Textbook Notes (368,117)
Canada (161,660)
York University (12,802)
Psychology (3,584)
PSYC 3140 (267)
Chapter 6

PSYC 3140 Chapter 6.docx

28 Pages
108 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC 3140
Professor
Kendra Thomson
Semester
Fall

Description
Chapter 6: Somatoform and Dissociative Disorders - Somatoform disorders: proccupation w/ health/appearance dominates one’s life - Soma = body  ppl seem to be concerned w/ physical disorders - What somatoform disorders have in common - No identifiable medical condition causing physical complaints - Dissociative Disorders o Dissociative experiences/dissociation  “detached” from surroundings (“this isn’t really me”) – ppl feel as if they are dreaming  slight alterations/detachments in consciousness or identity  can be intense/extreme that ppl lose entire identity and assume a new one  can lose memory / sense of reality and can’t function - Somatoform and dissociative share common history, common factors o Used to be categorized under heading: hysterical neurosis o Hysteria – Greek Hippocrates, Egyptians – thought that cause of these disorders can be traced to a “wandering uterus” (thought to occur mainly in women) o Hysterical – refers to gen. physical symptoms w/o known organic cause, or to dramatic/histrionic behav in women  Prejudice, stigmatizing o Freud – conversion hysteria – unexplained phys symptoms to explain the conversion of unconscious emotional conflicts - Neurosis (defined by psychoanalytic theory) o Neurotic disorders are caused from underlying unconscious conflicts, anxiety from those conflicts, implementation of ego defense mechanism o “neurosis” eliminated from diagnostic system in 1980 b/c too vague (applied to all non-psychotic disorders), implied specific (but unproven) cause for these disorders SOMATOFORM DISORDERS - DSM IV lists 5 basic somatoform disorder: hypochondriasis, somatization disorder, conversion disorder, pain disorder, body dysmorphic disorder - Inds pathologically concerned w/ appearance / functioning of bodies - Hypochondriasis, somatization disorder, pain disorder  overlap, proposal for DSM 5 is to combine these 3 disorders into new category called complex somatic symptom disorder Hypochondriasis Clinical Description - ancient greeks thought hypochondria was region below ribs, organs in this area affected mental state o eg. ulcers / ab disorders once considered part of hypochondrial symptom - physical complaints w/o clear cause labeled hypochondriasis o severe anxiety focused on possibility of having serious disease o threat seems so real, physicians’ reassurance doesn’t help - hypochondriasis has sim features of anxiety / mood disorders (panic disorder) o sim age of onset, personality characteristics, patterns of fam aggregation (running in fams) o anxiety/mood disorders comorbid w/ hypochondriasis o DSM 5  moving hypochondriasis to anxiety disorder - Hypochondriasis – anxiety/fear that one has serious disease o Anxiety prob, but dif expression than other anxiety disorders o Ind preoccupied w/ bodily symptoms  misinterprets them as illness/disease o Any physical sensation is concerning  normal body functions eg. heart rate/perspiration  small body functions eg. cough  vague symptoms – aches/fatigue o preoccupation w/ physical symptoms – usually seek family physician first  go to mental health profs after doctors rule out medical cause o reassurance from doctors that ind is healthy has short term effect  Cote  inds who fear developing disease (avoid situations associate w/ contagion) are dif from ppl are who anxious us they have a disease  Illness phobia  ppl who have fear of developing disease  Earlier onset  Hypochondriasis  inds who mistakenly believe they currently have disease  More likely to misinterpret phys symptoms, have inc rates of checking behavs, inc anxiety (than ppl w/ illness phobia)  Study: 60% of grp of patients w/ illness phobia developed hypochondriasis and panic disorder - panic disorder and hypochondriasis usually co-occur o Study: approx 50% of patents w/ panic disorder met diagnostic criteria for hypochondriasis, (HC)  HC more common in ppl w/ panic disorder (48%) than patients w/ social phobia (17%) or control (14%) o ppl w/ panic disorder misinterpret physical symptoms as beginning of next panic attack (which believe may kill them) o Differences  Panic disorder – fear immediate symptom related catastrophes that occur few mins before panic attack  HC – focus on long term process of illness / disease (eg. cancer/AIDS)  Anxieties of panic disorder focus on 10-15 sympathetic nervous system symptoms associated w/ panic attack (HC has wider range of concerns) Statistics - 1-14% of med patients diagnosed w/ HC - Study: 1400 patients in primary care settings – 3% met criteria for HC - 50-50 sex ratio (although used to be considered a “hysterical” disorder unique to women) - used to think that HC more prev in elderly (not true) - HC spread evenly across adulthood o Little bit