What are the 4 definitions of abnormality?

‘Abnormal’ means to deviate from what is usual or from some sort of standard. The problem lies in establishing a standard.

1. Deviation from social norms

Abnormality can be defined in terms of standards of social behaviour. For example, it is acceptable to wear very little clothing on a beach, but not when walking down the high street. Such standards are socially agreed and culturallybased, though there are many cross-cultural similarities. Many people who are labelled as clinically abnormal do behave in a socially deviant way, for example, schizophrenics behave anti-socially and erratically.

The term ‘clinical’ is used to distinguish an abnormality that has been diagnosed by a trained professional (e.g. a clinical psychologist) from the everyday use of the term ‘abnormality’.

Advantages of this approach:

• This has the benefit of including some consideration of the effect of deviant behaviour on others.

Limitations of this approach:

• Social deviations vary according to prevailing moral perspectives and this approach allows serious abuse of individual rights. Examples of deviation through history have been witchcraft, homosexuality, unmarried motherhood, delinquency and political dissent. Cultural relativism is an issue for all definitions of abnormality, i.e. the fact that any definition is relative to what is considered acceptable (or not) for any particular cultural group. The term ‘culture’ refers to the rules, customs and ways of interacting that are shared by a collection of people.
• Social deviation is related to social and cultural context. What is deviant behaviour in Britain may not be deviant elsewhere, and vice versa.
• Social deviation can be a good thing, as in the case of people who resisted German occupation in the Second World War, so it may be dangerous to regard deviancy as automatically abnormal.

2. Failure to function adequately

Certain behaviours are distressing and dysfunctional for the individual. For example, being depressed disrupts a person’s ability to work, to look after him/herself and/or to conduct satisfying relations with other people.

Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) suggested that certain elements jointly determine abnormality. Singly, they may cause no problem, but when several co-occur, they are symptomatic of abnormality and are related to a failure to function adequately. These elements are suffering, maladaptiveness (personally and socially), irrationality and incomprehensibility, unpredictability and loss of control, vividness and unconventionality, observer discomfort, and violation of moral standards.

Rosenhan and Seligman’s list does include some universal indicators of undesirable behaviour, such as distress to oneself or others, i.e. it is not all culturally relative.

Advantages of this approach:

• Using the concepts of dysfunction and distress acknowledges the subjective experience of the individual.

Limitations to this approach:

• In some situations, apparently dysfunctional behaviour may be functional, for example, depression can be an adaptive response to stress.
• Personal distress may not be a good indicator of an undesirable state. Although many people do seek psychiatric help because they feel distressed, not all mental disorders are accompanied by a state of distress (e.g. anti-social personality disorder). Anti-social personality disorder is similar to Bowlby’s concept of affectionless psychopathy. People with anti-social personality disorder have a disregard for the feelings of others. However, this causes no distress to the person with the disorder. However, in other situations, distress is a ‘healthy’ response up to a point (e.g. the death of a close friend). This means having to make subjective decisions about how much distress is tolerable. It might be helpful to include the distress of others as a criterion of adaptive behaviour.
• Diagnoses of dysfunction and distress require judgements to be made by others, which are inevitably influenced by social and cultural values.

3. Deviation from mental health

Doctors use the concept of physical health as a yardstick to measure ill-health, for example, a body temperature outside the normal range indicates illness. Jahoda (1958) suggested that we could similarly define psychological well-being in terms of signs of psychological health in order to recognise mental illness. The key features would be self-acceptance, potential for growth and development, autonomy, accurate perception of reality, environmental competence, and positive interpersonal relations. There is some overlap between Jahoda’s list and the one from Rosenhan and Seligman.

Advantages of this approach:

• It is preferable to have some absolutes (signs of healthiness) rather than relying on subjective criteria that are prone to cultural relativism.

Limitations of this approach:

Carl Rogers (1959) was the ‘father’ of the counselling movement. Like Jahoda, Rogers defined abnormality in terms of the characteristics of a mentally healthy person. He emphasised the importance of having a sense of self and being self-accepting as prerequisites for mental health.

