THE INTERACTIONIST APPROACH TO SCHIZOPHRENIA

EVALUATION

Research Support:

→ SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

• One strength is that there is evidence to support the dual role of vulnerability and triggers in the development of SZ.

• For example, Tienari et al (2004) investigated the combination of genetic vulnerability and parenting style. Children adopted from 19,000 Finnish mothers were assessed for SZ. Their adoptive parents were assessed for parenting style, and rates of SZ were compared to those in a control group of adoptees without any genetic risk.

• A parenting styles characterised by high levels of criticism and conflict, and low levels of empathy was implicated in the development of SZ, but only for the children with high genetic risk.

• This suggests that both genetic vulnerability and family-related stress are important in the development of SZ.

→ BENEFICIAL FOR TREATMENT PLANS

• A further strength is that there is evidence to support adopting an an interactionist approach to the treatment of SZ.

• For example, Tarrier et al (2004) randomly allocated 315 patients to either a medication + CBT group, a medication + supportive counselling group, or a medication only group.

• They found that patients in the two combination groups showed lower symptom levels than those in the medication only group.

• Research like this shows that there is a clear practical advantage to adopting an interactionist approach in the form of superior treatment outcomes, and therefore highlight the importance of taking an interactionist approach.

Conflicting Evidence:

→ NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD

• One weakness is that, although there is strong evidence that some sort of underlying diathesis coupled with stress can lead to SZ, we do not yet fully understand the mechanisms by which the symptoms of SZ appear, and how both diathesis and stress produce them.

• This suggests that the diathesis -stress model offers an incomplete explanation of SZ.