Definitions of Abnormality

• Deviation from Social Norms

  norms are unwritten rules created by society to guide behaviour - tell us what's acceptable and provide us with some sense of 'order' in society.

  travel will cause a change in social norms

  societies have age-based norms but also gender-based norms

  many mental disorders are seen to be clearly abnormal as behaviours associated with them violate social norms e.g. SZs often have difficulty controlling their emotions and might cry when they hear a funny story or laugh at sad things
• DSN Weakness - problem of context

  no clear distinction between what's an abnormal deviation from a social norm

  for example:

  context of behaviour

  - swimming costume - normal at a beach/pool, abnormal if worn round a supermarket

  degree of behaviour

  - being rude id considered deviant, but how rude do you have to be abnormal

  therefore this can lead to unreliable + inaccurate classifications of disorders
• DSN Weakness - lack of time validity

  acceptable to not acceptable

  - drinking and driving

  - smoking

  not acceptable to acceptable

  - homosexuality

  - having children out of wedlock

  therefore this definition of abnormality may lack temporal validity as some abnormal behaviours are now considered normal and vice versa
• DSN Weakness - cultural relativity

  social norms are influenced + defined by culture

  what may appear normal in 1 culture may appear abnormal in another

  e.g.

  - eating snails in France

  - women's rights

  this may lead to unreliable + invalid diagnoses of abnormality
• DSN Strength - cultural relativism

  breaking norms can be good thing and stimulate positive social change

  e.g. slavery was once considered 'normal' in society: elite of society might even have considered it abnormal not to have one or more slaves in their household.

  however, some members of this social groups break norms and opposed slavery the eventual result was abolition of slavery.
• Statistical Infrequency


  abnormal behaviour is statistically rare behaviour. any behaviour that doesn't occur very often is regarded as abnormal and may indicate the presence of a mental disorder.

  some behaviours can be measured on a quantitative scale, e.g. how extraversion levels can be measured by psychometric tests.

  on a normal distribution curve, the majority of scores for a population will cluster around the mean. any behaviour within the middle 68% is seen as normal
• SI Weakness - problems with extreme sections of the curve

  definition fails to describe and distinguish between problematic behaviour that needs treatment and desirable behaviour where treatment isn't required.

  e.g. some rare behaviours are desirable and don't seem to indicate the presence of mental disorder.

  having a high IQ, or exceptional musical ability are all rare but highly desirable rather than 'disordered'

  in order to adequately treat psychological disorders, we need a definition that will adequately identify the behaviours that are statistically rare, but also are undesirable and damaging to the individual.
• SI Weakness - where's the cut-off point?

  can be difficult to know where to draw the line between behaviour that's frequent enough to be normal and rare enough to be abnormal.

  makes the definition highly subjective. definition also doesn't take into account the severity of the behaviour only whether it's common or not
• SI Weakness - cultural relativity

  definition is limited as some behaviours are rare in some cultures but not others.

  little consideration of cultural differences as it argues that the population of the world are contained within the normal distribution.

  there are variances between cultures and the mathematical nature of this definition doesn't allows for this.

  ultimately means that abnormality could be widespread in one culture because of its comparison with the rest of the world
• Failure to Function Adequately

  abnormality can be judged in terms of not being able to cope with everyday life. as soon as a behaviour interferes with everyday life then the individual might label their own behaviour as 'abnormal' as they're unable to carry out normal activities
• Rosenhan and Seligman


  number of indicators of failure to function adequately:

  Maladaptive behaviour -> behaviour which stops the person achieving goals - socially or at work

  Personal Distress -> would include depression + anxiety

  Observer discomfort -> e.g. self harming

  Unpredictable behaviour:

  loss of control - behaviour which wouldn't be expected e.g. trying to commit suicide after failing a driving test

  unconventionality of behaviour - unusual behaviour

  violation of moral + ideal standards - behaviour which breaks societies expectations e.g. killing someone

  Irrational behaviour -> behaviour which can't be explained rationally
• FFA Weakness - subjective judgements are still required

  in order to use this definition, subjective judgements are still required for each of the main indicators of failing to function adequately.

  e.g. what one person might see as observer discomfort, another may not.

  so, the definition can be questioned in terms of its reliability as different people will make different decisions as to whether or not someone is abnormal
• FFA Weakness - adaptive or maladaptive?

  some apparently dysfunctional behaviour can actually be adaptive and functional for the individual. e.g. some mental disorders like anorexia, may lead to extra attention for the individual.

  this definition isn't able to always accurately define those with a mental disorder
• FFA Weakness - cultural relativism

  definitions of adequate functioning are also related to cultural ideas of how one's life should be lived.

  'failure to function' criterion is likely to result in different diagnoses when applied to people from different cultures, as the standard of one culture is being used to measure another.

  failing to function adequately may not be linked to a psychological disorder e.g. subcultures such as immigrant communities can't fin job and develop career due to prejudice and discrimination.

  failing to function isn't a valid way of defining psychopathology
• FFA Weakness - definition can depend on context

  adequate functioning is defined largely by social norms e.g. political prisoners on hunger strike. also most people fail to function adequately at some time, but aren't considered abnormal e.g. after a bereavement most people find it difficult to cope normally, they might actually be considered more abnormal if they functioned as usual.

  this definition lacks generalisability
• Deviation from ideal mental health

  Jahoda wrote a report for the Joint Commission on Mental Illness and Health.

  drew on the views of others and tried to identify common concepts that were used when describing mental health

  6 categories
• 6 categories

  1. self-attitudes: have good self esteem

  2. personal growth: we self-actualise (try reach our potential)

  3. resistance to stress: no symptoms of distress; can cope with stress

  4. autonomy: being independent

  5. perception of reality: rational + perceive self accurately. have realistic view of world

  6. environmental mastery: can successfully work, love + enjoy leisure.
• DIMH Strength - definition is positive

  it focuses on what people should be like rather than 'deviation' or 'infrequency'

  means that it may limit the stigma attached to abnormal behaviours and make less of a negative judgement on them within society
• DIMH Weakness - problem of subjective opinions of the criteria

  criteria are quite vague and difficult to measure objectively in comparison to physical conditions.

  e.g. Jahoda's criteria of 'environmental mastery' may be subject to personal opinion, as what one person deems as being successful and well adapted.

  means any decisions based on this definition mat be inconsistent.
• DIMH Weakness - lack of cultural relativism

  may of the 6 criteria identified for 'ideal mental health' are culture bound.

  the criterion of self-actualisation is relevant to individualist cultures but not collectivist cultures.

  why? Jahoda's criteria applies to western norms and values in individualist cultures. it may be that collectivist cultures don't strive to meet the same criteria therefore definition wouldn't be applicable to people in these cultures as most of them would be defined as 'abnormal' so lacks external validity

  Jahoda's criteria are based on a western, individualistic view of mental health, which may well be very different to an eastern, collectivist viewpoint.
• DIMH Weakness - criteria may be too strict

  e.g. it's very difficult for any individual to consistently meet all 6 criteria for ideal mental health

  therefore according to this definition, we would all be defined as 'abnormal' at some point.

  therefore this makes this potentially invalid as a definition of abnormality