• Such approaches are nevertheless influenced by cultural attitudes, for example, autonomy is not a universal ideal.
• The list is idealistic – few people actually manage to achieve most of the behaviours identified.
• It is possible to measure physical illness objectively (e.g. blood pressure), but the concepts for mental health are too vague for the purpose of diagnosis.

PROGRESS CHECK

1. Give an example of a socially acceptable definition of behaviour.
2. Name two behaviours from Jahoda’s list.

Abnormal behaviour is described as behaviour that is statistically infrequent, deviates from social norms, prevents proper function, or deviates from ideal mental health.

There is great debate about how we should define abnormal behaviour. Who gets to decide what is normal? What happens if our view of 'normal' changes over time and between cultures? To explore this, we will look at and evaluate some of the different ways through which abnormality is defined.

Statistical Infrequency

Statistical infrequency is a mathematical approach that quantifies behaviour.

Using IQ as a measure of intelligence is an example of the statistical infrequency approach.

Statistical infrequency aims to find a mean average of behaviour amongst the population. According to statistical infrequency:

• Behaviour is normal if it falls within this mean average.

• Behaviour is abnormal if it deviates from this mean average, meaning it is statistically rare.

Standard deviation can inform us how far someone's behaviour deviates from the mean average, that is, how abnormal their behaviour is.

A normal distribution curve can be generated if the population shares a common behaviour. This means that most people within the population will be on or near the mean average, but if an individual is outside of the normal distribution, they will be defined as abnormal.

When do people buy Christmas presents? If we illustrated the results of this question on a normal distribution curve:

• Buying presents around December would likely be shown within the mean (normal behaviour), and anything outside of this would be considered abnormal.
• Buying presents in October would deviate slightly from the norm, meaning it would be one or two standard deviations away from the norm.
• Buying presents in July would deviate greatly from the norm, meaning it would be two or more standard deviations away from the norm.

Strengths and weaknesses of statistical infrequency

Let's take a look at the strengths and weaknesses of statistical infrequency.

Strengths

• Mathematical approach: the mathematical nature of statistical infrequency makes it a very clear, objective definition of abnormality.

• Allows for easy comparison: quantifying behaviour makes it easy to compare and contrast normality and abnormality.

• Population validity: statistical infrequency takes the whole picture into account and gives a view of abnormalities within an entire population.

Weaknesses

• Fails to recognise desirable behaviour: statistical infrequency defines desirable behaviour such as high IQ as abnormal. This means that a positive characteristic such as high intelligence may be classed as a disorder.

• Cultural bias: what is considered normal in one culture may be abnormal in another.

  In Japan, tattoos are very rare, whereas, in the UK, one in three adults have one. Therefore, a behaviour considered abnormal in Japan is much more accepted in the UK. This example highlights that statistical definitions of normality are culturally dependent and, therefore, unreliable.

• Abnormality can occur frequently: 1 in 4 people experience a mental health issue every year. Therefore, given the high frequency of these issues, it may not be helpful to define everyone who suffers from them as abnormal.

Deviation from social norms

The deviation from social norms approach defines abnormality as behaviours that defy or disregard the social expectations of acceptable ways to behave in a given society.

Unlike the statistical infrequency approach, which defines normality and abnormality through quantitative research results, the deviation from the social norms approach defines normality and abnormality by the norms accepted by social groups. Some social norms are unspoken but widely accepted, such as queuing in shops. Others are both accepted and enforced by the legal system. These norms can also be context-dependent; for instance, if you are eating a burger, it is normal to eat with your hands, but if you are eating soup, that would be considered abnormal.

Strengths and weaknesses of deviation from social norms

The strengths and weaknesses of deviation from social norms are as follows:

Strengths

• Self-help and identification: if healthy behavior is accepted as the societal norm, a person with a mental disorder or their close friends will be able to recognize that they are behaving abnormally and seek help.

