The Student Room Group

psychology alevel year 13

Discuss family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia (16 marks)

Family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia states that family and childhood experiences of living in a dysfunctional family can lead to the development of schizophrenia.
The schizophrenogenic mother was a psychodynamic explanation developed by Fromm-Reichmann, to explain the development of schizophrenia. The characteristics of the schizophrenogenic mother is characterised as cold, controlling and demanding and is responsible for creating a family climate of tension and secrecy. This leads to people experiencing excessive stress and distrust, and it triggers psychotic thinking such as paranoid delusions and hallucinations.

One limitation of the explanation of schizophrenogenic mothers is socially sensitive. For instance, the evidence for the schizophrenogenic mother comes from clinical observations between the mother and the patient, whereby the mothers personality is assessed for ‘crazy making characteristics’. This matters because evidence lacks temporal validity and is quite outdated as the term ‘crazy making characteristics’ would not be appropriate in the ethos and values of modern day psychiatry, and may not be applicable to modern society. Therefore, the explanation of the schizophrenogenic mother has negative consequences for mothers and blames the mother for the development of schizophrenia, which is highly unethical and cannot be used as a full explanation as to why patients develop schizophrenia in the long run.

The double bind theory suggests that when a pair of messages are mutually contradictory, it places the individual in a trapped situation where they are unable to understand the mixed messages and fail to comment on the unfairness of the situation. As a result, they may face withdrawal of love from their parents as a punishment. This leads to the thought that the world is confusing and dangerous and is responsible for causing psychotic thinking. Smaller children have difficulty with contradictory messages, as they are more dependent on their parents and cannot ignore the messages. The child is placed in an impossible situation, where they have to comply with one parent’s wishes and go against the other parents wishes.Similarly, Bateson et al. states that schizophrenia is not an inborn mental disorder but develops through experiences of learned confusion and participation in dysfunctional communication patterns during childhood.

One limitation of the explanation of the double bind theory is that it lacks scientific rigour and has limited objective data to support its findings. Research such as Berher, found that patients with schizophrenia were more likely to recall double bind statements from their mother. However, this is a limitation because the findings as unreliable as the recall may be influenced by schizophrenia. This matters because it becomes harder to accurately measure the role of the double bind because it is based on retrospective recall of experiences during their childhood. Also, the recall of communications during childhood is unscientific as they are based on subjective experiences and cannot be falsified. Therefore, we can’t completely rely on the role of double bind as there is limited evidence to show that double bind communication patterns are accurate to explain how schizophrenia develops.

Another explanation of family dysfunction is expressed emotion, which is the levels of emotions especially negative emotions which are expressed by carers towards patients with schizophrenia. Expressed emotion can be characterised as three behaviours:verbal criticism being accompanied with violence, hostility towards patients and emotional overinvolvement in the patient's life (ex. Needless self sacrifice). Expressed emotions can be used to explain why patients relapse. Individuals with schizophrenia have a lower tolerance to intense environmental stimuli (ex. emotional comments from family members) and experiences of a negative emotional climate can create a source of stress for patients with schizophrenia. This is because they already have impaired coping mechanisms and find it harder to tolerate with negative comments, leading to the worsening of hallucinations and paranoid delusions,

One strength of the explanation of expressed emotion is research support. Tienari et al. found that patients with schizophrenia had come from disturbed families, with common child rearing patterns of high levels of criticism and low levels of empathy. This matters because it shows how poor parenting is a source of stress, and can contribute to the development of schizophrenia in patients. However, this research provides a limited explanation as schizophrenia may be triggered in people with a genetic vulnerability and dysfunctional family. This is because the source of stress from expressed emotion can trigger the onset of schizophrenia in a person who is vulnerable. Therefore, this suggests that an interactionist explanation may be used as a more comprehensive understanding as to why individuals develop schizophrenia.

One strength of family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia is that it has practical applications. For instance, it has led to the development of family therapy which improves communication between family members. It is beneficial for reducing negative emotions such as anger and guilt and leads to family members improving their beliefs about schizophrenia so they can gain a better understanding. This is important as research has found that family therapy is responsible for reducing the rates of relapse, and leading to a greater compliance to medication, which in return reduces the symptom severity.

Therefore, family dysfunction has helped provide a greater understanding into why some people are more vulnerable to developing schizophrenia. It provides an alternative view which sees the diagnosis as a result of environmental factors rather than being controlled by the thoughts in the patient's mind. This is beneficial as it may reduce the stigma associated with the disorder and may have positive consequences for the patients.

