Definitions of Abnormality

• Identify the definitions of abnormality

  1. Deviation from social norms
  2. Deviation from ideal mental health
  3. Failure to function adequately
  4. Statistical infrequency
• Deviation from ideal mental health


  Researcher: Marie Jahoda(1958)

  humanist principles in defining six features of ideal mental health, suggesting that deviation from these features would indicate an abnormality:

  Environmental mastery

  Autonomy

  Resisting stress

  Self actualisation

  Positive attitude towards oneself

  Accurate perception of reality
• Deviation from social norms


  • According to the definition, a person is considered abnormal when their behaviour doesn’t follow social norms
  • Social norms are unwritten rules for how members of a social group are expected to behave
• Failure to function adequately

  When people are unable to cope with normal tasks in their everyday life, such as getting ready and going to work
• Statistical infrequency

  • This definition states that abnormal behaviour is behaviour that is very rare
  • Statistics are how we measure how common behaviours or traits are when measured in comparison to the rest of the population
• Features: Failure to function adequately

  • Maladaptive behaviour
  • Personal anguish
  • Observer discomfort
  • Irrationality and unpredictability
  • Unconventionality
  • Researchers: Rosenhan and Seligman (1989)
• Strength: Failure to function adequately

  • This definition had clinical application
  • For example, in disorders like ADHD, autism, depression and OCD, clinicians only provide a diagnosis when they consider symptoms to impact on patients’ ability to function day to day
  • This is a strength as the criteria in FTFA provide a useful threshold for clinicians when deciding whether to provide a clinical diagnosis, and so recommend treatment
  • This allows therapies to be prioritised for those who need it most, improving the usefulness of FTFA as a definition of abnormality
• Negative Implications: Limitations of FTFA p1

  • Could lead to the labelling of alternative lifestyles as abnormal
  • For example, people who engage in thrill-seeking behaviours like base jumping or mountaineering could be labelled as abnormal according to FTFA, when they simply have different preferences and hobbies
• Negative Implications: FTFA p2

  
  

  • Labelling alternative lifestyles as abnormal according to FTFA
  • Could lead to people being inappropriately labelled as a danger to themselves or others
  • Could cause them to be referred for treatment they do not need
  • Unnecessary referrals for treatment puts strain on mental health services, which has negative implications for the economy
• Context Specific: FTFA

  • The definition does not consider people's circumstances when labelling them as abnormal
  • For example, people in high pressure jobs like banking are chronically stressed but are not abnormal as they accept this is part of the workplace culture
• Context Specific: FTFA p2

  • Likewise students may fail to function during exam season, even though this is a normal expectation for students across the country
  • This is a limitation as behaviours that are considered normal within their natural setting or context are instead labelled abnormal by society
  • Potentially causing additional stress for the people in these communities
• LIMITATION: DIMH definition is culture specific

  • it is culture-specific
  • Jahoda’s criteria are based on an American-centric view of mental health that prioritises autonomy and personal independence
  • This is an issue as countries that prioritise community and interdependence as attributes are likely to be classified as abnormal
  • As a result, DIHM is a culturally relative definition of abnormality, meaning unique criteria would need to be developed by clinicians in each country in order to be valid
• Given all of Jahoda's criteria must be met for ideal mental health, it is unlikely any of us will achieve ideal mental health for a prolonged period in our lifetimes, in particular self-actualisation
• STRENGTH: DIMH has real world application

  • it has practical application to clinical diagnoses
  • As DIMH uses standardised criteria to define the characteristics of ideal mental health
  • In turn, this allows for a consistent and reliable measurement to be used in the assessment of people’s mental health
  • This is a strength as it provides an objective and reliable measure for clinicians to use when diagnosing if a person is deviating from ideal mental health, by drawing a clear distinction between mental health and psychological illness
  • This will improve patients’ access to appropriate treatment
• STRENGTH


  SI definition has real world application
• Disorders such as Intellectual disability are diagnosed by looking at how representative a behaviour is within the population
• People who receive this diagnosis have less than 70 in an IQ test
• This is the case in less than 2% of the population and is therefore considered abnormal
• Strength of the definition

  • Allows for clinical diagnosis to be given to those behaviours which deviate from the statistical norm
  • Allows clinicians to quickly identify who is most in need of treatment or support
• This shows the value of using statistical frequency criterion when defining abnormal behaviours
• LIMITATION: SI definition is culture specific

  • it is culture-bound
  • For example, according to Kessler & Bromet (2013), the prevalence of depression in France (21%) is much higher than it is in Japan (6%).
  • This is an issue, as a person diagnosed with depression may be considered normal in France but abnormal in Japan due to cultural differences in diagnosis, which could impact how depressed individuals are viewed by society.
  • Therefore, we must accept that defining abnormality by statistical infrequency cannot be generalised across cultures, so lacks external validity
• LIMITATION: SI definition has negative implications of labelling behaviours as abnormal

  • not all rare characteristics should be considered abnormal.
  • For example, very few people have above 120 IQ, but it would not be useful to label such a person as abnormal as they do not require treatment.
  • This is a limitation as statistical infrequency fails to distinguish between desirable and undesirable rare behaviours and labels both as abnormal
  • Futhermore, there is not a meaningful cut-off at which point behaviour becomes abnormal. Instead, it is an arbitrary percentage.