The biological model also promotes the idea of cause and effect. Again using the case of neurotransmitter levels associated with psychological disorders, when a patient is treated with medicine designed to bring these levels back to normal, improvements seen go some way to proving that the neurotransmitter levels were responsible. However, such medications will only treat what could arguably be just a symptom - as mentioned, the biological model fails to consider what causes the change in the first place. Further to this, it may be that the neurotransmitter levels are themselves a symptom of the psychological disorder, rather than the other way around - it is not possible to prove that abnormal biochemistry is the cause rather than an effect. If this were the case, even whilst treating with medication, the disorder might still remain.
The biological model also suggests an element of inheritance with regard to psychological disorders, which is something that is investigated using twin studies, to discover if identical twins develop the same disorders. However, concordance rates are never 100%, and it could be argued that even in the cases where both twins develop the same disorder (for example eating disorders), it might be due to their environment rather than a genetic factor. It is possible though that they may inherit a genetic susceptibility to certain disorders, or perhaps a disposition to having neurotransmitter imbalances.
One of the main criticisms of the biological model is a counter to one of the perceived strengths - that psychological disorders are treated rather systematically, and diagnosed in the same way that a physical illness might be diagnosed. These can lead to certain stereotyping, and doctors who might try to fit patients into specific diagnoses in order to be able to ‘help’ them. This can be damaging - psychological disorders can vary wildly, and whilst a broken arm is always a broken arm, there is a lot more flexibility with psychological disorders, and it could lead to patients being mis-categorised and treated incorrectly.
The biological model also ignores social causes, which is something the behavioural model touches on, through suggesting that it is our life experiences that determine our actions, rather than underlying pathology. From a behavioural perspective, abnormality is associated with maladaptive behaviour and can have negative consequences for wellbeing. The behavioural model differs from the biological model in that in considers abnormality purely abnormal behaviour, rather than a form of mental illness. Treatment from a behavioural perspective concentrates on the causes - the idea being that from this perspective, behaviour learnt through experience has come to cause abnormality and therefore trying to change the behaviour will cure the abnormality. However, this is criticised as it is suggested that the behaviour is only a symptom, and the true cause remains untreated.
The behavioural model suggests that abnormal behaviour, like any behaviour, is learnt through conditioning - either classical or operant. According to this, classical conditioning can cause psychological disorders when an experience produces an extremely unpleasant response, so that the experience will be avoided in the future. Operant conditioning can cause psychological disorders when maladaptive behaviour is reinforced - in some cases, a punishment might be the desired response for attention reasons, and so a person might learn that by behaving in a maladaptive way, they can get the response they desire. In this way, the learning theory can account for some aspects of normal and abnormal behaviour, but it does ignore other possible causes, and the way humans think about things is also ignored by this model.
A strength of this model is that, like the biological model, it is quite easy to test. The case of Little Albert (whilst unethical) showed that abnormal behaviour could be learnt and therefore, one assumes, changed. Indeed, behavioural therapies are effective in treating abnormal behaviour, but the underlying cause may still remain and could perhaps manifest in other ways. The model also accounts for cultural differences as behaviour is something that can be learned regardless of cultural setting.
Perhaps one of the most influential aspects of the behavioural model is that it is a relatively quick and inexpensive treatment method for psychological disorders, even though from other perspectives it doesn’t treat the causes, and it helped pave the way for cognitive behavioural therapy, which is successful today.