higher in elderly - HC can come at any age in life  peak periods in adolescence, mid age (40s, 50s) and 60+ - Chronic (same w/ anxiety and mood disorders) - Study -100+ patients w/ HC and non-HC group followed for 4-5 yrs  2/3 of HC patients still met criteria for diagnosis of HC, and remained sig more symptomatic than comparison group - Culture specific syndromes o Koro – belief that genitals retracting into abdomen  Mainly Chinese males  Anxiety/panic  Few reports in western cultures  Rubin – imp of sexual functioning among Chinese males  ppl who suffer from Koro have excessive masturbation, unsatisfactory intercourse, promiscuity  May predispose men to focus attention on sex organs, inc anxiety/arousal o Dhat – anxious concern about losing semen during sex  Prev in India  Vague symptoms ie. Dizziness, weakness, fatigue  Low-grade depressive/anxious symptoms attributed to semen loss o other culture-bound somatic symptoms associated w/ emotional factors)  in African patients  hot sensations in head, sensation of something crawling on head  Pakistani/Indian patients  sensation of burning in hands/feet - phys symptoms = very challenging o 1. physician rules out physical cause for somatic complaints, refers client to mental health professional o 2. Mental health prof determines nature of somatic complaints (to find out if associated w/ somatoform disorder, or dif psychopathology eg. panic attack) o 3. Clinician needs to be aware of culture/subculture of patient Causes - HC disorder of cognition or perception w/ strong emotions - Inds w/ HC experience common physical sensations (normal) but quickly focus attention on these symptoms (not normal) o Act of focusing on yourself inc arousal, makes phys sensations seem more intense than they really are o Misinterpretation of phys sensations as illness inc anxiety o Inc anxiety produces inc physical symptoms (vicious cycle) - ppl w/ HC and ppl w/ high levels of health anxiety have inc perceptual sensitivity to illness cues (tested w/ Stroop test) o interpret ambiguous stimuli as threatening  become quickly aware (scared) of any sign of possible illness o have restrictive concept of health as being totally “symptom free” - Causes of somatic sensitivity/distorted beliefs o Isolated bio or psychological factors o Causes sim to anxiety disorders  HC runs in fams – but genetic contribution = non specific eg. tendency to over respond to stress  Children w/ HC report same kinds of symptoms as other fam members  Possible that inds w/ HC (like in panic disorder) have learned from fam members to focus anxiety on specific physical sensations  Study: adults w/ inc HC concerns reported more learning experiences in childhood around neg reactions to bodily symptoms than adutls w/ lower levels of HC  Learning experience – eg. being rewarded by parents when child expressed bodily complaint (eg. instrumental learning – being allowed to miss school / inc attention)  Observing parents/fam members expressing anxiety re: bodily sensations (vicarious learning)  Parent/fam member instruct child that all bodily sensations are dangerous/signs of serious illness o Hyperresponsivity can combine w/ tendency to view neg life events as unpredictable/uncontrollable (and need to be guarded against constantly) - 3 other etiological factors o 1. HC develops in context of stressful life event (same w/ anxiety disorders)  eg. death/illness Kristen’s disorder coincided w/ breast cancer of female relative o 2. Ppl w/ HC have disproportionate incidence of disease in family when they were children  even if didn’t develop HC until adulthood, they carry memories of illness tha could become focus of anxiety o 3. Social/interpersonal influence – ppl w/ families where illness is major issue learn that ill person is given inc attention  “benefits” of being sick contribute to later development of HC  “sick person” who receives inc attention, dec responsibility is adopting a “sick role” Treatment - until now – common clinical practice = psychodynamic therapy (little effectiveness) o Study: 4 our of 23 patients had benefit from psychodynamic therapy - CBT effective for HC who are willing to be referred to mental health prof o Exposure to health/illness info that patient is avoiding b/c of health anxiety, learning to challenge illness-related misinterpretations of benign bodily sensations (eg. learning to challenges thoughts that simple rash is sign of cancer) o Study: 83% of patients no longer meet diagnostic criteria of rHC after CBT o Study: randomly assigned 32 patients to either CBT or no-treatment wait-list control group  Treatment focused on identifying/challenging illnesss-related misinterpretations of phys sensations, and showing patients how to create symptoms by focusing attention on certain body areas taught patients that they are in control of bodily sensations  Coached to seek less reassurance from doctors  Treatment group improved 76%, only 5% in wait-list group  Benefits maintained for 3 mos  Ppl w/ CBT retained gains at 1 yr follow up (in another study) - CBT for HC o Adapted Ladouceur’s CBT of GAD for HC  worries about health present n both GAD and HC  Study: using multiple baseline single case design across 6 inds w/ hypochondriasis  demonstrated that using therapy focusing on excessive worry = effective treatment for health anxiety - anti-depressant meds eg. SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) - Study: CBT therapy most effective treatment (compared to meds) o Fluoxetine (SSRI) is promising med o Psychoeducation sufficient for only mild cases of HC Somatization Disorder (SD) Clinical Description - 1859 – Peirre Briquet (French physician) – patients came to him w/ somatic complaints w/ no medical basis  Somatization disorder (before called Briquet’s syndrome) - concerned w/ symptoms themselves – not afraid of getting a disease (like in HC) o concerned w/ physical symptoms themselves, not w/ what they might mean o HC – take immediate action when notice symptom (by calling doctor/ taking med) o SD – don’t feel urgency to take action, but usually feel weak, ill, avoid exercising (believe exercise will make them worse)  Entire life revolves around symptoms (can claim that symptoms are “identity” of person  don’t know who they are w/o them)  Can only relate to ppl in context of discussing her symptoms - eg. Linda  dropped out of nursing school b/c picked up disease she was learning about in combo w/ stressful emotional events Statistics - rare - DSM III criteria – required 13+ symptoms from list of 35 (dif diagnosis) - Simplified criteria for DSM IV – only 8 symptoms required - SD occurs on continuum o Undifferentiated somatoform disorder  ppl w/ only few medically unexplained phys symptoms, experience distress/impairment of functioning  SD w/ fewer than 8 symptoms  therefore likely to be taken out of DSM V - Study: prev of SD of 4.4% in large city (using 4-6 symptoms as criteria) o Median prev in 6 samples of large # of patients in primary care setting meeting this criteria = 16.6% - adolescence = age of onset - SD patients usually women, unmarried, low SES o 68% of patients in large sample were female - somatic and psychological complaints eg. anxiety / mood disorders - WHO study of inds in primary care settings w/ SD or insufficient somatic complaints to meet criteria for disorder  uniform rates around the world for somatic complaints and sex ration of SD Causes - sim features w/ HC – history of family illness/injury during childhood (minor factor – many fams experience chronic illness/injury w/o passing on sick role to children) - ppl w/ SD more sensitive to physical sensations / overattend to them - past difficulty of making diagnosis – few etiological studies have been done - mixed results for genetic contribution o Twin Study: no inc prev of SD in monozygotic pairs o SD runs in families, may have heritable basis o SD strongly linked in family/genetic studies to antisocial personality disorder (ASPD)  characterized by vandalism, persistent lying, theft, irresponsibility w/ finances/work, physical aggression , insensitive to punishment and neg consequences of impulsive behav, little anxiety/guilt  ASPD mainly in males, SD mainly in females  Both begin early in life, chronic, mainly in low SES, difficult to treat  Both associated w/ marital discord, drug/alc abuse, suicide attempts  Family/adoption studies  ASPD and SD run in fams, may have heritable component and that behavs can be learned in maladaptive family settings - Integration of biopsychosocial factors of ASPD and SD o 1. Both share neurobiologically based disinhibition syndrome characterized by impulsive behav  impulsiveness common in ASPD  SD – behaviours have short-term gain, long-term probs  development of new somatic symptoms gains immediate sympathy but eventually leads to social isolation  Same neurophysiological vulnerability  but then why do both disorders behave so differently?  Strong effect of social / cultural factors  Major dif b/w disorders is degree of dependence  Gender roles  strong component of identity o **Gender socialization accounts for major dif in expression of same biological vulnerability in men and women (eg. aggression strongly associated w/ males in mammals) - Canadian Psychological Association – always unethical to have any sexual contact w/ patient at any time during treatment Treatment - SD dif to treat, no treatments exist to cure syndrome - Ppl w/ SD are resistant to having a psychological cause applied to their physical symptoms  resistance makes them avoid / likely to discontinue psych treatment - Treatment can include reassurance, reducing stress, reducing frequency of help-seeking behavs - Common patterns = person’s tendency to visit many medical specialists according to ‘symptom of the week’ - To limit visits – gatekeeper physician assigned to each patient to screen all physical complaints o Subsequent visits to specialist have to be authorized