Abnormality

• 4 definitions of abnormality

  • Statistical infrequency
  • Deviation from social norms
  • Failure to Function adequately
  • Deviation from ideal mental health
• Signs of Failure to Function Adequately (FFA)

  • Personal space
  • Personal stress
  • Irrational behaviour - danger to others or self
• Criteria for Jahoda's definition of positive mental health

  • Positive self-attitude
  • Self-actualisation
  • Resistance to stress
  • Autonomy (independent)
  • Accurate perception of reality
  • Environmental mastery
• Statistical infrequency


  Behaviour is seen as abnormal if it is statistically rare and not exhibited by many people or in a population
• Deviation from social norms

  Behaviour is seen as abnormal if it doesn't fit the rules of expected behaviour or accepted behaviour of a majority in a population
• Failure to Function Adequately (FFA)

  Behaviour is seen as abnormal when it makes it difficult to lead/ cope with everyday life
• Deviation from ideal mental health


  Behaviour is seen as abnormal when someone who lacks several of the 6 categories and who doesn't meet the criteria of being 'mentally unhealthy'
• There are four ways to define abnormality - statistical infrequency, deviation from social norms, FFA, deviation from ideal mental health
• Common evaluations of definitions of abnormality


  • Real life application
  • Cultural relativism
  • Subjectivity
• Evaluations of abnormality


  • Statistical infrequency
  • Deviation from social norms
  • Failure to function adequately
• SI eval - real life application

  • Useful diagnostic and assessment tool, indicates cut off point (Beck's Depression Inventory)
• SI eval - labelling

  May have a negative impact on their life as might influence the way people view them or they view themselves (unnecessary harm)
• DFSN eval - real life application

  • Useful in diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder as what is normal and abnormal is considered by society
• FFA eval - personal perspective


  • Useful criterion for assessing abnormality as it includes people's experiences so the final diagnosis will be comprised of the patient's (subjective) self-reported symptoms and the psychiatrist's objective opinion. Not restricted by statistical limits
• FFA eval - labelling

  May have a negative impact on their life as might influence the way people view them or they view themselves (unnecessary harm)
• FFA eval - cultural relativism

  • Difficult to establish a universal definition, as each culture has a different view of what is normal or abnormal behaviour. What is considered as 'adequate' functioning behaviour in one culture may not be in another e.g women remaining housebound - agoraphobia
• FFA eval - subjective criteria


  Difficult to diagnose because they are based on subjective criteria of the clinicians. Diagnoses may vary so not very accurate e.g when does a grieving widower become FFA

• DFSN eval - social vs statistical

  • More useful than statistical norms because it includes the issue of desirability of a behaviour
• DSFN eval - cultural relativism

  • Abnormality can vary from society to society so creates problems for a person living with one culture from another culture. e.g sexual consent UK(16yrs), Angola (12yrs)
• DFSN eval - views change over time

  • Inappropriate because it is not reliable, as it is dependent on the prevailing social norms and moral values which can change. e.g issue of homosexuality disorder in DSMII not in DSMIII
• DFSN eval - dependent on social context

  • Limited use as makes abnormality a relative concept (may exist might not depending on situation). Abnormality depends on social situation in which behaviour occurred. e.g urinating in bathroom/classroom
• SI eval - desirability issues

  • Not effective diagnostic tool as reductionist (high IQ or low anxiety normal but classed as abnormal)
• SI eval - not all abnormal behaviours rare

  • Concept of statistical infrequency is limited as not all abnormal behaviours are statistically rare. Depression is statistically common - 20/30% will suffer in life from it but 'abnormal'
• SI eval - subjective cut off point

  • Disagreements about cut-off points make it difficult to define abnormality in this way
• DIMH eval - comprehensive definition

  • The range of factors discussed in relation to Jahoda’s ideal mental health, make it good tool for thinking about mental health. Covers most of the reasons a person would be seeking for help from services. 
• DIMH eval - Too idealistic

  • Six characteristics of positive mental health are unrealistic as most people would find it difficult to achieve all six at the same time. Everyone can be described as abnormal to some extent, which doesn’t determine a genuine distinction between normal and abnormal. (self-actualisation hard to achieve)
• DIMH eval - cultural relativism

  • Some cultures fall short of Jahoda’s criteria of ideal mental health, which may indicate wrongly abnormality when it is really different cultural values. (Western emphasis on ‘self-actualisation’ and ‘autonomy’)
• DIMH eval - subjective criteria

  • Some concepts in Jahoda criteria are vague and difficult to measure. e.g. ‘accurate perception of reality’ will be difficult to measure objectively, as reality is seen differently for each person because of experiences. There may be variations in diagnostics so not very accurate 
• Deviation from ideal mental health evaluations

  • Comprehensive definition
  • Too idealistic
  • Cultural relativism/bias
  • Subjective Criteria
• Statistical infrequency evaluations

  • Real life application
  • Desirability issues
  • Not all abnormal behaviours are rare
  • Subjective cut off point 
  • Labelling 
• Deviation from social norms evaluations

  • Social vs statistical 
  • Real life application 
  • View change over time
  • Dependent on social context 
  • Cultural relativism 
• Failure to function adequately evaluations

  • Patient’s perspective
  • Cultural relativism
  • Dependent on social context 
  • Subjective cut off point 
  • Labelling