Describe and evaluate the biological approach to treating OCD (16)
Drugs are used in various ways to treat OCD to help increase serotonin levels in the brain.
Selective Serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs) are a type of antidepressant that work on the
serotonin system in the brain. Serotonin is released by the presynaptic neuron into the
synapse (the tiny gap between each neuron). The serotonin in the synapse travels to a
receiving neuron (postsynaptic neuron) which absorbs the serotonin using receptors.
Serotonin is then reabsorbed by the postsynaptic neuron into the presynaptic neuron.
Reuptake is a required aspect of neurological activity which regulates the amount of
neurotransmitter present in a synapse. To keep serotonin available in the synapse, SSRI
drugs work by blocking the presynaptic neuron from reabsorbing serotonin. This means an
increase in serotonin levels in the synaptic gap, and as a result, serotonin can continue to
bind to the receptors of the postsynaptic neuron. To reduce a person's emotional symptoms
drugs are paired with CBT. In some cases they help others to engage more with CBT. That
being said, when SSRIs aren't effective in the given time frame the dose can either be
increased or combined with other drugs. For example an older antidepressant: Tricyclics are
used eg. Clomipramine. It acts on various systems including the serotonin system where it
has the same effect as SSRI’s. Although, it has some severe side effects so its usually kept
for those who don't respond to SSRIs. A more modern example is SNRIs (serotonin-
noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors) ; they are also second line in reserve to SSRIs and are in
a different class of antidepressants. The aim is to increase levels of serotonin as well as the
neurotransmitter noradrenaline.
A strength of drug therapy is that there is supportive research evidence to show its
effectiveness. Soomro found that drugs were more effective than placebos in reducing
symptoms up to 3 months after treatment. This supports the use of biological treatments
such as SSRI for OCD. Typically, 70% of patients who use SSRI see a decline in symptoms.
However, for the other 30%, alternative drug therapies, or a combo of drug therapy and
psychological treatments would be more effective. However, one of the issues regarding the
evaluation of treatment is that most studies have only lasted 3-4 months. This means that we
can only know about the short-term effectiveness of drug therapy and little is known about
the long-term effectiveness.
Another strength is that it's cost-effective and non-disruptive. Drug therapy is cheaper
compared to other psychological treatment therapies as it requires little monitoring.
Therefore, using drugs as a treatment for OCD is better value for the NHS compared to
psychological therapies. Furthermore, drug treatments like SSRI are also less disruptive to
patient’s lives, compared to psychological therapies as it requires little effort from the user;
they just take the medication until their symptoms are reduced. Therapies like CBT and
REBT require the patient to attend regular meetings and put considerable thought/motivation
into tackling their problems. This means drug therapies as a biological treatment for OCD
can be seen as a more appealing method of treatment for some patients.
A limitation of drug therapy for treating OCD is that it doesn't provide a lasting cure, but only
deals with the symptoms of the disorder. In the short term, the drugs are effective, but if
patients stop taking their medication, then they relapse within a week to having OCD again
(Maina). Scientists have an idea of how these drugs work; they don’t know why they work.
Nor is it understood why they work in some people to some degree but not in other people.
Delgado stated that there is no agreement between scientists that serotonin and other
neurotransmitters are the cause of OCD. Until they know exactly the cause of OCD, drugs
will be used to manage the problem as opposed to curing the disorder. This suggests that
the drugs are not effective in the long term and psychological therapies, such as CBT,
should be used instead (Koran).
,One limitation of drug treatments is that the supporting research might not be trustworthy.
Goldacre argued that pharmaceutical companies fund much of the research and may
selectively publish positive results while withholding negative findings. This means the
effectiveness of drug treatments could be exaggerated, leading doctors and patients to
believe they work better than they actually do. As a result, individuals may be prescribed
drugs that are less effective or have undisclosed risks. This is a significant limitation as it
raises ethical concerns about informed consent and the reliability of drug treatments in
psychological therapy.
Describe and Evaluate 2 ways of defining abnormality (16)
One definition of abnormality is statistical infrequency. According to this definition a
behaviour is seen as abnormal if it is statistically uncommon, or not seen very often in
society. It is a mathematical method, using normal distribution.This statistical approach
works best with characteristics that can be reliably measured e.g. IQ. In any human
characteristic, the majority of people’s scores will cluster around the average and the further
, above or below that average, the fewer people will attain that score (known as normative
distribution). The average IQ is 100. Most people (68%) have an IQ in the range from 85-
115. Only 2% of people score below 70. Those people are ‘abnormal’ and liable to receive a
diagnosis of intellectual disability disorder. Another definition is deviation from social norms
(DFSN). This concerns behaviour that is different from the accepted standards of behaviour
in a community/society. Social norms are expectations of what is acceptable behaviour laid
down by society. Any behaviour that deviates from the social norm will be seen as
undesirable/disapproved of by society and could be considered as being abnormal. An
example is Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD). These people are impulsive and
aggressive. The DSM-5 a symptom of APD is the absence of prosocial internal standards
linked with failure to conform lawful/culturally normative ethical behaviour. This psychopathic
behaviour would be considered abnormal in many cultures.
A limitation of DFSN is that social norms change over time, making this definition
inconsistent and unreliable. eg, in the U.S., homosexuality was considered a mental disorder
and classified as such in the DSM-II until the 70s. However, as societal attitudes became
more accepting, it was removed in the 80s, reflecting how definitions of abnormality can shift
based on prevailing social values rather than objective criteria. This demonstrates that what
is considered "abnormal" is subjective and influenced by cultural and historical context rather
than being a fixed concept. Therefore, using DFSN to define abnormality is problematic, as it
fails to provide a consistent universal measure of mental illness, making it an inadequate
and biased approach to diagnosis.
A strength of DFSN is that it’s crucial in safeguarding the well-being of individuals and the
wider community. Social norms are often established to maintain order, safety, and societal
functioning. When individuals exhibit behaviours that significantly deviate from these norms,
such as extreme aggression or a lack of regard for others' rights, it may indicate a mental
health concern that requires intervention. Addressing such behaviours not only supports the
individual's well-being but also ensures the safety and stability of the community. It allows for
early intervention, promoting both individual recovery and societal protection. Therefore
DFSN may have inconsistencies, it remains valuable in assessing and managing behaviours
that could pose a risk to people and the wider society.
A limitation of statistical infrequency is that it fails to account for behaviour/traits that are
statistically rare but considered desirable. eg., having an IQ above 130 is statistically rare
and would be classified as abnormal under this definition, yet high intelligence is a desirable
trait that does not require treatment.This highlights the flaw in solely relying on statistical
rarity to define abnormality, as it oversimplifies the concept and may lead to
misclassification. Just because a behaviour or trait is statistically uncommon does not
necessarily mean it is indicative of a mental health issue. Therefore, statistical infrequency is
a reductionist approach to defining abnormality, as it fails to consider the context and
desirability of certain behaviours, making it an ineffective sole criterion for diagnosis.
Drugs are used in various ways to treat OCD to help increase serotonin levels in the brain.
Selective Serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs) are a type of antidepressant that work on the
serotonin system in the brain. Serotonin is released by the presynaptic neuron into the
synapse (the tiny gap between each neuron). The serotonin in the synapse travels to a
receiving neuron (postsynaptic neuron) which absorbs the serotonin using receptors.
Serotonin is then reabsorbed by the postsynaptic neuron into the presynaptic neuron.
Reuptake is a required aspect of neurological activity which regulates the amount of
neurotransmitter present in a synapse. To keep serotonin available in the synapse, SSRI
drugs work by blocking the presynaptic neuron from reabsorbing serotonin. This means an
increase in serotonin levels in the synaptic gap, and as a result, serotonin can continue to
bind to the receptors of the postsynaptic neuron. To reduce a person's emotional symptoms
drugs are paired with CBT. In some cases they help others to engage more with CBT. That
being said, when SSRIs aren't effective in the given time frame the dose can either be
increased or combined with other drugs. For example an older antidepressant: Tricyclics are
used eg. Clomipramine. It acts on various systems including the serotonin system where it
has the same effect as SSRI’s. Although, it has some severe side effects so its usually kept
for those who don't respond to SSRIs. A more modern example is SNRIs (serotonin-
noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors) ; they are also second line in reserve to SSRIs and are in
a different class of antidepressants. The aim is to increase levels of serotonin as well as the
neurotransmitter noradrenaline.
A strength of drug therapy is that there is supportive research evidence to show its
effectiveness. Soomro found that drugs were more effective than placebos in reducing
symptoms up to 3 months after treatment. This supports the use of biological treatments
such as SSRI for OCD. Typically, 70% of patients who use SSRI see a decline in symptoms.
However, for the other 30%, alternative drug therapies, or a combo of drug therapy and
psychological treatments would be more effective. However, one of the issues regarding the
evaluation of treatment is that most studies have only lasted 3-4 months. This means that we
can only know about the short-term effectiveness of drug therapy and little is known about
the long-term effectiveness.
Another strength is that it's cost-effective and non-disruptive. Drug therapy is cheaper
compared to other psychological treatment therapies as it requires little monitoring.
Therefore, using drugs as a treatment for OCD is better value for the NHS compared to
psychological therapies. Furthermore, drug treatments like SSRI are also less disruptive to
patient’s lives, compared to psychological therapies as it requires little effort from the user;
they just take the medication until their symptoms are reduced. Therapies like CBT and
REBT require the patient to attend regular meetings and put considerable thought/motivation
into tackling their problems. This means drug therapies as a biological treatment for OCD
can be seen as a more appealing method of treatment for some patients.
A limitation of drug therapy for treating OCD is that it doesn't provide a lasting cure, but only
deals with the symptoms of the disorder. In the short term, the drugs are effective, but if
patients stop taking their medication, then they relapse within a week to having OCD again
(Maina). Scientists have an idea of how these drugs work; they don’t know why they work.
Nor is it understood why they work in some people to some degree but not in other people.
Delgado stated that there is no agreement between scientists that serotonin and other
neurotransmitters are the cause of OCD. Until they know exactly the cause of OCD, drugs
will be used to manage the problem as opposed to curing the disorder. This suggests that
the drugs are not effective in the long term and psychological therapies, such as CBT,
should be used instead (Koran).
,One limitation of drug treatments is that the supporting research might not be trustworthy.
Goldacre argued that pharmaceutical companies fund much of the research and may
selectively publish positive results while withholding negative findings. This means the
effectiveness of drug treatments could be exaggerated, leading doctors and patients to
believe they work better than they actually do. As a result, individuals may be prescribed
drugs that are less effective or have undisclosed risks. This is a significant limitation as it
raises ethical concerns about informed consent and the reliability of drug treatments in
psychological therapy.
Describe and Evaluate 2 ways of defining abnormality (16)
One definition of abnormality is statistical infrequency. According to this definition a
behaviour is seen as abnormal if it is statistically uncommon, or not seen very often in
society. It is a mathematical method, using normal distribution.This statistical approach
works best with characteristics that can be reliably measured e.g. IQ. In any human
characteristic, the majority of people’s scores will cluster around the average and the further
, above or below that average, the fewer people will attain that score (known as normative
distribution). The average IQ is 100. Most people (68%) have an IQ in the range from 85-
115. Only 2% of people score below 70. Those people are ‘abnormal’ and liable to receive a
diagnosis of intellectual disability disorder. Another definition is deviation from social norms
(DFSN). This concerns behaviour that is different from the accepted standards of behaviour
in a community/society. Social norms are expectations of what is acceptable behaviour laid
down by society. Any behaviour that deviates from the social norm will be seen as
undesirable/disapproved of by society and could be considered as being abnormal. An
example is Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD). These people are impulsive and
aggressive. The DSM-5 a symptom of APD is the absence of prosocial internal standards
linked with failure to conform lawful/culturally normative ethical behaviour. This psychopathic
behaviour would be considered abnormal in many cultures.
A limitation of DFSN is that social norms change over time, making this definition
inconsistent and unreliable. eg, in the U.S., homosexuality was considered a mental disorder
and classified as such in the DSM-II until the 70s. However, as societal attitudes became
more accepting, it was removed in the 80s, reflecting how definitions of abnormality can shift
based on prevailing social values rather than objective criteria. This demonstrates that what
is considered "abnormal" is subjective and influenced by cultural and historical context rather
than being a fixed concept. Therefore, using DFSN to define abnormality is problematic, as it
fails to provide a consistent universal measure of mental illness, making it an inadequate
and biased approach to diagnosis.
A strength of DFSN is that it’s crucial in safeguarding the well-being of individuals and the
wider community. Social norms are often established to maintain order, safety, and societal
functioning. When individuals exhibit behaviours that significantly deviate from these norms,
such as extreme aggression or a lack of regard for others' rights, it may indicate a mental
health concern that requires intervention. Addressing such behaviours not only supports the
individual's well-being but also ensures the safety and stability of the community. It allows for
early intervention, promoting both individual recovery and societal protection. Therefore
DFSN may have inconsistencies, it remains valuable in assessing and managing behaviours
that could pose a risk to people and the wider society.
A limitation of statistical infrequency is that it fails to account for behaviour/traits that are
statistically rare but considered desirable. eg., having an IQ above 130 is statistically rare
and would be classified as abnormal under this definition, yet high intelligence is a desirable
trait that does not require treatment.This highlights the flaw in solely relying on statistical
rarity to define abnormality, as it oversimplifies the concept and may lead to
misclassification. Just because a behaviour or trait is statistically uncommon does not
necessarily mean it is indicative of a mental health issue. Therefore, statistical infrequency is
a reductionist approach to defining abnormality, as it fails to consider the context and
desirability of certain behaviours, making it an ineffective sole criterion for diagnosis.
