Psychological Abnormality and Depression: Approaches and Prevalence

This article discusses the definition of psychological abnormality and depression, the biological and humanistic approaches to depression, and the prevalence of psychological disorders across different cultures, genders, and socioeconomic statuses.

Running head: PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:

1PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Task 1
‘Abnormal psychology’ comprises characteristics which are considered ‘atypical’ to the
normative standards of society (Levine et al. 2018). According to Rosenhan and Seligman
(1989), an individual possesses abnormal psychological characteristics if they are incapable of
performing daily essential activities. Such abnormality is characterized by an individual
displaying unconventionality, unpredictability and irrationality in his or her actions, engagement
in behaviors which violate social expectations along with being maladaptive to others as well as
self and whose presence generally causes uneasiness to others (Murphy 2017). This definition is
largely subjective since not all unconventional behaviors may be abnormal but rather, helpful,
empowering and positive for the individual. A person engaging obsessively compulsively in self
grooming practices, may feel positive in the performance of such activities. Individuals engage
in a variety of unconventional and self-threatening activities which are not necessarily abnormal
such as adventure sports or alcohol consumption (Goette et al. 2017). In accordance to Jahoda
(1958), an individual can be considered to be abnormal if he or she displays deviation from
standards of ideal mental health. Such a definition encompasses ideal mental health as one where
an individual perceives one’s personality positively, engages in optimistic social relationships,
exhibits independent and autonomous decision-making and displays the ability of future self
improvement (Marková and Jesuino 2018). Such a definition is highly subjective to a large
extent since it is impossible for an individual to possess all these characteristics, and despite
lacking in some these abilities, may still be healthy and functional in his or her present
environment. Racial and cultural subjectivity may be present since such definitions may largely

2PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
be formulated by white, upper class individuals and hence, may be inconsiderate of the
psychological uniqueness in women or culturally and racially diverse populations (Pelling 2017).
Concepts of abnormality are widely dependent on cultural backgrounds and the societal
perceptions of the community resided by an individual (Wong et al. 2016). For example, certain
groups belonging to tribal or aboriginal populations and across societies of Southern and South
Eastern Asia, idol worship and treating or serving a deity as a separate spiritual entity through
offerings or sacrifices is widely prevalent but may be considered abnormal in Western societies
or populations adhering to atheism or with an absence of idol worship (Sue et al. 2015).
Likewise, various societies remain in possession of ‘entomophagy’ - a practice of consuming
insects as a staple dietary food. Such a prevalent and popular dietary practice may be considered
highly abnormal and even unethical across populations not engaging in such behaviors or where
insects are viewed with disgust (Butcher, Mineka and Hooley 2017).
As observed from the above definitions the perception of abnormality is largely
dependent on normative standards of personal autonomy and independence. According to
common societal standards, an individual who is capable of performing daily activities with
independence, autonomy and efficiency is considered to be normal (Bartels and Peters 2017).
Hence, individuals who display a deviation in the form of a dependency may be considered as
abnormal, as observed in the definitions of functional ability formulated by Rosenhand and
Seligman (1989) (Kring et al. 2017). Hence, such judgments about abnormality can be largely
observed in classification of disorders such as ‘separation anxiety’ or ‘dependant personality
disorder’ where an individual’s preference to cling to others or inability to conduct independent
decision-making is considered as an abnormality and a ‘psychological disorder’ (Becker et al.
2016). Similarly, disorders characterized by uniqueness of an individual’s cognitive processes,

3PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
such as ‘autism’ is largely considered abnormal due to the individual not adhering to established
standards of independent function, intelligence and cognition (Hawks et al. 2019).
Task 2
Depression is a debilitating psychological disorder characterized by persistent feelings of
pessimism, hopelessness, melancholy and a loss of interest towards performance of activities
which were once desirable to an individual (Drapeau et al. 2017). The mechanisms of depression
acquisition have undergone explanation using various approaches, of which, the humanistic and
biological approaches comprise as prevalent ones. The biological approach to depression
attempts to explain the underlying causative mechanism of depression using a pathological
perspective associated with a deviation from general homeostatic mechanisms outlined my
neurotransmission (Beck and Bredemeier 2016). Hence, in accordance to the biological
approach, depression is a caused due to disturbances in the functioning of neurotransmitters such
as serotonin and dopamine and abnormalities in corticosteroid release resulting in inhibition of
the hypothalamus-pituatary axis and the dopamine system coupled with the hindrances to the
limbic system – the emotion-regulation center of the brain (Brown et al. 2016). The biological
approach also views depression as a causative effect due to genetic predisposition (Cown and
Browning 2015). In contrast, the humanistic approach to depression, attempts to view an
individual holistically, who is capable of achieving optimum potential and self actualization and
hence, he or she may be depressed due to inabilities to cope with existing situations and
circumstances of their life. Hence, an individual may be sad, depressed and lose an interest over
their lives due to recent traumatic or challenging life situations which pose to be a barrier against
their abilities to exhibit their highest potential (Park and Kim 2018).

4PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Upon comparison, it can be observed that the humanistic and biological approaches to
depression encompass contrasting views concerning the underlying causative mechanisms of the
same (Ghaemi 2015). The biological approach to depression adopts a pathology-oriented view
wherein a person is deemed to suffer from the disease due to disturbances in underlying
biological mechanisms. In contrast, the humanistic approach to depression, adopts a holistic,
person-centered view of depression wherein an individual may be depressed due to his or her
inabilities to react optimally towards existing life’s demands and challenges (Feltham 2016). In
addition to disease approaches, contrasts can also be observed in the ways in which an individual
is described by both these approaches. The biological approach views an individual as a sum of
intrinsic biological mechanisms and actions and hence, disturbances in the same result in
diseases such as depression (Watson and Pos 2017). In contrast, the humanistic approach views
an individual holistically beyond merely as a biologically active entity and as a sum of external
characteristics such as hobbies, perceptions, hopes, goals and dreams for the future. While the
biological approach may define depression as a mental condition beyond an individual’s control,
the humanistic approach may view an individual as a being who has the ability to exercise
considerable autonomy and control over a situation and hence, has the potential to overcome
depression (Lee. Wimmers and Fung 2016).
In contrast, the humanistic and biological approaches to depression differ in their aspects
of treatment principles and care provision to the individual. The biological approach to
depression adopts a medical model of treatment wherein the individual can be cured by
regulating the underlying distorted biological mechanisms. Treatment exerted by the biological
approach may encompass pharmacological and medicinal interventions (Gaufberg and Hodges
2016). In contrast the humanistic approach to depression adopts a recovery model of treatment

5PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
by considering the individual as a holistic being with hopes, dreams and desires. Treatments in
the recovery approach will aim to enhance an individual’s concept of self and promote
encouragement, empowerment and optimism through goal formulation, mindfulness tactics,
resilience improvement and acquisition of coping strategies (White 2018).
However, despite the differences, the biological and humanistic theory do possess certain
similarities, observed extensively in the form of traits. According to the biological theory, an
individual’s personality is dependent on traits of extroversion/introversion, neuroticism/stability
and psychoticism/socialization. Comparing with humanistic theory, similarities can be found in
terms of recognizing the individual as one who prefers social interaction or isolation
(extroversion/introversion), are either anxious or remain calm under challenges
(neuroticism/stability) and are either egoistic or altruistic (psychoticism/socialization).
Characteristics of both these theories can be found in phobias, where it is observed that an
individual prefers isolation and social networking, exhibits anxiety and can display hostile
behaviors as response to undesirable stimulus (Ghaemi, 2015).
Task 3
According to the statistical data reported by the House of Commons in the ‘Mental Health
Statistic for England’ (Baker 2018):
 Culture: Mental health and psychological disorders are prevalent across 23% of Blacks
who are British, 18% of Asians and Asians who are British, 17% of Whites who are
British, 14% of White belonging to other ethnicities and 20% of individuals belonging to
mixed cultural and ethnic groups.

6PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
 Gender: Mental health and psychological disorders were found to be prevalent across
23% of women and 15% of men.
 Socioeconomic Status: Mental health and psychological disorders are found to be
prevalent across 29% unemployed individuals, 33% individuals who are economically
inactive, 16% part time employed individuals and 14% of individuals who are employed
full time.
The prevalence of specific psychological disorders in accordance to this report, include
generalized anxiety disorders (5.9%), depressive episodes (3.3%), phobias (2.4%), obsessive
compulsive disorders (1.3%), panic disorders (0.6%) and alternative, unspecified psychological
disorders (7.8%).
Stigmatized gender perceptions where females may be regarded as the ‘weaker’ sex
occupied with aspects of physical appearance and males are considered to be the ‘stronger’ sex
in possession of ‘masculine’ emotions of aggressiveness can result in diseases such as histrionic
disorders and eating disorders being stereotyped as feminine and disorders such as antisocial
personality disorders being stereotyped as ‘masculine’ psychological disorder (Dhejne et al.
2016). Such gender oriented stereotypes may result in discrepancies in the true reporting where
males may under report or avoid reporting their mental health issues due to the common
perception that a prevalence of psychological diseases in males signifies weakness or lack of
‘masculinity’ (Clement et al. 2015). The socioeconomic status of individuals further influences
the incidence and report of psychological disorders (Stanwell et al. 2008). Individuals belonging
to economically underprivileged groups may exhibit increased susceptibility to mental health
disorders due to their lack of accessibility to preventive resulting in negative mental health
outcomes (Bharadwaj, Pai and Suziedelyte 2017). Likewise, such economically deprived groups

7PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
may also display a lack of disease diagnosis and reporting due to lack of sufficient information
and awareness concerning psychological disorders and treatment services (Lozano et al. 2019).
Differences in reporting and incidence can be observed significantly across populations
belonging to diverse races, ethnicities and cultures. Such differences can be observed in the
prevalent stereotyped notion of blacks being more aggressive, violent and antisocial as compared
to whites resulting in greater disease reporting and diagnosis in the former as compared to the
latter.
Such stereotypical generalizations can vastly influence the diagnosis of psychological
disorders (Skapinakis et al. 2006). This is a common criticism underlying the assessments and
diagnosis made by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – Edition 5 (DSM
5). DSM 5 has been criticized extensively to associate normal behaviors as pathological and
often fails to evaluate the biological and genetic mechanisms underlying psychological disorders
(Chmielewski et al. 2015). Healthy behaviors such as positive self-esteem, optimism, ambition
and adequate recognition of one’s needs and preferences, when observed in increased levels are
diagnosed in DSM 5 as narcissistic or histrionic personality disorders. Coupled with the
stigmatized perception that women are generally more preoccupied with physical appearance and
attention-seeking, such disorders are stereotyped to be widely common on females (Wakefield
2016). Healthy behaviors of assertiveness and leadership, if observed in greater levels are
diagnosed by the DSM 5 as antisocial and violent personality disorder. Coupled with the
stereotype that Blacks are violent and aggressive, an Afro-Caribbean subjected to responsibilities
of family bread earning against difficult or underprivileged socioeconomic situations may be
stigmatized as being dangerous and antisocial (Artigas-Pallarés and Paula-Pérez 2015).

8PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
References
Artigas-Pallarés, J. and Paula-Pérez, I., 2015. Unresolved issues in the DSM-5. Revista de
neurologia, 60, pp.S95-101.
Baker, C. (2018). Mental health statistics for England: prevalence, services and funding.
[online] Researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk. Available at:
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06988/SN06988.pdf [Accessed 2 Mar.
2019].
Bartels, J.M. and Peters, D., 2017. Coverage of Rosenhan’s “On Being Sane in Insane Places” in
Abnormal Psychology Textbooks. Teaching of Psychology, 44(2), pp.169-173.
Beck, A.T. and Bredemeier, K., 2016. A unified model of depression: integrating clinical,
cognitive, biological, and evolutionary perspectives. Clinical Psychological Science, 4(4),
pp.596-619.
Becker, E.M., Jensen-Doss, A., Kendall, P.C., Birmaher, B. and Ginsburg, G.S., 2016. All
anxiety is not created equal: Correlates of parent/youth agreement vary across subtypes of
anxiety. Journal of psychopathology and behavioral assessment, 38(4), pp.528-537.
Bharadwaj, P., Pai, M.M. and Suziedelyte, A., 2017. Mental health stigma. Economics
Letters, 159, pp.57-60.
Brown, P.J., Rutherford, B.R., Yaffe, K., Tandler, J.M., Ray, J.L., Pott, E., Chung, S. and Roose,
S.P., 2016. The depressed frail phenotype: the clinical manifestation of increased biological
aging. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 24(11), pp.1084-1094.

9PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Butcher, J.N., Mineka, S. and Hooley, J.M., 2017. Abnormal psychology. Pearson Education
India.
Chmielewski, M., Clark, L.A., Bagby, R.M. and Watson, D., 2015. Method matters:
Understanding diagnostic reliability in DSM-IV and DSM-5. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 124(3), p.764.
Clement, S., Schauman, O., Graham, T., Maggioni, F., Evans-Lacko, S., Bezborodovs, N.,
Morgan, C., Rüsch, N., Brown, J.S.L. and Thornicroft, G., 2015. What is the impact of mental
health-related stigma on help-seeking? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative
studies. Psychological medicine, 45(1), pp.11-27.
Cowen, P.J. and Browning, M., 2015. What has serotonin to do with depression?. World
Psychiatry, 14(2), p.158.
Dhejne, C., Van Vlerken, R., Heylens, G. and Arcelus, J., 2016. Mental health and gender
dysphoria: a review of the literature. International review of psychiatry, 28(1), pp.44-57.
Drapeau, M., Blake, E., Dobson, K.S. and Körner, A., 2017. Coping Strategies in Major
Depression and Over the Course of Cognitive Therapy for Depression. Canadian Journal of
Counselling & Psychotherapy/Revue Canadienne de Counseling et de Psychothérapie, 51(1).
Feltham, C., 2016. Depressive realism: what it is and why it matters to Humanistic
Psychology. Self & Society, 44(2), pp.88-93.
Gaufberg, E. and Hodges, B., 2016. Humanism, compassion and the call to caring.
Ghaemi, S. N. (2015). Biomedical Reductionist, Humanist, and Biopsychosocial Models in
Medicine. Handbook of the Philosophy of Medicine, 1-19.

10PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Ghaemi, S.N., 2015. Biomedical Reductionist, Humanist, and Biopsychosocial Models in
Medicine. Handbook of the Philosophy of Medicine, pp.1-19.
Goette, W.F., Delello, J.A., Schmitt, A.L., Sullivan, J.R. and Rangel, A., 2017. Comparing
delivery approaches to teaching abnormal psychology: investigating student perceptions and
learning outcomes. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 16(3), pp.336-352.
Hawks, Z.W., Marrus, N., Glowinski, A.L. and Constantino, J.N., 2019. Early origins of autism
comorbidity: neuropsychiatric traits correlated in childhood are independent in infancy. Journal
of abnormal child psychology, 47(2), pp.369-379.
Kring, A.M., Kyrios, M., Fassnacht, D., Lambros, A., Mihaljcic, T., Teesson, M., Matthewson,
M.L., Morton, E., Kate, M.A., Harris, A. and Izadikhah, Z., 2017. Abnormal psychology.
Lee, M., Wimmers, P.F. and Fung, C.C., 2016. Assessing Competence in Medical Humanism:
Development and Validation of the ICARE Scale for Assessing Humanistic Patient Care.
In Assessing Competence in Professional Performance across Disciplines and Professions (pp.
393-409). Springer, Cham.
Levine, A., 2018. Book Review: Not So Abnormal Psychology: A Pragmatic View of Mental
Illness. Journal of Disability Studies, 4(1), pp.30-31.
Lozano, P., Thrasher, J.F., Forthofer, M., Hardin, J., Shigematsu, L.M.R., Arillo Santillán, E. and
Fleischer, N.L., 2019. The role of social norms and socioeconomic status in smoking-related
stigma among smokers in Mexico and Uruguay. Critical Public Health, 29(2), pp.215-227.

11PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Marková, I. and Jesuino, J.C., 2018. Social psychology as a developmental discipline in the
dynamics of practical life: Gustav Jahoda’s pioneering studies on children’s social
thinking. Culture & Psychology, 24(3), pp.343-357.
Murphy, J., 2017. The Flexible Psychological Concept of Normality. In On Human Nature (pp.
451-466). Academic Press.
Park, S.C. and Kim, Y.K., 2018. Depression in DSM-5: Changes, controversies, and future
directions. In Understanding Depression (pp. 3-14). Springer, Singapore.
Pelling, N., 2017. Abnormal psychology overview. Abnormal Psychology in Context: The
Australian and New Zealand Handbook, p.3.
Quinn, D.M. and Chaudoir, S.R., 2015. Living with a concealable stigmatized identity: the
impact of anticipated stigma, centrality, salience, and cultural stigma on psychological distress
and health.
Skapinakis, P., Weich, S., Lewis, G., Singleton, N. and Araya, R. (2006). Socio-economic
position and common mental disorders: Longitudinal study in the general population in the UK.
The British Journal of Psychiatry, 189(2), pp.109-117
Stansfeld, S., Clark, C., Rodgers, B., Caldwell, T. and Power, C. (2008). Childhood and
adulthood socio-economic position and midlife depressive and anxiety disorders. The British
Journal of Psychiatry, 192(2), pp.152-153.
Sue, D., Sue, D.W., Sue, S. and Sue, D.M., 2015. Understanding abnormal behavior. Cengage
Learning.

12PSYCHOLOGICAL ABNORMALITY
Wakefield, J.C., 2016. Diagnostic issues and controversies in DSM-5: return of the false
positives problem. Annual review of clinical psychology, 12, pp.105-132.
Watson, J. and Pos, A.E., 2017. Humanistic and Experiential Perspectives. The Oxford handbook
of mood disorders, p.459.
White, T.H., 2018. Exploring Agentic Treatments for Anxiety and Depression. Intuition: The
BYU Undergraduate Journal in Psychology, 13(2), p.10.
Wong, J.Y., Tiwari, A., Fong, D.Y. and Bullock, L., 2016. A cross-cultural understanding of
depression among abused women. Violence Against Women, 22(11), pp.1371-1396.