish they possessed.
Weakness: Additionally, if someone is living a happy and fulfilled life, there is absolutely no benefit to them being labeled as 'abnormal', regardless of how unusual their behaviours/characteristics may be. For example, someone with a very low IQ, but who is not distressed and quite capable of working (ect) would simply not need the label of not being 'normal'/having a 'disorder'. This may just instead have a negative effect of the way that other people view them and, in turn, how they view themselves (self-fulling prophecy).
Definition 2: The deviation from social norms definition
According to this definition, a person is abnormal if they violate the (unwritten) rules of their society. Behaviour that deviates from the social norms can make others feel threatened or uncomfortable as it violates 'moral standards' and differs from what the majority of people do.
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strengths: One strength of this definition is that it has an extensive range of useful practical applications - such as it can help to identify people who are in the need of psychiatric help. For example, someone who is hearing constant voices that aren't there would most likely be diagnosed as schizophrenic, as this is not typical behaviour within our society. This is a strength as it can lead to a diagnosis for the sufferer and therefore they are able to be provided with an explanation for what is happening to them and be given ways to deal with their disorder and hereby improve the overall quality of their life.
Weakness: This definition carries limitations as social norms are culture specific and therefore what is seen as 'normal' in one culture may be considered to be 'abnormal' in another. A popular example to demonstrate this is lip-plates: in many South-American countries, women, once they reach a certain age, pierce their lower lip in order to insert plates into it, hereby stretching it. To us, this appears very strange and 'abnormal' but to them, it is a tradition that their society follows and views as completely normal. This is a weakness as there is such a variation between cultures than it can be extremely unclear to us whether a behaviour is accepted in another society or not.
Weakness: A further weakness is that social norms change over time. For example, up until 1967, homosexuality was classed as a mental illness, whereas nowadays it is considered to be legal and is widely accepted. This is a limitation as it leads to a lack of consensus between generations - for example, the much older generation would've grew up with homosexuality being frowned upon and classed as an illness and so, they are likely to maintain these views, despite it being common and acceptable nowadays. So, not only does this definition cause unclarity between what is 'normal' and not between different cultures, but it also causes this problem between different generations within the same society.
Weakness: Another limitation of the deviation from social norms definition is that actions of certain individuals do violate our social norms, but these people are not usually regarded as abnormal in psychological terms. For example: prostitutes break a social norm by offering sexual services for payment, but they are not typically seen as needing psychiatric help - and so where do we draw the line?
Definition 3: The failure to function adequately definition
Under this definition. a person crosses the line between 'normal' and 'abnormal' when they are no longer able to cope with the demands of everyday life: this can include them being unable to maintain basic standards of nutrition and hygiene, having an inability to hold down a job and being unable to maintain relationships with people around them.
Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) proposed some signs that can be used to determine when someone is not coping:
1. when a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules, such as maintaining eye contact and respecting personal space.
2. when a person experiences personal distress (or if they cause their friends/family distress)
3. when a person's behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strength: A strength of this definition is that the 'abnormal' behaviour is observable. A persons failure to function adequately can be witnessed by people around them, for example: if the person is unable to get out of bed of a morning, or they're struggling to keep jobs. This is a strength as it means that problems can be picked up by others, and if the individual is incapable of realising that they need help, they can intervene and make sure they get the right treatment, if required.
Weakness: Abnormality is not always accompanied by dysfunction. Psychopaths (people with dangerous personality disorders) can cause great harm, but still appear completely normal. For example, Harold Shipman (an English doctor) murdered at least 215 of his patients, yet he came across to others as a completely respectable working man who displayed no signs of dysfunction.
Weakness: A further weakness is that there are times in a persons life where it is perfectly normal and acceptable to suffer from distress and stop functioning 'normally'. For example, losing a parent. This is a limitation of this definition as grieving is psychologically healthy to overcome loss, yet this definition doesn't acknowledge this and so it would seem that everyone, at some point in their life, would be classified as 'abnormal' under this definition, which is clearly inaccurate.
Weakness: Additionally, another limitation of this definition is that apparently 'abnormal' behaviour may actually be helpful for the individual. For example, a person with OCD who has to obsessively wash their hands may find that this behaviour, in fact, makes them happy and able to cope better with their day - this is not considered by this definition.
Definition 4: Deviation from ideal mental health
Unlike the other definitions, the deviation from ideal mental health looks at what makes a person 'normal' and anyone that deviates from these 'ideal' traits is considered to be abnormal.
Jahoda (1958) proposed that we are in good mental health if we meet 6 criteria points. These include:
- having a positive view of one self
- if we self-actualise
- autonomy/independence
- ability to resist stress
- having an accurate perception of reality
- environmental mastery (the ability to meet the varying demands of day-to-day situations)
The more criteria a person fails to meet, the more 'abnormal' they are considered to be.
PEE (Point, Evidence, Explain) Evaluation points:
Strength: One strength of Jahoda’s definition is that it takes a positive
and holistic view. Firstly, the definition focuses on positive
and desirable behaviours, rather than considering just
negative and undesirable behaviour. Secondly, the definition
considers the whole person, considering a multitude of factors
that can affect their health and well‐being. Therefore, a
strength of the deviation from ideal mental health definition
of abnormality is that it is comprehensive, covering a broad
range of criteria.
Weakness: This definition carries limitations, for example: very few people meet all of Jahoda's criteria for what is considered to be good mental health - and those who do tend to be considered 'supreme human beings' such as Ghandi. This proposed criteria, therefore, is very unrealistic and over-demanding for an 'average' human being. It additionally doesn't account for when people have normal experiences of stress (e.g. grieving the loss of someone) - as under this definition, they would be considered 'abnormal', when in fact, it is extremely common as most people will go through such stress at one point in their life.
Weakness: In addition to this, some of Jahoda's criteria points are specific to Western European Cultures and therefore can be argued to be culture bound. For example, there is an emphasis on personal achievement within this criteria but this would be viewed as self-indulgent in many places (in particular, collectivist cultures) as there is much less emphasis on the family/community.
Comments
Post a Comment