psychopatholgy exam 1

BU - PS371

4 Ds

deviance, danger, distress, dysfunction

morbidity

state of having a specific illness/condition

comorbidity

state of having 2 or more illnesses/conditions

incidence

percentage of new expression of given condition within target period

prevalence

any expression of given condition

genotype

genetic information

phenotype

what's physically expressed

allele

one or more alternate forms of a gene that arise by mutation, found at same place on chromosome

heritability

proportion of presence within a given population (believed to be due to genetic variation)

validity

extent to which what's being measured is measuring what it's supposed to - is it accurate?

internal validity

confidence that variables of interest (independent variables) produce specific outcome of interest (dependent variables)

external validity

how well findings relate to real world conditions

reliability

consistency of a measure - can same results be reproduced? is measure consistent?

internal reliability

extent to which measure is consistent within itself, split-half method

split-half method

measures extent to which all parts of test contribute equally to what's being measured

external reliability

extent to which a measure varies from one use to another

test-retest

measures stability of test over time

inter-rater

degree to which different raters give consistent estimates of the same behavior

nomothetic

based on peer-based norms (most common in present)

idiographic

assessments based on individual (more common in past)

sign

indicator of condition as observed by others, not individual, objective, estimated visually or with instruments

symptom

indicator of condition as perceived by individual, subjective, cannot be estimated/quantified

syndrome

condition characterized by specific set of symptoms

correlation

extent to which two variables are connected

causation

extent to which one variable causes another

does correlation equal causation?

NO!

morbidity

relating to state of being ill or diseased

comorbidity

more often than not simultaneous presence of one or mother additional illnesses/disorders

incidence

percentage of new expression of given disease within target period

prevalence

percentage within certain population of any expression of given disorder within target period

presumed casual factors

nature, nurture, integration

emphasis on independent and interrelated biological, social, and psychological factors & the way they interact with one another

developmental factors

high-risk periods, at-risk populations, critical periods? age-related factors that influence possibility of disorders?

treatment-related factors

options/treatments of choice, psychological vs. biological vs. other treatment options, what's best for whom & when?

paradigm

model or framework for which to view a phenomenon

philippe pinel

humane treatment of mentally ill during french revolution

william tuke

founder of the retreat at york, humane treatment of mentally ill, "moral treatment"

dr. benjamin rush

among first of americans to believe that mental illness was "disease of the mind" and not demonic possession, "father of american psychiatry"

dorothea dix

advocated for humane treatment of people with mental illness in asylums in america

emil kraepelin

classification system for identification of mental illness, credited with first record-keeping system in mental hospitals

key figures - psychodynamic

freud, jung, adler, horney

characteristics - psychodynamic

maladaptive behavior is the result of unconscious unresolved conflict. pathology results as net observable effect of unmet needs

theoretical foundation - psychodynamic

case studies, correlational research

temporal focus - psychodynamic

historical

research support - psychodynamic

moderate

key figures - behavioral

skinner, pavlov, watson, thorndike

characteristics - behavioral

all behavior is learned, pathology results as maladaptive ways of coping with experience

theoretical foundation - behavioral

experimental-based

temporal focus - behavioral

ahistorical

research support - behavioral

strong

key figures - cognitive-behavioral

beck, seligman, bandura, maultsby, linehan

characteristics - cognitive-behavioral

maladaptive thoughts lead to maladaptive behavior - cognitive errors can be unmasked and modified

theoretical foundation - cognitive-behavioral

animal research, case studies, experimental human research

temporal focus - cognitive-behavioral

historical and contemporary

research support - cognitive-behavioral

strong

key figures - humanistic/existential

maslow, rogers, satir

characteristics - humanistic/existential

pathology results from difficulty finding pleasure/fulfillment

theoretical foundation - humanistic/existential

subjective, mostly self-report

temporal focus - humanistic/existential

present, future

research support - humanistic/existential

weak

key figures - multicultural/sociocultural

wing sue, sue, linton, parham, white, comas-diaz, landrine

characteristics - multicultural/sociocultural

maladaptive responses to conflicts between dominant and "minority" cultural norms

theoretical foundation - multicultural/sociocultural

interpersonal dynamics, sociology, anthropology, political science

temporal focus - multicultural/sociocultural

historical and contemporary

research support - multicultural/sociocultural

modest

historical perspective disease model

each disorder has clear underlying physiological cause

genome-wide associated studies (GWAS)

identify specific genetic markers believed to be associated with psychiatric disorders

common disease common variant (CDCV)

many genes contribute to association with disorder (most likely)

multiple rare variant (MRV)

few genes (multiple rare variances) contribute to association with disorder

genetic linkage analyses

examine traits with known genetic coding as potential markers of disorder

twin studies

prevalence of schizophrenia in identical vs. fraternal twins

adoption studies

twins raised separately w/o biological parents instead of together

family studies

expression of traits among relatives as a function of degree of relatedness

diathesis-stress model

diathesis = physiological vulnerability to expression of disorder

risk for expression determined by stress, but stress not constant throughout life

reciprocal gene-environment

more dynamic than diathesis-stress model, takes genetically encoded traits into consideration (increase/decrease probability of encountering stressful experiences)

cross-sectional

study of effects/relationships over time by recruiting groups of individuals (eg. grouping by age)

longitudinal

study of effects/relationships over time, across multiple assessment sections

case studies

detailed exploration of rare occurrences, help generate hypotheses

single-subject experiments

allows testing of causal hypotheses

single-person study flaws

susceptible to bias, difficult to generalize

population studies

get incidence, prevalence across population, eg. kessler et al

group experiments

existing or created for experiment, correlational and comparative

multiple person experiments pros and cons

easy to repeat, enhance external validity, but don't address causal factors

observational data

purely raw observation, nothing in manipulated

experimental data

intentional manipulation of variables in experimental environment

clinical trial phase i

evaluation of safety, open label (no deception), may represent first human use, very small samples

clinical trial phase ii

evaluate usefulness, risk, side effects, dose - placebo controlled, somewhat larger sample group, typically blinded - always at least single blinded, sometimes double blinded - compare study drug to placebo

clinical trial to phase iii

establish efficacy, compare to other treatments - blinded, random assignment to treatment groups

independent variable

variable that's being manipulated

dependent variable

variable that changes as outcome of manipulation

single blind study

one party (subject/experimenter) is unaware whether they are in the experimental or control group

double-blind study

neither party is aware which is the control group and which is the experimental group

statistical significance

results are reliable/statistically significant (p=.05)

clinical significance

contextualization of results - overall effect on well-being, health, functionality

purpose of assessment

background, diagnosis, track treatment goals and change if needed, select research subjects

concurrent validity

ability for a test to predict event in the present - does it line up with another measures known to measure outcome?

predictive validity

ability for a test to predict event in the future - does measure accurately predict outcomes that we would expect?

standardization

process in which procedures used in research are kept the same

bias

we want none of it. get that shit outta here