Definitions of abnormality: Statistical infrequency
Statistical infrequency - statistically uncommon behaviour e.g people below 70 IQ are abnormal, called intellectual disability disorder
Strengths: definition used in clinicalpractise for diagnosis and assessment of symptoms
Limitations: unusual characteristics of an individual can be positive e.g people above 70 IQ aren't seen as abnormal
Definitions of abnormality: Deviation from social norms
Deviation from socialnorms - behaviour different from acceptedstandards e.g going outside without wearing shoes
norms are specific to culture e.g homosexuality is still illegal in many countries
according to the DSM-5 psychopaths are abnormal because they don't conform to social norms
Strengths: definition used in clinicalpractise for diagnosis and assessment of symptoms
Limitations: symptoms have cultural and situational relativism e.g hearing voices/auditory hallucinations in Haiti is perceived as communication from ancestors
Definitions of abnormality: Failure to function adequately
Failure to function adequately - inability to cope with everyday demands e.g struggle to go to school or work
Rosenhan and Seligman identified signs of this:
individual no longer conforms to standard interpersonal rules
individual experiences severe personal distress
individuals behaviour becomes irrational or dangerous
Strengths: 25% of people experience mental health problems, therefore treatment is targeted at who needs it more
Limitations: people face discrimination for having different lifestyles
Definitions of abnormality: Deviation from ideal mental health
Deviation from idealmentalhealth - individual doesn't meet ideal mental health
Jahoda suggested criteria for ideal mental health:
ability to cope with symptoms of stress
rationality
self-actualise
realistic view of the world
Strengths: criteria provides a checklist we can use to seek further help from psychiatrists and humanistic counsellors
Limitations: Jahoda's criteria are culture bound, mainly Westernised ideas, in some cultures self-actualisation is seen as self-indulgent
Characteristics: Phobias
Behavioural - panic (crying, screaming, running away, freezing) avoidance (conscious effort to avoid phobic stimulus) endurance (conscious effort to remain in the presence of the phobic stimulus)
Emotional - anxiety (prevents relaxation) fear (immediate unpleasant response when thinking about or seeing phobic stimulus)
Cognitive - irrational beliefs (unfounded thoughts) cognitive distortions (inaccurate and unrealistic perceptions of phobic stimulus)
Characteristics: Depression
Behavioural - activitylevels (lethargy or psychomotor agitation) disruption to sleep (insomnia or hypersomnia) aggression (verbal aggression towards others or self-harm)
Emotional - loweredmood (feeling lethargic and sad) anger (verbal aggression towards others or self-harm) lowered self-esteem (reduced self-esteem)
Cognitive - poorconcentration (indecisive and unable to stick at things) absolutist thinking (extreme negativity)
Characteristics: OCD
Behavioural - compulsions (repetitive and reduce anxiety) avoidance (avoid situations which trigger OCD)
Emotional - anxiety (obsessions and compulsions are overwhelming) depression (co-morbid) guilt (over compulsions)
Cognitive - obsessive thoughts (recurring unpleasant thoughts) coping strategies (praying or meditating to manage anxiety)
Behavioural approach to explaining phobias: Two-process model
acquisition by classical conditioning - learn to association neutral stimulus (no fear) with unconditioned stimulus (fear)
Watson and Rayner: created a phobia in a 9 month old baby 'Little Albert'
researchers made a loud noise which became associated with a rat, forming the fear generalised to other white objects
maintenance by operantconditioning - takes place when our behaviour is reinforced or punished, increasing frequency of the behaviour
Mowrer: avoid phobic stimulus means escape fear, reduction of fear reinforces avoid
Strengths of the behavioural approach to explaining phobias: Two-process model
real world application to exposure therapies, identifies how they're formed and maintained which helps create suitable treatment
Watson and Rayner suggest phobias link to trauma, similarly Jongh found 73% of people with a fear of dental treatment had experience dental trauma
Limitations of the behavioural approach to explaining phobias: Two-process model
not all phobias are caused by bad experiences, likewise not all frightening experiences lead to phobias
although it explains avoidance behaviour, doesn't offer an explanation for phobic cognitions, why someone thinks something is scary
Behavioural approach to treating phobias: systematicdesensitisation
systematicdesensitisation - gradually reduce anxiety through classicalconditioning, process called counterconditioning
had three stages:
Stage 1 - anxietyhierarchy - list established between client and therapist of situations related to phobic stimuli from least to most frightening
Stage 2 - relaxation - it is impossible to be afraid and relaxed at the same time, known as reciprocal inhibition
Stage 3 - exposure - exposed to phobic stimuli while in relaxed state, gradually making their way up the anxiety hierarchy
Strengths of systematic desensitisation:
Gilroy: followed up 42people after three45minute sessions suffering from arachnophobia, in 3 and 33 months were lessfearful than control group treated without gradual exposure, therefore shows success of process
specifically beneficial for treating people with learningdisabilities as they struggle with cognitive therapies and are distressed by the traumatic experience of flooding
Behavioural approach to treating phobias: flooding
flooding - exposing people the phobia stimulus without gradual build-up of anxiety hierarchy
process of extinction whereby without the option of avoidance, the client quickly learns the stimulus is harmless
flooding is unethical but clients provide informedconsent before starting the treatment
Strengths of flooding:
cost-effective
time effective, can take as little as a day, 1 session of flooding is the equivalent to 10 sessions of systematic desensitisation
Limitations of flooding:
