PEEL paragraphs

• Can lead to human rights abuses

  P: A limitation of the deviation from social norms as a definition of abnormality is that it can lead to human rights abuses.

  E: If there is too much reliance, it may result in systematic abuse. For example, historically deviation from social norms was used to maintain control over minority ethnic groups and women. Classification considered ridiculous are only considered ridiculous nowadays because social norms have changed.

  E: Radical psychologists have suggested that some modern categories abuse the right to be different.

  L: Therefore, deviation from social norms may result in functioning individuals being considered abnormal as they do not meet societal norms.
• Cultural relativism


  P: A limitation of the deviation from social norms as a definition of abnormality is that it is affected by cultural relativism.

  E: This is because social norms vary tremendously in cultures and between cultures. For example, hearing voices is acceptable in African-American cultures, however, considered a mental abnormality in the UK.

  E: This suggests that deviation from social norms cannot be used to identify abnormal behaviour in other cultures.

  L: Therefore, the deviation from social norms as a definition of abnormality is limited by its cultural bias.
• Not a sole explanation

  P: A strength of the deviation from social norms as a definition of abnormality is it is not a sole explanation.

  E: There is real life application to the definition, the definition aids in the diagnoses of affectionless psychopathy disorder.

  P: However, this strength of applying the definition is limited as other factors are not considered.

  E: For example, the distress to other people resulting affectionless psychopathy disorder is best explained through the failure to function adequately definition.

  E: This suggests that there is never one sole reason for defining abnormality.
• Desirability of behaviour


  P: A strength of the deviation from social norms is that it is supported by the fact that there are certain behaviours that are less desirable than others.

  E: For example, high levels of aggression is considered in society.

  E: This suggests that through identifying deviations from social norms - e.g. aggression - this can allow the development of treatments which will enable the individuals to perform socially acceptable behaviours.

  L: Therefore, deviation from social norms as a definition for abnormality can be used to identify and treat individuals with abnormal behaviour.
• Real Life application


  P: A strength of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality is that there is real life application.

  E: Statistical infrequency is used in the diagnosis of intellectual disability disorder. Furthermore, all diagnosis include measurement of severity of symptoms compared to norms.

  E: This suggests that statistical infrequency is a useful part of clinical assessment.

  L: Therefore, statistical infrequency as a definition fo abnormality is beneficial in identify individuals with abnormal behaviours and will potentially aid them in pursuing treatment.
• No benefit to label


  P: HOWEVER, a limitation of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality is that people do not benefit from being labelled.

  E: People with very low IQ who are not distressed and therefore capable of working, do not need an IDD diagnosis.

  E: One may suggest that it would have a negative effect on them if they were labelled and may result in them feeling distressed.

  L: Therefore, statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality may cause self-fulfilling prophecy or an increase in distress if diagnosed.
• Unusual characteristics positive


  P: A limitation of statistical infrequency as a definition of abnormality is that unusual characteristics may be positive.

  E: An IQ over 130 is unusual, however, it is not undesirable and does not require treatment.

  E: This suggests that not all statistical infrequent behaviours are negative.

  L: Therefore, this is a serious limitation of the statistical infrequency definition of abnormality as it means that it cannot be used on its own to diagnose disorders.
• Subjective judgement


  P: A limitation of the failure to function adequately definition of abnormality is that it uses subjective judgements.

  E: Psychologists must judge if someone is distressed or not based on their own instinct. This means that some psychologists may considered an individual to be experience distress whilst other psychologists would not judge the same individual as experience distress.

  E: This suggests that the definition lacks criterion validity.
• Patient's perceptive


  P: However, this limitation has been addressed through the introduction of checklists such as the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale. Therefore, a strength of the definition is that it has elements of objectivity and also incorporates the patient's perceptive.

  E: The definition does not include subjective experiences of the individual and use criterion to assess the abnormality.

  E: This suggests that the failure to function adequately is objective and therefore the criterion validity would increase.

  L: Therefore, despite there being some subjective elements to the definition, failure to function adequately may be used to successfully and objective identify abnormal behaviour through the incorporating objective checklists and the patient's perceptive.
• Simply deviation from social norms?

  P: A limitation of the failure to function adequately as a definition of abnormality is that it hard to differentuate between someone failing to function and when someone is just deviating from norms.

  E: For example, individuals who live alternative lifestyles would be considered to be failing to function adequately as extreme sports lovers may be accused of being malaadaptive.

  E: This suggests that the failure to function adequately risks limiting personal freedom and discriminating against minority groups.

  L: Therefore, the failure to function adequately as a definition of abnormality is limited as it may wrong consider people as failing to function adequately when in reality they are only deviating from social norms.
• Cultural relativism w. Jahoda's criteria

  P: A limitation of the deviation from mental health adequately as a definition of abnormality is that it is culturally bias.

  E: Hearing voices may be considered normal in African-American cultures as it is perceived as being spoken to by God.

  E: This suggests that the deviation from mental health as a definition of abnormality is limited as it is not applicable to non-Western cultures. This refutes the idea that the failure to function adequately may be used to explain behaviour of non-Western cultures.

  L: Therefore, this decreases our confidence in the validity of the deviation from mental health adequately as a definition of abnormality.
• Comprehensive definition


  P: A strength of deviation from ideal mental health as a definition of abnormality is that it is a comprehensive definition.

  E: The definition is very comprehensive and incorporates a broad range of criteria as it covers most reasons why people should ask for help.

  E: This suggests that it is a good tool for thinking about mental health.

  L: Therefore, deviation from ideal mental health is a positive definition as it may encourage people to seek help if they identify any of the 6 abnormal behaviours. This would be beneficial for society as 1/3 of absentees from work is due to poor mental health, therefore the definition would aid the improvement of people's mental health as it indicates clearly the signposts to when they are deviating from the ideal mental health.
• Unrealistically high standards


  P: A limitation of the deviation from ideal mental health is that it is unrealistic.

  E: Jahoda's 6 points for ideal mental health are unrealistic as it is unlikely that many people would achieve all 6 points such as resistance to stress and positive self-belief.

  E: This suggests that deviation from ideal mental health is an ineffective definition of abnormality as it would perceive everyone as "abnormal".

  L: Therefore this refutes the deviation from ideal mental health as a definition of abnormality as it would not aid the development of intervention or preventative measures and may result in a self-fulfilling prophecy as it implies that if you cannot achieve the 6 points that you will not have a good mental health.
• Phobias not following trauma

  P: A limitation of the 'Two Process Model' as an explanation for phobias is that not all phobias follow trauma.

  E: A fear of snake despite having never met one may be explained better through the social learning theory. The social learning theorywould suggest that because a child saw parents being fearful of the snakes that they would intimate the fear, resulting in the phobia.

  E: This suggests phobias can be developed without the phobic stimulus.

  L: Therefore, the behaviourist explanation of phobias is limited.as it solely explains phobias to have developed as the result of association.
• Incomplete explanation


  P: A limitation of the 'Two Process Model' is that it is an incomplete explanation.

  E: Bounton (2007) suggested that evolutionary factors had an important role in the development of phobias - for example, the fear of dark or snakes was an adaptive fear.

  E: Seligman suggested that biological preparedness was more important in the development of pobias than just conditioning.

  L: Therefore, we cannot have confidence that the 'Two Process Model' is a reliable explanation for phobias.
• Alternative explanation for avoidance behaviour


  P: A limitation of the 'Two Process Model' is that there are alternative explanations for avoidance behaviour.

  E: Research has found that avoidance behaviour is motivated by the positve feeling of safety - this finding has been used to explain why agoraphobics do not leave their homes.

  E: This suggests that avoidance behaviour is not the result of the desire to reduce anxiety as the theory suggests as it contradicted by research.

  L: Therefore, the 'Two Process Model' is limited because research contradicts the suggestion that avoidance behaviour is motivated solely by the need to reduce anxiety.
• Cognitive aspects of phobias

  P: A limitation of the 'Two Process Model' is that it does not consider the cognitive aspects of phobias.

  E: Behavioural characteristics such as panic and avoidance may be the bi-product of cognitive processes instead of classical or operant condition. We may be hardwired to focus attention on certain stimulus due to our biology.

  E: This suggests that phobias are innate rather than learnt like the behaviourist explanation of phobias suggests.

  L: Therefore, this indicates that Mowerer's 'Two Process Model' is flawed and phobias may be the result of other factors instead of classical or operant conditioning.
• Good explanatory power


  P: A strength of the 'Two Process Model' is that it has good explanatory power.

  E: The explanation successfully explains the maintenance of phobias. Furthermore, it has had important implication because explains why we need phobias as wellas helping prevent avoidance behaviour through not reinforcing it.

  E: This suggests that the development of an explanation for phobias has had positive implications.

  L: Therefore, the good explanatory power of the 'Two Process Model' is a strength as it has lead to the development of successful treatments such as flooding & systematic desensitation.
• Cost-effective


  P: A strength of flooding is that is an appropraite treatment.

  E: Flooding is highly effective & quicker than other alternatives.

