Individual Differences Abnormality

1. Individual Differences Abnormality

2. Who is the most normal? – rank these celebrities from 1-5. 1 = Most normal.

3. Would someone be considered abnormal if….. They were gay? They had depression? They were a single parent? If they were a bigamist? If they had a learning difficulty? If they wore a bikini?

4. What is abnormality? How would we decide what is normal or abnormal? How would we measure/decide upon the extent of an abnormality?

5. HOW DO WE DEFINE WHAT IS NORMAL? In social terms We might use the standard of adequate functioning Or the concept of ideal mental health

6. DEVIATION FROM SOCIAL NORMS This approach to abnormality considers that an individual’s behaviour can impact on others and states that… Behaviour which doesn’t conform to socially acceptable patterns may be considered abnormal.

7. Are these behaviours socially deviant? Walking around in the nude? Refusing to go outside? Have several wives? Eating another human being? Holding up (making) the OK sign with your hand? Having a child out of wedlock? Being gay?

8. There are a number of problems with this approach – can you think of any? Social deviancy is related to moral standards which can change with time. Therefore this approach also had to change or would be historically biased. Social deviancy is also defined by the context in which a behaviour occurs. (It is ok to be in a bikini on a beach)

9. Social deviancy is not necessarily a bad thing: some people are socially deviant because they have a non-conformist lifestyle – others because their behaviour is motivated by high principles (Nazi Germany) SOCIAL DEVIANCY CAN’T BE THE SOLE CRITERION OF ABNORMALITY BUT IT IS IMPORTANT THAT PEOPLE TRY TO BEHAVE IN WAYS THAT ARE SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE SO THAT THEY DON’T UPSET OTHERS.

10. The failure to function adequately approach to define abnormality If an individual’s behaviour, mood or thoughts adversely affects their; (1) Well-being, i.e. their ability to retain relationships and employment. (2) Becomes a danger to their own safety (3) Become a danger to the safety of others Then they are considered abnormal.

11. Many mental disorders result in an inability to function adequately in terms of every day life and interactions. • SO… • many people who seek psychiatric help are recognising that they are not functioning adequately – so this could serve as a standard for abnormality

12. Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) have extended the failure to function approach to cover seven features associated with abnormality. Each of the features individually may not be enough to cause a problem - BUT when several are present then they are symptomatic of abnormality.

13. THE SEVEN FEATURES ARE: - • Suffering (personal distress) • Maladaptiveness (destructive behaviour) • Vividness and unconventionality of behaviour (strange behaviour) • Unpredictability and loss of control • Irrationality and incomprehensibility • Observer discomfort (making others feel uncomfortable) • Violation of moral and ideal standards

14. Group Activity – the seven features of abnormality. Imagine a continuum from normal behaviour at one end and extremely abnormal at the other. Bearing in mind Rosenhan and Seligman's definitions, consider the experiences on the next page and for each of them describe what would be acceptable behaviour and what would be regarded as abnormal.

15. Suffering – Grief Personal Distress Maladaptiveness – Disregard for ones own safety – taking part in extreme sports Vividness and unconventionality – Tattooing/ Piercing Unpredictability and loss of control – losing ones temper Irrationality and incomprehensibility – Remaining friendly towards someone who is hostile Observer discomfort – Laughing inappropriately Violation of moral and ideal standards – Removing ones clothes to sunbathe

16. LIMITATIONS of the “failure to function approach” The approach requires subjective decisions (Involves opinions) Some of the features also apply to people who are simply non-conformists or who are grieving etc. Not all people who have mental abnormalities are aware of their failure to function and so can deny that they have a problem.

17. Activity – Write a description of yourself – call this (A) then write a brief description of how you would like to be (B) How different are the two descriptions? If your ideal self is very different from your perceived self - Would NEVER achieving your ideal self result in you becoming mentally unbalanced – depressed etc??

18. Deviation from Ideal Mental Health. Humanistic Psychologists(Carl Rogers, Maslow) have been instrumental founders of this final approach of defining abnormality -

19. Rogers (1959) believed that abnormal behaviour occurs when a child receives conditional love from their parents (therefore the child will have to become somebody else in order to receive the love that they want) . Healthy psychological development or normal behaviour will therefore be a result of… Unconditional love – which leads to high self-esteemand freedom to seek self-actualisation

20. Jahoda(1958) – expanded on the ideal mental health theory and suggested that it was preferable to identify the criteria for positive mental health. She proposed 6 categories

21. Self–attitudes (positive) • Personal growth (being able to achieve) • Integration (being able to cope with stress) • Autonomy. (being independent) • Perception of reality (being relaistic – knowing what is real and what is not.) • Environmental mastery (the extent to which you can love and be loved)

22. Assessment of the deviation from ideal mental health model Pro’s – The approach focuses on positive characteristics – Identifies characteristics that people need to be mentally healthy rather than looking for problems Limitations: - Criteria used are hard to define, vague and difficult to measure (how do you rate someone’s attitudes/integration?) Criteria is bound to time and culture. – less likely to apply to collectivist societies.

23. Cultural Relativism • A major problem with ALL psychological definitions of Abnormality is that they often fail to consider differences between cultures. • Cultural Relativism means that value judgments are up to individual cultural context SO we cannot make absolute statements about what is normal or abnormal.

24. Different cultures will have different criteria as to what constitutes as normal and abnormal behaviour. What maybe considered deviant or abnormal in one culture may be normal in another • Dhat Syndrome in India is an example of this.

25. Dhat syndrome is found in Males of the Indian sub-continent. Sufferers have physical and mental exhaustion and blame it on the presence of blood in their semen. A PHYSICAL ILLNESS • WE would state that they have depression!

26. Also what is considered abnormal changes over time. For example – Homosexuality ceased to be categorised as a mental disorder in the 1980 edition of DSM (Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders) But was considered abnormal in America until the 1970s

27. BUT There are some features (identified by Rosenhan and Seligman) that are universal indicators of undesirable behaviour – Failure to eat, chronic depression etc • Conclusion –The 7 features proposed by Rosenhan and Seligman may offer the most realistic approach – the more of these features possessed by an individual the more likely it is that they can be categorised as abnormal