Psychopathy or abnormal psychology is the term used for the study of ‘illnesses related to the mind', and so includes the etiology and treatment of schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorders and phobias etc. In general it can be seen to encompass any mentally or behaviorally disordered state in which proper psychological functioning is disordered or interfered with . It is not a simple, clear cut science by any means, as it is still in very experimental stages, with much of that which it encompasses still lying outside proper human understanding. The result of this is that within the field of psychopathy many different perspectives exist, with each approaching the various disorders from very different angles and proposing different etiology and treatment.
[...] (1975) Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis, International Universities Press, Inc. Corsini, R.J. & Wedding, D. (1995) Current Psychotherapies, F.E. Peacock. Dryden, W. (1996) Handbook of Individual Therapies, SAGE Publications References (Secondary) Freud, S. (1909) Notes Upon a Case of Obssesional Neurosis. Odier, C. (1956) Anxiety and Magical Thinking, International Universities Press. Arieti, S. (1979) New Views on Psychodynamics of Phobias, American Journal of Psychotherapy No.33. MacFarland, J.W., Allen, L. and [...]
[...] When it comes to looking at the biogenic perspective of psychopathy, it is much more difficult to apply it to phobia etiology and treatment, as there is very little that it directly suggests for such a case. Instead, it is perhaps better to take a more general view of biogenic etiologies and treatments, and understand that each could be seen to apply to phobias, if the case was deemed relevant (or in many cases severe) enough. As previously explained, the etiology involved in the biogenic perspective is very clear cut. [...]
[...] There are three main areas over which criticisms arise in Freud's psychoanalytic theory of phobia etiology and treatment[7]. The first is that the little Hans account, and others like it are based almost entirely on case history, and all the theoretical inferences made are not very well qualified. Secondly, when this particular psychoanalytic therapy is used to cure phobias, the levels of success are far from constant. Moreover, even when the treatment is successful, it often takes years of gradual progress, and does not appear to result from a sudden recognition of internal conflicts. [...]
[...] Both the psychoanalytic and biogenic perspectives of psychopathy, then, can be seen to be less than perfect. There are many who would claim that it is debatable that psychotherapy has any real benefits whatsoever, and that those ‘successes' seen so far could have been totally unrelated to the therapy which the individual was undergoing. Biogenics is also criticized by many for being the practice of ‘scientific guesswork', and for being unethical, as most often the patients are in no objective state to give consent to such treatments. [...]
[...] To be able to accurately assess and compare these two very different approaches, it will prove beneficial at times (especially over the psychoanalytic model) to focus on one particular area of psychopathy as a sort of case study. ‘Phobias' is the best candidate as it is generally regarded as the best understood so far, with much known regarding etiology and treatment and little trouble found in diagnosis[3]. Freud created the psychoanalytic account of phobias in 1909 in a groundbreaking case known as the ‘Little Hans' study[4]. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