  E: This suggests that flooding is highly appropriate as it has a quick effect.

  L: Therefore, this is a strength of flooding as it means the sufferers are free of symptoms as soon as possible and consequently costs them less than systematic desensitisation.
• Less effective for some types of phobias

  P: A limitation of flooding as a treatment of phobias is that it less effective for some types of phobias.

  E: Despite flooding being a highly effective treatment for simple phobias, it is less effective for more complex phobias such as social phobias because flooding does not address the cognitive aspects of the phobia.

  E: This suggests that some phobia sufferers would benefit more from cognitive therapies such as cognitive behavioural therapies because they tackle irrational thinking.

  L: Therefore, this is a limitation as highlights that flooding is not always appropriate treatment for phobias as it does not incorporate the cognitive element of phobias.
• Treatment traumatic for patients

  P: A limitation of flooding is that it can be traumatic for patients.

  E: This is the most serious issue with flooding. It is not an unethical treatment as patients give their consent, however, patients are often unwilling to see it through to the end.

  E: This suggests flooding's effectiveness is limited due to the extreme nature of the treatment.

  L: Therefore, flooding is limited as time and money are wasted preparing patients for them to refuse or not finish the treatment.
• Symptom substitution


  P: A limitation of the treatments of phobias is that symptom substitution.

  E: This is when one phobia goes and another develops - for example, the phobia of snakes being cured and changed to a phobia of trains. However, there is very mixed evidence as to whether symptom substitution occurs.

  E: This suggest that although this may occur, it is not very common. However, it is a potentially huge problem for behaviourist treatments.

  L: Therefore, this is a limitation as it potentially reduces the effectiveness of the behaviourist treatments of phobias.
• Acceptable for patients


  P: A strength of systematic desentivisation is that it acceptable for patients.

  E: Patients tend to prefer it and they tend to choose it over flooding as there is not the same degree of trauma.

  E: The low refusal rates and low attrition rates suggest that systematic desentivisation is an appropriate treatment for phobias.

  L: Therefore, systematic desentivisation is a more appropriate treatment for phobias than flooding.
• Suitable for diverse range of patients

  P: A strength of systematic desentivisation is that it suitable for a diverse range of patients.

  E: Some phobia sufferers have learning difficulties find it hard to understand during flooding or cognitive therapies because they require a reflection on thinking.

  E: This suggests that systematic desentivisation is the most appropriate treatment for phobias.

  L: Therefore, systematic desentivisation is the most appropriate treatment for phobias as it is suitable for a diverse range of patients whereas flooding is not appropriate for all patients.
• Gilroy et al. (2003)


  P: A strength of systematic desentivisation is its effective is supported by research evidence.

  E: Gilory et al (2003) found that after the experimental group had had three 45 minutes systematic desentivisation, they were less fearful after 3 months and 33 months than the control group (who only learnt relaxation techniques).

  E: This suggests that systematic desentivisation is effective in reducing fear of the phobic stimilus.

  L: Therefore, this is a strength of systematic desentivsation as it shows that it is an highly effective treatment and therefore will aid the sufferers to function in their everyday life even after stopping systematic desentivisation treatment.
• Grazioli & Terry (2000)


  P: Beck's cognitive theory of depression is supported by research evidence.

  E: Grazioli & Terry looked 65 pregnant women for cognitive vulnerability and found that those who had higher cognitive vulnerability were more likely to suffer post-natal depression.

  E: This suggests that there is a cognitive factor of depression as Beck suggests.

  L: Therefore, this research supports Beck's explanation for depression as it supports that cognitive processes are involved in depression.
• Practical applications


  P: A strength of Beck's cognitive theory of depression is that it has practical applications.

  E: The theory has had led to the development of CBT which challenges irrational theory and Lipsky et al. found that it reduced depression.

  E: This supports the theory because it supports that irrational thoughts are a cause of depression as depression would not reduce with CBT if they were not involved.

  L: Therefore, this is a strength of Beck's cognitive theory as successful treatments could not have been developed based on an incorrect theory, this gives us confidence in the reliability of Beck's cognitive theory of depression.
• Doesn't explain all aspects

  P: A weakness of Beck's cognitive theory of depression is that it does not explain all aspects of depression.

  E: The theory neatly explains basic symptoms, however, some depressed patients are deeply angry or experience hallucination which is not explained by the theory. For example, cotard syndrome has delusions are zombies which cannot be explained by Beck's theory.

  E: This suggests that Beck's theory does not explain all aspects of depression.

  L: Therefore, Beck's cognitive theory of depression is a limited explanation.