by gatekeeper - treatment focuses on reducing using physical symptoms as a way to relate to others (encouraged to interact w/ others in more appropriate ways) - randomized controlled studies - written consultation letters sent to physicians to educate them about SD are effective to dec excessive help- seeking behav in ppl w/ SD o this intervention doesn’t improve psychological distress of patient - group CBT therapy has additional benefit in dec health care costs, and improves SD patients’ psychological well-being CONVERSION DISORDER - conversion –Freud believed that anxiety results form unconscious conflicts that are “converted” into physical symptoms to find expression o the “conversion” allowed ppl to release anxiety w/o experiencing it o eg. phobic disorders – anxiety resulting from unconscious conflicts are “displaced” onto another object Clinical Description - Conversion disorders deal w/ physical malfunctioning eg. paralysis, blindness, difficulty speaking (aphonia) w/o any physical or organic pathology to account for malfunction, loss of sense of touch o some ppl have seizures – may have psychological origin b/c no EEG changes can be documented o blobus hystericus – sensation of lump in throat that makes it dif to swallow, eat, talk - Conversion symptoms mimics full range of physical malfunctioning - Proposal to change name to “functional neurological disorder” (“functional”  symptom w/o organic cause) o Eg. someone going blind when visual processes are normal, have arm/leg paralysis w/o neurological damage - Astasia-Abasia – weakness in legs, difficulty keeping balance, frequent falling Closely Related Disorders - conversion reactions have indifference to symptoms (same as SD)  attitude called la belle indifference - conversion symptoms often precipitated by marked stress o marked stress before conversion symptom occurred in 52-93% of patients  stress in form of physical injury  Study: 324 out of 869 patients (37%) reported prior physical injury  If clinician can’t identify stressful event before onset of conversion symptom, inc chance of real physical condition - Can function normally – unaware of this - Eg. inds /w/ conversion symptom of blindness can avoid objects in visual field, but will tell you they can’t see the objects - Eg. conversion symptom paralysis – might be able to run in emergency, surprised they can do this - Not common for physicians to misdiagnosis o Study: 85 patients diagnosed w/ conversion disorder  11.8% had developed neurological disorder 2.5 yrs after first exam  rate of misdiagnosis of conversion disorders (that are real physical probs) is 4%  ruling out other medical causes = principle diagnostic criterion in DSM 5 - Difficult to distinguish b/w inds truly experiencing conversion symptoms vs faking symptoms (“malingers” – fully aware of what they are doing, doing it for reason eg. to get out of legal probs) - Factitious disorders – b/w malingering and conversion disorders o Symptoms under voluntary control (same w/ malingering) but person has no reason for voluntarily producing symptoms (except to assume sick role, get more attention) o Symptoms can be extended to family members o Factitious disorder by proxy (Munchausen syndrome by proxy - Adult (usually mom) may make her child sick (caused from mom trying to get attention from child)  Extreme tactics to create appearance of illness in child  Eg. mother stirred her own used tampon in urine sample of child, mix species in child’s vomit  Nature of illness usually hidden – mom makes herself seem like a great parent to med professionals (forms pos relationship w/ them)  to assess Munchausen syndrome by proxy– trial separation of mom and child or video surveillance of child while in hospital  Study: validates video surveillance in hospital rooms of children suspected w/ Munchausen syndrome by proxy  Child suffering from recurring Escherichia coli infections – cameras caught mom injecting her own urine into child’s IV Unconscious Mental Processes in Conversion and Related Disorders - Unconscious cog processes  we are capable of receiving/processing info from sensory channels (eg. vision and hearing) w/o being aware of it o Study: ppl w/ small, localized damager to certain parts of brain can identify objects in filed of vision, but had no awareness that they could see - Study: dif b/w real unconscious processing and faking (malingering) o Hypnotized 2 subjects, making each believe they were blind o One subject told that its very imp that she appears to everyone to be blind (2 person not given these instructions) o Results  Person 1 – underperformed on visual discrimination task (eg. upright triangle task – given 3 shapes, identify upright triangle) – picked wrong shape on almost every trial  Person 2  performed perfectly on visual discrimination tasks – but reported she couldn’t see anything - Study: evaluated man who appeared to have conversion symptoms of blindness o Performed more poorly than chance