Weaknesses

• Low temporal validity: societal norms change over time.

  In the past, homosexuality was considered abnormal and, as such, defined as a mental disorder. Now, homosexuality is considered socially acceptable and normal by many societies.

  Therefore, social norms are not a valid measure of abnormality over time.

• Cultural bias: what is normal in some cultures may be considered abnormal in another.

  In the UK, homosexuality is considered socially acceptable and normal by the majority of the UK, but, in places such as Nigeria, it is considered abnormal and is illegal.

  As such, this definition of abnormality is not cross-cultural.

• Context-dependent: behaviour that is considered normal in some contexts is considered abnormal in others, meaning that this definition of abnormality is not stable.

  Wearing a bikini is viewed as normal at the beach but abnormal in a restaurant.

Failure to function adequately defines abnormality as being unable to cope with the demands of everyday life, for example, maintaining personal hygiene, eating, and going to work. For instance, people with depression often struggle to get out of bed to go to work or engage in social activities. This is a sign of abnormality and may cause distress to them and their loved ones.

Rosenhan and Seligman (1989) suggested some features to help define failure to function adequately:

• Observer discomfort: behaviour may cause discomfort or distress to the observer.

• Irrationality: the individual may try to rationalise irrational behaviour.

• Maladaptive behaviours: the individual may be unable to achieve their goals.

• Unpredictability: the individual may display unpredictable behaviours which signal a lack of control.

• Personal distress: the individual may be suffering or in distress.

Let's evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of failure to function adequately.

• Subjective: this definition is subjective as it comes from the perspective of the person who is mentally ill or their loved ones. This means that a failure to function adequately approach can encourage someone with a mental illness or their loved ones to seek help even if the mentally ill person's behaviour may appear 'normal' to others.

Weaknesses

• Cultural bias: for an adult, the failure to get out of bed may be considered a worrying sign of depression, however, in teenagers, this may be seen as normal. This is only one example of how this definition of abnormality is dependent on many cultural factors, such as the need to work.

• Dysfunction is not always observable: for instance, psychopaths can cause great harm and are mentally ill but can appear completely normal. Consider Harold Shipman, the English doctor who killed over 200 patients and was able to get away with it because he appeared 'normal'.

This definition of abnormality views mental health similarly to physical health by looking for signs of a deviation from normal functioning and wellbeing.

Jahoda (1958) provided a list of characteristics that, if a person deviated from, they would be considered abnormal:

• Positive attitude towards oneself: high self-esteem and a strong personal identity

• Autonomy: independence and self-reliance

• Resisting stress: being able to cope with stress and everyday anxiety

• Environmental mastery: being able to meet the ever-changing demands of life

• Self-actualization: growing and working towards your potential

• Viewpoint: accurate perception of reality

The strengths and weaknesses of deviation from ideal mental health are as follows:

Strengths

• Puts the individual first: this definition prioritises the individual's needs and health.

Weaknesses

• Unrealistic: the criteria for normality are demanding and unrealistic. According to Jahoda's definition, most people would be classed as abnormal.

• Western-centric: this definition uses western ideas regarding mental health as a universal judgment. This is culturally biased as it assumes western views on mental health are shared throughout the world.

• Vague: Jahoda's criteria are vague and subjective; things like self-esteem or personal growth cannot be measured, meaning it would be down to personal opinion if a person had a mental health condition or not.

Definitions of Abnormality - Key takeaways

• Psychopathology is the scientific study of mental illnesses.

• There are many different approaches to defining a person as 'mentally ill'.

• Mathematical approaches such as statistical infrequency quantify behaviour and abnormality. Although this makes them objective, it also risks claiming positive behaviours are abnormal.

• Social approaches such as deviation from social norms, failure to function adequately and deviation from ideal mental health, whilst more holistic and individualistic, are often culturally dependent and therefore not a neutral approach to mental health.

• No definition of psychopathology is without issue. Therefore, these definitions should be used together to create a holistic view of mental illness.