Can someone mark this for me please, and tell me if i am using the right structure and what i should improve
Original post by stuclh
Discuss family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia (16 marks)
Family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia states that family and childhood experiences of living in a dysfunctional family can lead to the development of schizophrenia.
The schizophrenogenic mother was a psychodynamic explanation developed by Fromm-Reichmann, to explain the development of schizophrenia. The characteristics of the schizophrenogenic mother is characterised as cold, controlling and demanding and is responsible for creating a family climate of tension and secrecy. This leads to people experiencing excessive stress and distrust, and it triggers psychotic thinking such as paranoid delusions and hallucinations.
One limitation of the explanation of schizophrenogenic mothers is socially sensitive. For instance, the evidence for the schizophrenogenic mother comes from clinical observations between the mother and the patient, whereby the mothers personality is assessed for ‘crazy making characteristics’. This matters because evidence lacks temporal validity and is quite outdated as the term ‘crazy making characteristics’ would not be appropriate in the ethos and values of modern day psychiatry, and may not be applicable to modern society. Therefore, the explanation of the schizophrenogenic mother has negative consequences for mothers and blames the mother for the development of schizophrenia, which is highly unethical and cannot be used as a full explanation as to why patients develop schizophrenia in the long run.
The double bind theory suggests that when a pair of messages are mutually contradictory, it places the individual in a trapped situation where they are unable to understand the mixed messages and fail to comment on the unfairness of the situation. As a result, they may face withdrawal of love from their parents as a punishment. This leads to the thought that the world is confusing and dangerous and is responsible for causing psychotic thinking. Smaller children have difficulty with contradictory messages, as they are more dependent on their parents and cannot ignore the messages. The child is placed in an impossible situation, where they have to comply with one parent’s wishes and go against the other parents wishes.Similarly, Bateson et al. states that schizophrenia is not an inborn mental disorder but develops through experiences of learned confusion and participation in dysfunctional communication patterns during childhood.
One limitation of the explanation of the double bind theory is that it lacks scientific rigour and has limited objective data to support its findings. Research such as Berher, found that patients with schizophrenia were more likely to recall double bind statements from their mother. However, this is a limitation because the findings as unreliable as the recall may be influenced by schizophrenia. This matters because it becomes harder to accurately measure the role of the double bind because it is based on retrospective recall of experiences during their childhood. Also, the recall of communications during childhood is unscientific as they are based on subjective experiences and cannot be falsified. Therefore, we can’t completely rely on the role of double bind as there is limited evidence to show that double bind communication patterns are accurate to explain how schizophrenia develops.
Another explanation of family dysfunction is expressed emotion, which is the levels of emotions especially negative emotions which are expressed by carers towards patients with schizophrenia. Expressed emotion can be characterised as three behaviours:verbal criticism being accompanied with violence, hostility towards patients and emotional overinvolvement in the patient's life (ex. Needless self sacrifice). Expressed emotions can be used to explain why patients relapse. Individuals with schizophrenia have a lower tolerance to intense environmental stimuli (ex. emotional comments from family members) and experiences of a negative emotional climate can create a source of stress for patients with schizophrenia. This is because they already have impaired coping mechanisms and find it harder to tolerate with negative comments, leading to the worsening of hallucinations and paranoid delusions,
One strength of the explanation of expressed emotion is research support. Tienari et al. found that patients with schizophrenia had come from disturbed families, with common child rearing patterns of high levels of criticism and low levels of empathy. This matters because it shows how poor parenting is a source of stress, and can contribute to the development of schizophrenia in patients. However, this research provides a limited explanation as schizophrenia may be triggered in people with a genetic vulnerability and dysfunctional family. This is because the source of stress from expressed emotion can trigger the onset of schizophrenia in a person who is vulnerable. Therefore, this suggests that an interactionist explanation may be used as a more comprehensive understanding as to why individuals develop schizophrenia.
One strength of family dysfunction as an explanation for schizophrenia is that it has practical applications. For instance, it has led to the development of family therapy which improves communication between family members. It is beneficial for reducing negative emotions such as anger and guilt and leads to family members improving their beliefs about schizophrenia so they can gain a better understanding. This is important as research has found that family therapy is responsible for reducing the rates of relapse, and leading to a greater compliance to medication, which in return reduces the symptom severity.
Therefore, family dysfunction has helped provide a greater understanding into why some people are more vulnerable to developing schizophrenia. It provides an alternative view which sees the diagnosis as a result of environmental factors rather than being controlled by the thoughts in the patient's mind. This is beneficial as it may reduce the stigma associated with the disorder and may have positive consequences for the patients.
Can someone mark this for me please, and tell me if i am using the right structure and what i should improve

I can’t mark this for you as I’m only a student myself, but what I can tell you is that this is way too much for a 16 marker. Your AO1 can fit into one paragraph nicely if you do it correctly, as it’s only 6 marks. As for your AO3, again, it’s too long. 3-4 AO3 paragraphs will suffice as it’s only 10 marks. Remember that in an exam, you’d only have about 15 or so minutes to write a 16 marker and it’s likely that you will have multiple in one paper. Last year, for AQA there were two 16 markers in paper 1, one in paper 2 and three in paper 3. When you evaluate, you should be evaluating family dysfunction as a whole rather than the sub-explanations to hit the top band in marks, otherwise they could cap you for not directly answering the question.
Reply 2
Original post by bibachu
I can’t mark this for you as I’m only a student myself, but what I can tell you is that this is way too much for a 16 marker. Your AO1 can fit into one paragraph nicely if you do it correctly, as it’s only 6 marks. As for your AO3, again, it’s too long. 3-4 AO3 paragraphs will suffice as it’s only 10 marks. Remember that in an exam, you’d only have about 15 or so minutes to write a 16 marker and it’s likely that you will have multiple in one paper. Last year, for AQA there were two 16 markers in paper 1, one in paper 2 and three in paper 3. When you evaluate, you should be evaluating family dysfunction as a whole rather than the sub-explanations to hit the top band in marks, otherwise they could cap you for not directly answering the question.

my teacher told us to do it like that and i know it is way too much. i don't know what to think now
Reply 3
Original post by stuclh
my teacher told us to do it like that and i know it is way too much. i don't know what to think now

I’m a y13 student too - my teacher‘s an examiner and I know if they saw that they’d say it’s way too long!

We’ve been advised:
Intro - outline (1 para maybe 6 lines ish; keep points concise and knowledge-focused)
Aim for 3-4 eval para (again, concise & to the point); you could even just do 2 if they’re thorough and A* level (ie with a counter at the end of each point)

Typed, you could get 16/16 for writing less than a page, trust me.

Hope this helps!!

Quick Reply