Definitions of abnormality 1:
Deviation from social norms:
AO1:
Social norms within a society can be written (explicit, e.g. laws) and some can be unwritten (implicit,
e.g. social expectations)
These social norms regulate societal behaviour and hence someone who breaks these principles is
seen as abnormal
AO3:
Lacks historical validity – Social norms change over time, in the 1950’s being an unmarried mother
was considered abnormal and these mothers were labelled ‘moral imbeciles’, an acceptable
behaviour now – lacks ecological validity as it is the situation that has changed rather than the
individual
Cultural differences – Social norms differ between cultures, in England finishing all the food on a
plate is a good thing, however, in India, it is a sign of hunger – not an objective and consistently
accurate measurement of abnormality
Not good for diagnosing abnormality – not a clear distinction between a socially deviant behaviour
and a mental abnormality, lots of behaviours which could be called socially deviant but not
necessarily an indication of a mental abnormality (e.g. drunk-driving)
Failure to function adequately:
AO1:
Unable to cope with everyday life and complete routine tasks
Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) devised some key characteristics of failing to function adequately:
1. Personal distress – psychological stress and discomfort
2. Observer distress
3. Maladaptive behaviour – behaviour interferes with ability to lead a normal life
4. Unpredictable behaviour – unexpected or uncontrolled behaviour given the context
5. Irrational behaviour – difficult to understand the behaviour
AO3:
Not always effective in diagnosing a psychological abnormality – Someone who loses their job may
have personal distress but is not necessarily an abnormality – environmental factors may cause a
failure to function adequately causing the definition to have less validity
Presence of abnormality may not result in failing to function adequately – People with psychological
disorders can lead mainly normal lives (e.g. David Beckham has OCD and Stephen Fry has bipolar
disorder) – shows definition may be inadequate
Certain actions may be admired – For example going on hunger strike, not FFA in social context
, Definitions of abnormality 2:
Deviation from Ideal Mental Health (DIMH):
AO1:
Jehoda (1958) suggested a list of ideal characteristics which lead to ideal mental health and it’s the
lack of these characteristics that leads to a definition of abnormality
1. Strong sense of self-identity
2. Resistant to stress
3. Self-actualisation – self-motivated belief to deal with the imperfect world around us
4. Autonomy
5. Empathy
AO3:
Too idealistic – Criterion devised in a perfect reality such as self-actualisation which Maslow (1968)
says that few people reach – can cause people to feel disheartened and hence is a poor indicator of
a psychological abnormality
Ethnocentric – Focus on personal growth and autonomy may not be what is valued in more
collectivist cultures where community development is key, principles of teamwork and co-
operativity trump those of personal growth, reduces external validity of definition as a means of
diagnosing a psychological abnormality
Gives people aspirations – Although some of the criterion are achieved by few people, they are
generally pleasant and provide people with intrinsic motivation to reach their goals and develop
themselves, hence the definition is beneficent as it seeks to improve people’s lives
Deviation from social norms:
AO1:
Social norms within a society can be written (explicit, e.g. laws) and some can be unwritten (implicit,
e.g. social expectations)
These social norms regulate societal behaviour and hence someone who breaks these principles is
seen as abnormal
AO3:
Lacks historical validity – Social norms change over time, in the 1950’s being an unmarried mother
was considered abnormal and these mothers were labelled ‘moral imbeciles’, an acceptable
behaviour now – lacks ecological validity as it is the situation that has changed rather than the
individual
Cultural differences – Social norms differ between cultures, in England finishing all the food on a
plate is a good thing, however, in India, it is a sign of hunger – not an objective and consistently
accurate measurement of abnormality
Not good for diagnosing abnormality – not a clear distinction between a socially deviant behaviour
and a mental abnormality, lots of behaviours which could be called socially deviant but not
necessarily an indication of a mental abnormality (e.g. drunk-driving)
Failure to function adequately:
AO1:
Unable to cope with everyday life and complete routine tasks
Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) devised some key characteristics of failing to function adequately:
1. Personal distress – psychological stress and discomfort
2. Observer distress
3. Maladaptive behaviour – behaviour interferes with ability to lead a normal life
4. Unpredictable behaviour – unexpected or uncontrolled behaviour given the context
5. Irrational behaviour – difficult to understand the behaviour
AO3:
Not always effective in diagnosing a psychological abnormality – Someone who loses their job may
have personal distress but is not necessarily an abnormality – environmental factors may cause a
failure to function adequately causing the definition to have less validity
Presence of abnormality may not result in failing to function adequately – People with psychological
disorders can lead mainly normal lives (e.g. David Beckham has OCD and Stephen Fry has bipolar
disorder) – shows definition may be inadequate
Certain actions may be admired – For example going on hunger strike, not FFA in social context
, Definitions of abnormality 2:
Deviation from Ideal Mental Health (DIMH):
AO1:
Jehoda (1958) suggested a list of ideal characteristics which lead to ideal mental health and it’s the
lack of these characteristics that leads to a definition of abnormality
1. Strong sense of self-identity
2. Resistant to stress
3. Self-actualisation – self-motivated belief to deal with the imperfect world around us
4. Autonomy
5. Empathy
AO3:
Too idealistic – Criterion devised in a perfect reality such as self-actualisation which Maslow (1968)
says that few people reach – can cause people to feel disheartened and hence is a poor indicator of
a psychological abnormality
Ethnocentric – Focus on personal growth and autonomy may not be what is valued in more
collectivist cultures where community development is key, principles of teamwork and co-
operativity trump those of personal growth, reduces external validity of definition as a means of
diagnosing a psychological abnormality
Gives people aspirations – Although some of the criterion are achieved by few people, they are
generally pleasant and provide people with intrinsic motivation to reach their goals and develop
themselves, hence the definition is beneficent as it seeks to improve people’s lives
