Definitions of abnormality

• What are the 4 definitions of abnormality

  Statistical infrequency

  Deviation from social norms

  Deviation from ideal mental health

  Failure to function adequately
• Statistical infrequency 


  • Any behaviour that is different to a statistically usual behaviour is abnormal
  • E.g. Individuals scoring below an IQ score of 70 may be very abnormal and are liable to intellectual disability disorder
• Evaluate Statistical infrequency as an exp.

  • :) Real life app, able to diagnose people with IDD and uses quantitative measures to define abnormality and can measure symptom severity. Useful in clinical assessment
  • :( Unusual characteristics aren't always negative, some positive (e.g. IQ over 130 are just as unusual), may be abnormal but does not require treatment. Cannot be used alone to make a diagnosis
  • :( Labelling, can be harmful when labelling someone as abnormal and may have a negative affect on the way others view them as well as themselves (IDD)
• Deviation from social norms

  • When a person behaves in a way that is different to how we expect people to behave
  • If a behaviour offends our sense of what is acceptable, we are likely to label it as abnormal
  • Norms are specific to the culture we live in, there are few that would be considered universally abnormal
• DFSN example


  • E.g. APD (antisocial personality disorder) is an absence of prosocial internal standards associated with failure to conform to lawful or culturally normative ethical behaviour
  • Many would class this behaviour as abnormal as their behaviour doesn't conform to our moral standards
  • It would be considered abnormal in many cultures
• DFSN Eval

  • :) Real life app, diagnosis of APD in sufferers, has helped in distinguishing abnormalities, however its never the sole reason for defining abnormality, may be other factors
  • :( Cultural relativism, social norms vary meaning views on what is normal and not will largely differ. Its possible that what we class as abnormal may be normal for another culture (e.g. hearing voices)
  • :( Human rights abuses, too much reliance on DFSN can lead to systematic abuse of human rights. (e.g. slaves diagnosed with drapetomania as a result of running away to escape)
  • :( Not a sole explanation, may be linked to FFA
• Failure to function adequately

  • When someone can no longer cope with the demands of everyday life and they fail to function adequately
  • They are unable to maintain basic standards of nutrition and hygiene
  • They cannot hold down a job or maintain relationships
  • E.g. IDD (intellectual disability disorder)
• What are Rosenhan and Seligman's signs to indicate someone if failing to function? (1989)

  • When a person no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules ( e.g. maintaining eye-contact and respecting personal space)
  • When a person experiences severe personal distress
  • When a person's behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous to themselves or others
• FTFA eval

  • :) Focuses on the subjective experience of the individual, it is difficult to assess distress but this approach captures the experience of many who need help is useful to assess criterion for abnormality
  • :( Subjective judgements, some patients may claim they are distressed but assumed to be fine and vice versa. Methods can be used to appropriately assess people but judgements are usually subjective
• FTFA eval 2

  • :( Someone may just be deviating from social norms instead of failing to function, some people may choose not to have a job or may not have a permanent address. Those who practise extreme sports can be accused of maladaptive behaviour. If we treat behaviours as 'failures' of functioning, we limit personal freedom and discrimination against minority groups who's life choices may largely differ from ours
• Deviation from ideal mental health

  • Focuses on what it means to be psychologically healthy and what may differ from this
• What is the criteria from ideal mental health?

  • Created by Marie Jahoda (1958)
  • We are in good mental health if:
  • We have no symptoms/distress
  • We are rational and can perceive ourselves accurately
  • We self-actualise
  • We have a realistic view of the world
  • We have good self-esteem and lack guilt
  • We are independent of others
  • We can successfully work/love/enjoy leisure
• DFIMH Limitation(AO3)

  • Culturally relative to Western European and North American cultures
  • Classifications by Jahoda are specific to these cultures and from an individualistic point of view
  • Other cultures such as collectivist would view the emphasis on self-actualisation as negative and self-indulgent
  • Therefore for others this may be seen as a deviation in itself instead of positive mental health
• DFIMH limitation 2- unrealistic (AO3)

  • Jahoda's criterium sets an unrealistic standard for everyone to reach- ideal or not
  • Hard to achieve all of them even at the same time or for a long-term period
  • The approach would view majority as abnormal and may class us as deviating from ideal MH
  • However this may be a positive as it's clear to indicate to sufferers when they may need treatment such as counselling to improve their MH
  • However no value for someone who may benefit from treatment against their will
• DIMH strength (AO3)

  • Comprehensive definition, common and covers a broad range of mental health criteria
  • Positive tool in identifying the indicators of negative mental health or vulnerabilities that may develop into a mental health condition
• Why is deviation from social norms better than statistical infrequency

  • It takes into account the desirability of a behaviour in which SI does not
  • One example is aggression. Highly aggressive people are equally unusual as highly non-aggressive people
  • However, as aggression is low in social acceptability we tend to regard high levels of aggression (but not low levels) as abnormal
  • Here deviation from social norms works better than statistical infrequency because we are clearly not simply looking at how unusual the behaviour is but also at its social unacceptability
  • Therefore SI may be a too extreme/surface level measure of abnormality