on visual discrim task  He was malingering – someone who is truly blind would perform at chance level on visual discrim tasks  Ppl w/ conversion symptoms can see objects in their visual field and would perform well on these tasks (but this experience is dissociated from an awareness of sight)  Malingers do everything possible to pretend they can’t see Statistics - conversion disorder may occur w/ other disorders (SD) - rare in mental health settings  but ppl who seek help for conversion disorders more likely to consult neurologists/specialists - high prev in neurological settings – 30% - Study: 10-20% of all patients referred to epilepsy centres have psychogenic (noon-epileptic) seizures - mainly in women (like SD) - develop during adolescence - occur frequently in males during extreme stress o eg. not uncommon in combat soldiers - symptoms will disappear, return later in same/sim form when stressor occurs (eg. Mr. A – dizziness/ringing in ears went away, returned later in form of speech disruption) - 3 yr Longitudinal Study: 88 patients – long-term prognosis poor for CD w/ movement disturbances  resolved in only 5% of patients at follow up - conversion symptoms common in religious/healing rituals o seizures, paralysis, trances – common in fundamentalist religious groups in NA – seen as evidence of contact w/ G-d (seen in high esteem by peers) o don’t meet criteria for disorder unless interfere w/ person’s functioning Causes - Freud – 4 basic processes in development of CD o 1. Ind experiences traumatic event (unacceptable, unconscious conflict) o 2. Represses conflict (b/c conflict / resulting anxiety are unacceptable) o 3. Anxiety inc, threatens to emerge into consciousness, person “converts” it into physical symptoms (relieving pressure of having to directly deal w/ conflict)  reduction in anxiety = primary gain / reinforcing event that maintains conversion symptoms o 4. Inc attention/sympathy from loved ones, may be allowed to avoid dif situation  secondary gain /reinforcing set of events - ind w/ conversion disorder experiences traumatic event that must be escaped at all costs o eg. combat, being exposed to accident/homicide o running away is unacceptable, being sick = socially acceptable o getting sick on purpose is unacceptable, so motivation is detached from person’s consciousness o b/c the escape behav (conversion symptoms) is successful in getting away from traumatic situation, behaviour continues until underlying prob is resolved - Study: 34 child/adolescent patients (25 girls) evaluated after receiving diagnosis of psychologically based pseudo seizures (psychogenic non- epileptic seizures) o Many had other psych disorders – 32% w/ mood disorders, 24% w/ separation anxiety/school refusal o Most patients had substantial stress – inc history of sexual abuse, recent parental divorce, death of close fam member, physical abuse o Results – major mood disorders and severe environmental distress (sex abuse) are common in children/teens w/ conversion disorder of pseudroseizures - Freud’s primary gain o La belle indifference – inds not upset by symptoms o Freud thought that b/c symptoms reflected unconscious attempt to resolve conflict, patient wouldn’t be upset by them  But – patients w/ CD are distressed (eg. Mrs A embarrassed by episodes of speech disruption that she avoided social gatherings ) - Study: compared patients w/ CD and control groups of anxious patients w/o CD o CD showed equal/greater anxiety and physiological arousal than control group - Social/Cultural influences o CD more likely to occur in less educated, low SES - little knowledge re: disease/med illness o Study: 13% of 30 patients w/ motor disabilities due to CD had attended high school, compared w/ 67% in control group w/ motor s symptoms due to physical cause o Prev experience w/ real physical probs (usually in fam members) can influence later choice of specific conversion symptoms – patients adopt symptoms w/ which they are familiar - dec incidence over past decades  knowledge about real causes of physical probs eliminates secondary gain - many dif factors affect CD o ind may have biological vulnerability to develop disorder under stress o exposure to traumatic events = major factor o sometimes interpersonal factors override bio factors Treatment - sim treatment to SD - main strategy – identify/ attend to traumatic/stressful life event (either in real life or memory) and remove sources of secondary gain - 1. Therapeutic assistance to re-experience / relive event (catharsis) o eg. Ms A – CBT involving imaginable exposure to trauma memories  frequency of speech disturbance episodes dec during treatment until Ms A was symptom free! - 2. Must reduce reinforcing / supportive consequences of conversion symptoms (secondary gain) o eg. Eloise – mother found it convenient if Eloise stayed in same place for all of day while mom attended to store in front of house o Eloise’s immobility strongly reinforced by motherly