Defining Abnormality With Consideration of Cultural Differences

After reading Chapter 2 of Ronald J. Comer’s book, Fundamentals of Abnormal Psychology, I now understand key principles of 4 models that that contribute to understanding abnormalities. The first model is the biological model, which can be linked to Roman and Greek times as I read in chapter 1. It mainly states that the cause of psychological abnormalities is that of physical illness. In addition, the abnormalities are introduced because of malfunctioning parts in the brain. This includes the possible malfunction of neurons that are found in the cerebrum and the possible malfunction of these neurons and the transmissions between them. Other factors may include genes, evolution and viral infections

The question of what it means to be labelled ‘psychologically abnormal’ is examined closely in Rosenhans study of ‘On Being Sane in Insane Places’. This study highlights the usefulness and consequences of being diagnostically labelled.

Abnormal behavior relates to the influence of psychological factors, biological factors as well as the social factors referring to inadequate relationships. In the face of diverse definition, abnormal behavior refers to the deviating from norm, which norm is the typical behavior or characteristic of the population. As such, Jim behavior is abnormal because it violates moral and conventional mores of the society (Violates societal standards), as such causing social discomfort to others. For instance, Jim fails to recognize the social cues in conversation thereby annoying other interlocutors. Jim is this case is behaving in a manner counterproductive to his own well being by

The term ‘abnormal’ means deviating from the average. Therefore, if we were to adopt a literal approach to defining abnormality, we would conclude that any rare behaviour or ability was abnormal. This, however, is not a useful way of defining abnormality as it doesn’t take into account whether or not the behaviour is desirable. There are three ways of defining abnormality; deviation from

What constitutes normal and abnormal is not universally agreed upon, but there are certain criteria to consider when evaluating abnormalities, which was pointed out in Rosenhan (1973). However, he questions the standards of sanity in society and the system that diagnoses the abnormal. One of the primary research questions looks at if a psychiatric diagnosis is reflective of the person or the environment. To attempt to answer this, 8 people (pseudopatients) with no history of mental issues checked themselves into a psychiatric hospital under the pretense that they were hearing voices. After they were admitted, they

According to the text, abnormality can be defined by comparing the behavior of the person in question to a set of criteria. This set of

The poster is going to outline the definition of abnormality and describe two diagnostic classification systems whilst referencing the diagnostic criteria for Schizophrenia and an overlook of its subtype catatonic schizophrenia.

The Strengths and Limitations of the Biological Model of Abnormality This model uses physical illness as a model for psychological disorder, suggesting that like physical illness, mental illness has an underlying bodily cause. It proposes that genetic, organic or chemical disorders cause metal illnesses which give rise to behavioural and psychological problems. Thus, abnormality has physical causes such as brain dysfunction (neurological), biochemical imbalances, infections or genetics and so can only be cured through medical treatments. Therefore it implies that abnormality results from properly

For many years scientists, including doctors, psychologists, and psychiatrists, have been interested in trying to understand human behaviour, in particular behaviour that is described as being ‘abnormal’. It is difficult to define ‘abnormal’ in terms of behaviour because there are many differing descriptions which have radically changed over the years. ‘Abnormal’ behaviour is widely categorised as being persistent and in a serious degree contrary to the continued wellbeing of the individual and/or the surrounding community. Cultural beliefs and expectations determine which behaviour patterns are deemed as being ‘abnormal’.

There are several models of abnormality in use today (Comer, 2009) lists “The Biological Model…”, “The Psychodynamic Model…”, The Behavioral Model…”, The Cognitive Model…”, The Humanistic-Existential Model…”, The Sociocultural Model…” (p.33). The biggest contrasts would be the Biological model, and the other models. Comparing the biological model, and the cognitive model will highlight those differences.

With the following information in mind, it should be noted that not all disorders are considered pathological; some behaviors are seen as ways of expressing and communicating distress to members of a certain culture and are seen as culturally accepted responses (APA, 1994). In fact, cultures experience, express, and cope with feelings of distress in various ways that may counter what Western societies see as common. Furthermore, at times these cultural differences are

Psychological dysfunction is somewhat not satisfactory on the account of the behavior is contiuum. A more sensative impairment would not meet the standards for a disorder. Personal distress, by itself, this criteria doesn’t define abnormal behavior, because distress can be a normal reaction to a trumatic situation. Psychological diorders, by meaning, the suffering and distess is missing. Atypical or not culturally accepted is insufficient when it refers to someone such as a person with an extremely high IQ, who’s atypical but not dysfunctional. Culturally

Abnormal behavior is defined as a psychological dysfunction within an individual associated with distress or impairment in functioning and response that is not typical or culturally expected (Durand, 2005). There are

The sociocultural model suggests that abnormal behavior is the result of broad forces influencing an individual (Comer, 2015). By using this approach, the therapist is equipped to help Sara understand her irrational thoughts, atypical behaviors, and overall degree of abnormal functioning. Whilst, emphasizing the family-social and multicultural perspectives; a main tenet in facilitating individual experiences in sociocultural therapy. Taking into account, Sara’s traditional Japanese customs and values, coupled with cultural sensitivities and the norm within her respective society (Comer, 2015). Thus, in understanding Sara, the therapist should first focus on her awareness of familial hardships or stress since moving to the United States, helping Sara to identify and express any degree of unhappiness or discomfort.

Chapter 3 During the Middle Ages some “authorities” classified abnormal behaviors into two groups, those that resulted from demonic possession and those due to natural causes. The 19th-century German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin was the first modern theorist to develop a comprehensive model of classification based on the distinctive features, or symptoms, associated with abnormal behavior patterns (see Chapter 1). The most commonly used classification system today is largely an outgrowth and extension of Kraepelin’s work: the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association. Why is it important to classify abnormal behavior? For one thing, classification is the core of science. Without labeling and organizing patterns of abnormal behavior, researchers could not communicate their findings to one another, and progress toward understanding these disorders would come to a halt. Moreover, important decisions are made on the basis of classification. Certain psychological disorders respond better to one therapy than another or to one drug than another.