AO3

• Further support for the impact of stress was found by Varese (2012) who found that

  -children who experience severe trauma before the age of sixteen were three times more likely to develop SZ in later life compared to the general population

  -There was a relationship between the level of trauma and the likelihood of developing SZ, with those severely traumatised children having a greater risk.
• A strength is that

  -interactionist treatment of schizophrenia is that it is not reductionist, it takes a holistic stance and aims to improve the individual's psychological wellbeing as well as dealing with the physiological aspects, such as lowering dopamine levels via medication.
• Another strength is that There is strong research evidence supporting the idea that schizophrenia develops through an interaction of factors.

  -For instance, Tienari et al. (2004) found that adopted children with a genetic risk for schizophrenia were more likely to develop it only if they were raised in dysfunctional families.-This suggests neither genes nor environment alone are sufficient — it’s their interaction that matters.

  -Such findings validate the interactionist model, highlighting its predictive power and real-world relevance.
• A limitation is that it can be difficult to establish cause and effect between the interacting factors.

  -For example, it’s unclear whether family dysfunction causes schizophrenia or whether the early signs of schizophrenia lead to dysfunctional family relationships.-This makes it hard to pinpoint the exact nature of the “interaction,” limiting our ability to predict or prevent the disorder.-Therefore, while the approach is comprehensive, its lack of clarity about causal relationships reduces its explanatory precision.
• Another drawback is that the interactionist model’s complexity makes it difficult to investigate empirically.

  -Because it involves multiple interacting factors — biological, psychological, and social — it’s challenging to design experiments that isolate and measure their combined effects.-This means our understanding of how these factors work together remains theoretical rather than proven.

  -As a result, the approach, while appealing in theory, lacks precise scientific evidence supporting its mechanisms.