normality vs abnormality

the following broad approaches to defining abnormality hv been the most influential

• abnormality as a deviation from social norms

• abnormality as inadequate functioning

• abnormality as a deviation from ideal mental health

• abnormality as statistical infrequency

• medical model of abnormality

in an intuitive way, we define abnormality as something that go outside of the boundaries of what is considered acceptable in society

• abnormality is something thats a deviation from social norms

• but obviously this definition has issues

  • if abnormality is defined in relation to society, how do we account for the fact that society’s change & evolve

    • different cultures hv different criteria for what is normal & abnormal

    • and even old definitions of abnormality may not be applicable to today’s society

  • since society defines what is acceptable, then this means that abnormality can be used as a form of social control

    • if ppl dont follow the rules of a society, they can be labelled as abnormal & cast away from society

      • this position led to the movement of anti-psychiatry

  • some patterns of behaviour may be socially acceptable, but could still be harmful to the individual

    • ex: not being able to leave your home could be smthg thats socially acceptable, but the fact that the person is unable to leave home is an indicator of a bigger issue

  • abnormality should be evaluated in a context

Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) proposed that a theory- abnormality is inadequate functioning

they had 7 criteria that can be used to establish abnormality

1. suffering - subjective experience of one’s state as wrong

2. maladaptiveness - inability to achieve major life goals

3. unconventional behaviour

4. unpredictability/loss of control over actions

5. irrationality

6. observer discomfort

7. violation of moral standards

this approach doesn’t account of times when abnormal behaviour can be adaptive

• some behaviours or actions (like extreme sports) may be harmful but they aren’t classified as abnormal

• some behaviours may be uncomfortable to other people, but they may not be causing harm to the individuals (ex: public displays of affection)

Rosenhan and Seligman claimed that there are degrees of abnormality (likely in response to these limitations)

• degrees of abnormality can be defined as the number of abnormal behaviours that’re met?

• also abnormal behaviour may be seen only when multiple criteria are seen together

Abnormality as a deviation from ideal mental health

humanistic psychologists - psychologists who believe that psychology should focus on the positive aspects of humanity & human experiences (like joy, self-realization) instead of the negative aspects

• focusing only on the negative side of human experiences meant that researchers weren’t able to see the root cause of problems, or if there were bigger issues beneath the problems

Marie Jahoda (1958) identified 6 characteristics of ideal mental health (her theory was abnormality as a deviation from ideal mental health)

1. efficient self-perception

2. realistic self-esteem

3. voluntary control of behaviour

4. accurate perception of the world

5. positive relationships

6. self-direction & productivity

positive of this approach - it is defined through what an individual needs to achieve, instead of what they are not able to do

• also embraces interpersonal relationships, self-perception

weakness - the approach to the feasibility of mental health

• may be impossible to achieve all 6 characteristics of mental health, so people who are exhibiting abnormal behaviour won’t be identified as abnormal, even tho they are abnormal?

• the parameters are also difficult to quantify - kinda open to interpretation

Abnormality as statistical infrequency (theory)

Statistical infrequency has been used as a criterion of abnormality

• a behaviour is identified as abnormal if it’s statistically unusual

  • ex - IQ

different thresholds in statistical research that can be used to determine “norms”

• 95%

• 99%

• 99.9%

obviously this approach has weaknesses

• statistical norms change - the average IQ in the world increases at approx 3 IQ points every 10 years

• statistically infrequent behaviours are sometimes desired

  • ppl with high IQs are valued in society

but a strength of this approach is that it quantifies abnormality

the medical model of abnormality (theory)

instead of trying to create a common definition to fit all possible types of mental disorders, a possible approach could be to look at each disorder separately & establish a set of symptoms that define it

• would involve a dynamic effort of generations of clinicians, instead of relying on the research of a single scientist

defining each abnormality based on its symptoms - known as the medical model of abnormality

the model assumes that disorders hv a cause, which can be inferred only on observable symptoms

• ex - cant see depression, but it could be inferred if the individual experiences consistent periods of sadness, loses interest in hobbies for a long time (observable symptoms)

• so, a medical classification of abnormal behaviour implies identifiable patterns of behaviour in each disorder

strength - is flexible

• includes different perspectives on mental illness

• also allows a diagnosis to be exist separately from a clinicians theoretical orientations

weakness - is difficult to apply the medical model to mental illness, as some symptoms of mental illness aren’t rlly observable (like mood changes - how do we identify mood changes without using a questionnaire)

• also, need to determine which symptoms are indicators of a specific mental illness, or are related to which disorder

  • one symptom may be an indicator of multiple disorders, and it is only through a combo of symptoms that mental disorders can be distinguished or diagnosed

    • but then using multiple symptoms raises questions

      • which symptoms are primary & which are secondary

      • how many symptoms hv to be present & for how long