ao3x2

intro

• one individual differences explanation is the cognitive approach

support

• Barch et al. (1999):

  • Used Stroop test.

  • Schizophrenics = slower & made more mistakes than controls.

  • Supports idea that attentional filters are defective → inability to filter out irrelevant info.

• Evaluation:

  • Lab experiment → lacks ecological validity.

  • Poor performance may be due to lab stress, not schizophrenia itself.

refute

• Problem: Most schizophrenia participants in studies are already on antipsychotic medication.

• Impact: Medication alters brain functioning.

• Implication:

  • Cognitive impairments found may be side effects of drugs, not causes of schizophrenia.

  • Weakens validity of cognitive explanations

methodological

• Criticism: Cognitive theories often only describe deficits (e.g. attention, theory of mind).

• They explain proximal causes (immediate symptoms), but not distal causes (origins of the disorder).

• Implication:

  • Limits explanatory power → cannot fully explain schizophrenia alone.

  • Suggests a holistic approach (biological + psychological + social) is needed.

intro

second explanation is thew psychodynamic approacyh

support

• Despite flaws, it highlighted the importance of childhood experiences in schizophrenia.

• Influence: Inspired later theories on dysfunctional family dynamics.

• Impact on research:

  • Helped explain relapse in schizophrenia patients.

  • Opened up further exploration of how family relationships & childhood experiences affect symptoms.

refute x2

• Dangerous therapies:

  • Strupp et al. (1977): Psychoanalysis can be harmful for schizophrenics.

  • Requires reliving distressing memories → patients often emotionally incapable of coping.

  • Can cause more harm than benefit.

• Weak evidence – Schizophrenogenic mother:

  • Fromm-Reichmann (1934): Examined hospital records → 33/45 cases had overprotective mothers.

  • But 12/45 did not, weakening reliability.

  • Findings questioned: research lacked objectivity.

  • Overall: explanation is inconsistent and unconvincing.

cause and effect

• Issue of cause and effect:

  • Cannot prove cognitive deficits or childhood trauma cause schizophrenia.

  • Only shows a correlation/relationship between variables.

• Implication: Weakens explanatory power of individual differences approaches.

reductionis and deterministic

• Reductionist:

  • Ignore social factors influencing schizophrenia.

  • Epidemiological evidence: risk ↑ with being male, migrant, urban-living, poor at birth.

• Deterministic:

  • Assume individuals cannot adapt to trauma or adjust faulty cognition.

• Incomplete explanation:

  • Not all schizophrenics have traumatic childhoods or cognitive deficits.

  • Therefore, individual differences explanations cannot fully account for schizophrenia.

compare

Nature vs Nurture Criticism – Individual Differences Explanations

• Psychodynamic theories → schizophrenia = product of early experience (nurture).

• Contradiction: Strong evidence for biological factors.

• Heston (1966) adoption study:

  • Sample: 47 adoptees with biological mother diagnosed with schizophrenia, 50 adoptees without.

  • Findings:

    • 10.6% with schizophrenic biological mother → also diagnosed.

    • 0% without schizophrenic biological mother → diagnosed.

• Conclusion:

  • Suggests genetic link (nature), not purely upbringing.

  • Weakens psychodynamic "nurture-only" explanation.

conclusion

• trength: Provide useful insight into why some individuals are more vulnerable to schizophrenia.

• Limitation: On their own → incomplete explanation.

• Holistic approach more effective:

  • Combines biological, social, and individual differences explanations.

  • Identifies a wider range of risk factors.

  • Leads to more comprehensive support and treatment for patients.