attention o Any unnecessary mobility was punished o Therapist has to work w/ both patient and family to eliminate self- defeating behavs - CBT – 65% of group of 45 patients w/ motor behav conversions (eg. difficulty walking) responded well to CBT o Hypnosis (given to half of patients) didn’t add any benefit to CBT PAIN DISORDER - pain disorder – person may have clear physical reasons for pain (initially() – but psychological factors play major role in maintaining it (anxiety focused on experience of pain ) - DSM IV – might remove it from somatoform disorders and put it in separate section b/c person rarely presents w/ localized pain w/o physical basis - Difficult to separate cases where causes are psychological vs cases from physical causes - Pain disorder = somatoform disorder (ind presents w/ physical symptoms judged to have strong psychological contributions) - DSM 5 proposal – make pain disorder part of larger category called “complex somatic symptom disorder” o Clinician can still specify complaints of chronic pain (+associated anxiety) as main issue - 3 subtypes of pain disorder in DSM IV –includes range of pain caused by psychological factors to pain caused from medical condition - 5-12% meet criteria for pain disorder - imp feature – pains real/hurts regardless of causes - DSM IV criteria  pan disorder is “chronic” when persisted for +6 mos - Difficult to assess whether a somatoform pain disorder ins present o Study: when patients described their symptoms, those w/ physically based pain differed in ways from those w/ pain from psychological facotrs  Physically based pain – usually described clearn localization of pain, used more sensory words to describe quality of pain, better able to link pain to situations that could inc or dec it) - if med treatmens for physical conditions are in place and pain remains, or if pain is related to psychological factors  need psych interventions o eg. med student – had intermittend ab pain for sev weeks, no past history of pain, recently separated from husband – taught relaxation techniques and given supportive therapy to help cope w/ current stressful situation – pain disappeared BODY DYSMORPHIC DISORDER - body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) – ppl think they’re so unable that they’re unable to interact w/ others / function normally out of fear that ppl will laugh at their ugliness o preoccupation w/ imagined defect in appearance (person actually looks normal) o “imagined ugliness” – eg. Uma Thurman Clinical Description - Study: 23 patents w/ BDD o 61% focused on skin, 55% on ahir - fixation w/ mirrors o frequently check imagined ugly feature to see if it changed o others avoid mirrors (phobia) - suicidal ideation, suicide attempts and suicide are common - “ideas of reference” – they think everything that goes on in their world is somehow related to them (and to their imagined defect) - cause disruption in patient’s life – become housebound for fear of showing themselves to pppl - used to be called dysmorphophobia (fear of ugliness ) – used to be thought to rep a psychotic delusional state b/c inds weren’t able to realize that their beiefs were irrational - OCD – do patients really believe in their obsessions or realize that they’re irrational o 10% or less believe their feare about contaminating others or need to prevent catastrophes w/ rituals are realistic/reasonable o major issue of what “delusional” is - Study: 50% of patients convinced their imagined bodily defect was real/reasonable source of concern o Is this delusional?  DSM IV  inds w/ BDD whose beliefs are firmly held that they could be called delusional, should receive a 2 diagnosis of delusional disorder somatic type - no sig differences b/w delusional and nondelusional BDD o delusional type more severe, found in less educated patients o both groups respond equally to treatments for BDD o “delusional” group doesn’t respond to drug treatment for psychotic disorders - DSM V proposal – patients would receive just a BDD diagnosis, whether they are “delusional” or not nd o Practice of giving 2 diagnosis of delusional disorder (a psychotic disorder) should be dropped Statistics - prev of BDD hard to estimate - BDD tends to be kept secret - more common thatn prev thought - w/o treatment tends to be lifelong o eg. patient – had condition for 71 yrs, since age 9 - Study: approx 70% of uni students report some dissatisfaction w/ bodies, 28% meet all criteria for disorder o Studyw as done by questionnaire, could reflect large percentage of students are just concerned w/ their weight - Study: prev of BDD in ethnically diverse sample of 566 adoles b/w 14-19 o Prev of BDD = 2.2%  girls more dissatisfied than boys w/ bodies o Blacksof both genders more satisfied w/ bodies than Caucasians, Asians and Hispanics - not strongly associated to one sex o slightly more f
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 3140

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit