Definitions of abnormality:
Statistical infrequency:
Individual has less common characteristics in comparison to the population. Normal distribution allows us to observe
what’s usual behaviour and referred to as ‘abnormal’.
Evaluation:
● Weakness: in other occasions defining people's characteristics on statistical rarity soil is unsuitable.
Eg, people with high IQ’s could be diagnosed as having a mental disorder as their intelligence may
be two deviations above population and technically “abnormal”. This is why statistical infrequency is
best used in conjunction with other tools to define abnormality.
● Defining abnormality using statistical criteria can be appropriate in many situations; eg, in definition
of mental retardation or intellectual ability. In such cases normal mental ability can be effectively
measured with anyone whose IQ falling more than two standard deviation points than most the
population being judged as having some mental disorder. When used in conjunction with other
definitions such as failure to function adequately, provides an appropriate measure for abnormality
● Weakness: imposed. Western culture is measuring behaviour thus suffers cultural bias. Doesn’t
consider cultural factors in determining abnormal behaviour and what is normal in one culture may
be seen abnormal in another due to its infrequency, decreasing its population validity. Also
behaviours which were rare many years ago may not be now. Therefore this tool could run risk of
being era-dependent by adopting a statistical norm based on behaviours that may later become
outdated.
Deviation from social norms:
Concerns behaviour different from accepted standard in society. Social norms: collective judgement to observe what’s
right. Eg, queuing at bus stop without pushing in is one norm that has no written law for but is defined by society as
acceptable behaviour. Social norms may be context dependent; in some places may be acceptable to eat without
forks or knives and use our hands (barbecues) however in others (a restaurant) may be seen abnormal.
Evaluation:
● Issue basing abnormal behaviour on set of social norms is that they are subject to change over time.
Behaviour that is socially acceptable now may suddenly be seen as socially deviant later and vice
versa. Today homosexuality is seen as socially acceptable however based on this definition it was
seen as socially deviant and classed as a mental disorder in the past decreasing the definitions
reliability. Therefore this definition is very era-dependent and cannot generalise the population of
modern society causing lack of external validity too.
● Ethical issues may be seen. This is because it dehumanises behaviour we don’t understand
necessarily where it came from (social cryptomnesia) therefore it is seen to be a concerning
definition for abnormality and unreliable.
● Diagnosis targets the minority which makes behaviour seem restricted and limiting personal freedom
Failure to function adequately:
When someone is unable to cope with ordinary demands of everyday life. Signs; hygiene and unable to maintain a job.
Rosenhan and seligman: sings: severe personal distress, lack of conformity to personal space
Evaluation:
● Weakness: needs someone to judge whether behaviour displayed is abnormal or not, may be
subjective. Patient experiencing personal distress through being unable to meet their bills or get
work may be judged abnormal by one while another individual may see this as pitfall of adult life.
Creates ideal expectations which many people may struggle to adhere to and risk being classed as
abnormal. However issue tackled by using global assessment of functioning scale however still
means someone had to make judgment, creating unreliable data.
● Strength: recognises the subjective experience of the individual themselves who may to be
struggling to function adequately and wish to seek intervention. This definition takes a patient
centered view by allowing mental disorders to be regarded from the perception of sufferers.
● Cultural bias: it will inevitably be related to how one culture believes an individual should live their
lives. Basing abnormality on the basis of failing to function is likely to lead to different diagnoses
when applied to people from different cultures or even socio-economic classes. Eg, people from
Statistical infrequency:
Individual has less common characteristics in comparison to the population. Normal distribution allows us to observe
what’s usual behaviour and referred to as ‘abnormal’.
Evaluation:
● Weakness: in other occasions defining people's characteristics on statistical rarity soil is unsuitable.
Eg, people with high IQ’s could be diagnosed as having a mental disorder as their intelligence may
be two deviations above population and technically “abnormal”. This is why statistical infrequency is
best used in conjunction with other tools to define abnormality.
● Defining abnormality using statistical criteria can be appropriate in many situations; eg, in definition
of mental retardation or intellectual ability. In such cases normal mental ability can be effectively
measured with anyone whose IQ falling more than two standard deviation points than most the
population being judged as having some mental disorder. When used in conjunction with other
definitions such as failure to function adequately, provides an appropriate measure for abnormality
● Weakness: imposed. Western culture is measuring behaviour thus suffers cultural bias. Doesn’t
consider cultural factors in determining abnormal behaviour and what is normal in one culture may
be seen abnormal in another due to its infrequency, decreasing its population validity. Also
behaviours which were rare many years ago may not be now. Therefore this tool could run risk of
being era-dependent by adopting a statistical norm based on behaviours that may later become
outdated.
Deviation from social norms:
Concerns behaviour different from accepted standard in society. Social norms: collective judgement to observe what’s
right. Eg, queuing at bus stop without pushing in is one norm that has no written law for but is defined by society as
acceptable behaviour. Social norms may be context dependent; in some places may be acceptable to eat without
forks or knives and use our hands (barbecues) however in others (a restaurant) may be seen abnormal.
Evaluation:
● Issue basing abnormal behaviour on set of social norms is that they are subject to change over time.
Behaviour that is socially acceptable now may suddenly be seen as socially deviant later and vice
versa. Today homosexuality is seen as socially acceptable however based on this definition it was
seen as socially deviant and classed as a mental disorder in the past decreasing the definitions
reliability. Therefore this definition is very era-dependent and cannot generalise the population of
modern society causing lack of external validity too.
● Ethical issues may be seen. This is because it dehumanises behaviour we don’t understand
necessarily where it came from (social cryptomnesia) therefore it is seen to be a concerning
definition for abnormality and unreliable.
● Diagnosis targets the minority which makes behaviour seem restricted and limiting personal freedom
Failure to function adequately:
When someone is unable to cope with ordinary demands of everyday life. Signs; hygiene and unable to maintain a job.
Rosenhan and seligman: sings: severe personal distress, lack of conformity to personal space
Evaluation:
● Weakness: needs someone to judge whether behaviour displayed is abnormal or not, may be
subjective. Patient experiencing personal distress through being unable to meet their bills or get
work may be judged abnormal by one while another individual may see this as pitfall of adult life.
Creates ideal expectations which many people may struggle to adhere to and risk being classed as
abnormal. However issue tackled by using global assessment of functioning scale however still
means someone had to make judgment, creating unreliable data.
● Strength: recognises the subjective experience of the individual themselves who may to be
struggling to function adequately and wish to seek intervention. This definition takes a patient
centered view by allowing mental disorders to be regarded from the perception of sufferers.
● Cultural bias: it will inevitably be related to how one culture believes an individual should live their
lives. Basing abnormality on the basis of failing to function is likely to lead to different diagnoses
when applied to people from different cultures or even socio-economic classes. Eg, people from
