Psychiatric labeling in cross-cultural perspective.
Psychiatric labeling in cross-cultural perspective.
复制标题
跨文化视角下的精神病学标签。
DOI：
10.1126/science.1251213
复制
发表时间：
1976
期刊：
影响因子：
56.9
通讯作者：
Jane M. Murphy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jane M. Murphy
将标签思想应用于精神疾病往往采取不同的路线，并引起了相当大的争议，例如，在托马斯谢夫和沃尔特戈夫等人之间的持续交流中。（12-15）。这场争论中的一个问题是，精神疾病是否应该被认为是一种继发性偏差的“纯粹病例”，还是一种更复杂的病例。莱默特对继发性偏差概念的表述受到了他对口吃的调查的影响，他认为口吃代表了纯粹的情况：“迄今为止，口吃一直无视因果解释的努力......它似乎完全是一种过程产物，在这种过程产物中，为了追求隐喻，正常的言语变异，或者至多是言语的轻微异常（初级口吃），可以被输入一个询问或评价过程，并作为次级口吃出现”（9，第56页）。重要的一点是，初级偏差被认为是正常的变化或只是”轻微的异常”，社会反应的影响被认为是真正的原因。社会反应”影响”和”塑造”正常的言语变异，从而”创造”口吃。对于精神疾病，标签理论家倾向于使用”纯粹案例”模型，而不是以失明为代表的更复杂的模型，其中视力缺失或丧失是主要的偏差，盲人的作用是次要的偏差。谢夫提供了关于标签和精神疾病的最系统的理论陈述，在他的阐述中，被输入到干扰处理中以精神疾病形式出现的主要偏差被描述为”无定形的"，”无结构的“，”和“剩余”违反社会规范（11，页。33、82）。Rosenhan认为，被标记为精神分裂症的行为可能“在精神病院外是‘理智的’，但在精神病院里似乎是疯狂的”。[因为病人]对一种奇怪的环境有反应”（6，第257页）。Lemert说，社会排斥可以”在没有任何特殊性格结构的情况下创造一种类人猿倾向”（9，第198页）。此外，许多人认为，我们称之为精神疾病的行为在不同的文化或少数社会阶层中可能被认为是正常的。因此，精神疾病的主要偏差被认为在很大程度上是微不足道的，社会反应成为主要的病因。这一观点让人想起了关于人类可塑性、文化决定论和文化相对主义的思想，这些思想曾被人们所承诺。
The application of labeling ideas to mental illness has tended to take a different course (11) and has aroused considerable controversy, as indicated, for ex-ample, in the continuing exchange between Thomas Scheff and Walter Gove et al.(12-15). One question in this controversy is whether mental illness should be considered a" pure case" of secondary deviation or a more complex case. Lemert's formulation of the concept of secondary devia-tion was influenced by his investigation of stuttering, and he suggests that stuttering represents the pure case:" Stuttering thus far has defied efforts at causative ex-planation.... It appears to be exclusively a process-product in which, to pursue the metaphor, normal speech variations, or at most, minor abnormalities of speech (pri-mary stuttering) can be fed into an interactional or evaluational process and come out as secondary stuttering"(9, p. 56). The important point here is that primary deviance is considered to be normal variation or only" minor abnormalities," and the influence of societal reactions is consid-ered genuinely causative. Societal reac-tions" work on" and" mold" normal variations of speech to" create" stuttering. For mental illness the labeling theorists have tended to use the" pure case" model rather than the more complex model represented by blindness, where lack or loss of sight is primary deviance and the role of blind man is secondary deviance.Scheff has provided the most systematic theoretical statement regarding labeling and mental illness, and in his formulation the primary deviations that are fed into interactional processing to come out as men-tal illness are described as" amorphous,"" unstructured," and" residual" violations of a society's norms (11, pp. 33, 82). Rosenhan suggests that the behaviors labeled schizophrenic might be"'sane'outside the psychiatric hospital but seem insane in it...[because patients] are responding to a bizarre setting"(6, p. 257). Lemert says that social exclusion can" create a para-noid disposition in the absence of any special character structure"(9, p. 198). Fur-ther, many have posited that behavior we call mental illness might be considered normal in a different culture or in a minority social class. Thus, the primary deviations of mental illness are held to be for the most part insignificant, and societal reac-tions become the main etiological factor. This view is reminiscent of ideas about human plasticity, cultural determinism, and cultural relativism which were promi-