Name: 精神的な障害。クラッシュコース心理学#28 (Psychological Disorders: Crash Course Psychology #28)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T08:13:27.000Z
Duration: 10 min 10 s
Description: VoiceTubeの動画で発音を聞きながら英語表現を覚えよう！学べる英語：

Way back in 1887, a journalist named Elizabeth
Cochran assumed the alias Nellie Bly and feigned

a mental illness to report on the truly awful
conditions inside psychiatric hospitals in

関係詞節（制限と非制限）

the US, which were known as asylums at the
time. She found rotten food, cold showers,

prevalent rats, abusive nurses, and patients
being tied down in her famous expose "Ten

Days in a Mad House". What she documented
had been pretty standard mental health treatment

for centuries, but her work led the charge
in mental health reform.

Nearly a century later in 1975, American psychologist
David Rosenhan published a paper called "On

Being Sane in Insane Places" detailing the
experiment that he conducted on psychiatric

institutions themselves. The first part of
his experiment involved sending pseudopatients

- a group of eight totally mentally sound
associates, including David himself - to knock

on institution doors and falsely report that
they'd been hearing voices. Once admitted,

the fake patients abandoned their fake symptoms
and behaved as they normally did, waiting

for administrators to recognize them as mentally
healthy.

Like Cochran, Rosenhan and his team learned
that it's easy to get into a mental institution,

but it is much, much harder to get out. The
participants were kept in the institution

for an average of 19 days, one of them for
52 days. They were forced to take psychotropic

medication (which they sneakily spit out)
and were eventually discharged with a diagnosis

of paranoid schizophrenia in remission. Of
course, being dubbed in remission isn't exactly

the same thing as being labeled sane, and
that was just one of Rosenhan's criticisms

of the system. It viewed mental illness as
an irreversible condition, almost like a personality

Part two of his experiment came later when
Rosenhan shared his results with a teaching

hospital and then told the staff that he'd
be sending more pseudopatients their way in

the next few months, and challenged them to
detect the imposters. With that in mind, out

of 193 new patients, 41 were ferreted out
as likely or suspected pseudopatients. The

thing is, Rosenhan never actually sent in
any pseudopatients. In the end Rosenhan concluded

that the way people were being diagnosed with
psychiatric issues often revealed less about

the patients themselves and more about their
situation. Like, saying you've heard voices

one time might catch a doctors attention a
lot more than weeks of normal behavior.

Naturally people criticized his methods and
his findings, but his experiment raised a

lot of important questions like: How do we
define, diagnose, and classify mental disorders?

At what point does sad become depressed? Or
quirky become obsessive compulsive? Or energetic

become hyperactive? What are the risks and
benefits of diagnostic labeling, and how does

When people think of psychology they probably
most often think about the conditions that

it's been designed to understand, diagnose,
and treat - namely psychological disorders.

From common problems that most of us will
experience at some point in our lives to the

more serious dysfunctions that require intensive
care. They're a big part of what psychology

is here for and over the next several lessons
we're going to be looking at mental illness,

as well as wellness. How symptoms are diagnosed
and what biological and environmental causes

may be at work. But, to grasp those ideas,
we first have to find out how we came to understand

the idea of mental health itself and build
a science around studying, discussing, and

In 2010, the World Health Organization reported
that about 450 million people worldwide suffer

from some kind of mental or behavioral disorder.
No society is immune from them, but when I

say psychological disorder I'm guessing some
of you will conjure up all sorts of dramatic

images like diabolical criminals from Arkham
Asylum or Hollywood stereotypes of various

eccentric, scary, or tragic figures. This
roll call of one-sided stock images is part

of the problem our culture faces - the misconceptions
and often destructive stigma associated with

Mental health clinicians think of psychological
disorders as deviant, distressful, and dysfunctional

patterns of thoughts, feelings, or behaviors.
And yeah, there are a lot of sensitive and

loaded words in there, so let's talk about
what we mean, starting with deviant.

Sounds like I'm talking about doing things
that are dicey or raunchy, but in this context

it's used to describe thoughts and behavior
that are different from most of the rest of

your cultural context. Of course, being different
is usually wonderful. Geniuses and Olympians

and visionaries are all deviants from the
norm so it probably goes without saying that

the standards for so-called deviant behavior
change a lot across cultures and in different

situations. For example, in a combat situation
killing people is probably to be expected,

but murder is definitely deviant criminal
behavior back home in times of peace. And

in some contexts speaking to spirits or ancestors
is A-OK, but in other settings say a bar in

Iowa City at happy hour it might not be quite
acceptable.

But, to be classified as a disorder, that
deviant behavior needs to cause that person

or others around them distress, which just
means a subjective feeling that something

is really wrong. In turn, distress can lead
to truly harmful dysfunction - when a person's

ability to work and live is clearly, often
measurably, impaired.

So that's today's definition but it took a
long time for the Western world to come up

with a way of thinking about psychological
disorders that was rooted in science and investigative

inquiry. It wasn't until around the 18th and
19th centuries that we really started to put

forth the notion that mental health issues
might be about a sickness in the mind. For

example, by the 1800s doctors finally caught
on to the fact that advanced syphilis could

manifest in serious neurological problems
like dementia, and irritability, and various

mental disorders. So eventually a lot of so-called
mental patients were removed from asylums

to full medical hospitals where all of their
symptoms could be treated.

This "a-ha" moment is just one instance of
how perspectives on mental health began to

shift towards what is called the Medical Model
of Psychological Disorder. The Medical Model

champions the notion that psychological disorders
have physiological causes that can be diagnosed

on the basis of symptoms, and treated,
and sometimes even cured. That way of thinking

about mental health was an important step
forward, at least at first. It took us past

the old days of simply locking people up when
they didn't seem quite right to others.

But even if it was an improvement, the medical
model was seen by some in the field as kind

of narrow and outdated. Most contemporary
psychologists prefer to view mental health

more comprehensively through what is called
the Biopsychological Approach. You've heard

us say over and over again that everything
psychological is simultaneously biological

and that truism is particularly useful here.
The Biopsychological view takes that holistic

perspective, accounting for a whole number
of things clearly physiological and not in

order to understand what's happening to us,
what might be going wrong, and how it can

It takes into account psychological influences
for sure like stress and trauma and memories,

but also biological factors like genetics
and brain chemistry, and social-cultural influences

like all the expectations wrapped up in how
a culture defines normal behavior. So by considering

the whole host of nature and nurture influences,
we can take a broader view of mental health,

realizing that some disorders can be cured
while others can be coped with, and still

others may end up not being disorders at all
once our culture accepts them.

But another important part of handling disorders
with scientific rigor is attempting to standardize

and measure them. How we talk about them,
how we diagnose them, and how we treat them.

So the field has literally come up with a
manual that shows you how to do that. But

it is not without it's flaws. It's called
the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic