Simple limitations of definitions
- 1. Definitions of Abnormality Problems exist with all the definitions we have examined. Subjectivity Over- and under-inclusivity Cultural relativity
- 2. Statistical Infrequency Does not consider the desirability of behaviours or traits. Very high intelligence or extremely altruistic behaviour are both statistically rare, but would not generally be classed as ‘abnormal’. Many rare behaviours or characteristics (e.g. left handedness) have no bearing on normality or abnormality
- 3. Statistical Infrequency Some behaviours/characteristics are regarded as abnormal even though they are quite frequent. Depression may affect 27% of elderly people (NIMH, 2001). This would make it common but that does not mean it isn’t a problem
- 4. Violation of Social Norms Social norms change between cultures and over time. Consequently, so do people’s conceptions of abnormality. Homosexuality was regarded as a mental illness until 1973, but not any more. Cross-cultural misunderstandings are common, and may contribute to e.g. high diagnosis rate of schizophrenia amongst non-white British people
- 5. Violation of Social Norms Classification of abnormality can only based on the context in which behaviour occurs Same behaviour might be normal or abnormal e.g. undressing in bathroom or classroom A subjective judgement is usually necessary e.g. there may be situational factors unknown to the observer
- 6. Failure to Function Adequately Adequate functioning is defined largely by social norms (see ‘deviation from…’) Most people fail to function adequately at some time, but are not considered ‘abnormal’ After a bereavement most people find it difficult to cope normally Ironically, they might actually be considered more abnormal if they functioned as usual
- 7. Failure to Function Adequately Many people engage in behaviour that is maladaptive/harmful or threatening to self, but we don’t class them as abnormal Adrenaline sports Smoking, drinking alcohol Skipping classes
- 8. Deviation from Ideal Mental Health What is considered ideal is historically and culturally specific (see ‘deviation from social…’) Jahoda’s and others’ criteria set the bar too high. Strictly applied, so few people actually meet these criteria that everyone ends up classed as abnormal and so the concept becomes meaningless