Schumacher: found participants and therapists ranked flooding as significantly more stressful which raises ethicalconcerns
flooding has higher attrition rates than systematic desensitisation
The cognitive approach to explaining depression:
Beck'snegative triad:
faultyinformationprocessing - pessimistic views
negativeschema - negative mental framework of the world, if a person has negative self-schema their perceptions will also be negative
negativetriad - negative view of the self, the world and the future
Strengths of explaining depression: Beck's negative triad
Cohen: tracked development of 473 adolescents, regularly measuring cognitive vulnerability which he founds predicts later depression
Cohen: concluded that assessing cognitive vulnerability allows psychologists to screen young people, identifying those most at risk of developing depression in the future
understanding depression can be applied to therapies such as CBT and is useful in clinical practise
The cognitive approach to explaining depression: Ellis's ABC model
used to explain how irrational thoughts affect our behaviour and emotional state
A - activating event - situations triggering irrational beliefs
B - beliefs - identified a range of irrational beliefs
C - consequences - emotional and behavioural consequences of irrational beliefs
Strengths of explaining depression: Ellis's ABC model
real world application to Ellis's Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT)
Limitations of explaining depression: Ellis's ABC model
only explains reactive and endogenous depression, triggered by life events, which isn't always how depression is formed
The cognitive approach to treating depression:
Beck's negative triad: challenge a clients views
therapists may set them homework to record when they enjoyed an event or someone complimented them
if clients say in future sessions nobody likes them, therapists produce the clients evidence to prove they're incorrect
central technique is to identify and disputeover irrational thoughts
behavioural activism: increase a clients engagement in activities to improve moods
Strengths to the cognitive approach to treating depression:
March: compared CBT to antidepressants and a combination of both when treating 327 depressed adolescents, found 81% of CBT group, 81% of antidepressants group and 86% of the combination improved, suggests its just as effective
Limitations of the cognitive approach to treating depression:
diverse clients, Sturmey: any psychotherapy isn't suitable for clients with learning difficulties due to intense cognitive work
in extreme cases, some clients cannot motivate themselves to engage in the cognitive element, may find it hard to pay attention during sessions
relapse rates, Ali: assessed depression in 439 clients every month for 12 months following a course of CBT, found 42% relapsed within 6 months of stopping treatment and 53% in a year
The biological approach to explaining OCD: Genetic explanations
candidate genes - specific genes which increase vulnerability
OCD is polygenic - combination of genetic variations that increase vulnerability (Taylor: found 230 genes involved)
types of OCD - aetiologically heterogenous (one combination of genes may cause OCD in one person, by a different combination may cause the disorder in another person)
Strengths to the biological approach to explaining OCD: Genetic explanations
Nestadt: revised twin studies and found 68% of identical twins shared OCD as opposed to 31% of non-identical twins
research has found a person with a family member diagnosed with OCD is four times more likely to develop it as someone without
Limitations to the biological approach to explaining OCD: Genetic explanations
Cromer: found that over half the OCD clients in their sample had experienced a traumatic event in their past, therefore genetic vulnerability only provides a partial explanation for OCD
The biological approach to explaining OCD: Neural explanations
role of serotonin - regulates mood
if a person has low levels of serotonin, then normal transmission of mood-relevant information doesn't take place and a person may experience low moods
some OCD cases may be explained by a reduction in the functioning of the serotonin system in the brain
decision-making system - impaired decision-making
associated with abnormal functioning of the sides of frontal lobes, responsible for logical thinking
Strengths of the biological approach to explaining OCD: neural explanations
antidepressants that work purely on serotonin are effective in reducing OCD symptoms, suggesting serotonin may be involved in OCD
Limitations of the biological approach to explaining OCD: neural explanations
OCD is often co-morbid with depression, which causes a disruption to the action of OCD, it could therefore mean serotonin activity is disrupted in many people with OCD because they are depressed as well
The biological approach to treating OCD:
SSRI's - work on serotonin system in the brain by preventing the re-absorbtion and breakdown of serotonin on the presynaptic neuron, takes 3-4 months of daily use for an impact
Combining SSRI's with other treatment - antidepressant SSRI's reduces emotional symptoms of anxiety, allowing effective engagement in CBT
alternatives of SSRI's - tricyclics (same effect as SSRI's but have severe side effects) SNRI's (used for people who don't react to SSRI's, increase levels of serotonin and noradrenaline)
Strengths of the biological approach to treating OCD:
cost-effective, cheaper than psychological treatments so are good value for the NHS
non-disruptive
Soomro: review studies comparing SSRI's to placebos and concluded that 17 studies showed significantly better results for the SSRI's than the placebo
Limitations of the biological approach to treating OCD:
drugs can face side effects such as indigestion and blurred vision which reduces the effectiveness, therefore people may stop taking medication
if medication is self-administered there is a high risk of relapse
Goldacre: believed the evidence favouring drug treatment is biased because the research is sponsored by drug companies who may withhold elements of research, therefore making the evidence unreliable