Cultural and Genetic Influences on Abnormal Behavior
This paper examines how abnormal behavior is defined and understood across different cultural and social contexts. It argues that both genetic inheritance and lived experience interact to shape human behavior, and that definitions of "abnormal" are highly relative to cultural norms. Drawing on examples ranging from cross-cultural land-use disputes to differences in personal space and physical contact, the paper demonstrates that what one society labels abnormal may be perfectly acceptable—or even expected—in another. It also considers the role of abnormal psychology as a field, noting the advantages and limitations of defining abnormal behavior, and emphasizes that historical context is essential for understanding how such definitions evolve over time.
- Introduction: Behavior, Genetics, and Social Context: Genetics and experience shape human behavioral norms
- Culture as a Driver of Behavior and Thought: Social environments and culture direct behavioral learning
- Non-Verbal Communication and Cultural Norms: Physical space and gestures vary across cultures
- Defining Abnormal Behavior Across Cultures: Cultural context determines what counts as abnormal
- Advantages and Limitations of Defining Abnormal Behavior: Defining abnormal behavior raises more questions than answers
- Conclusion: History and context are essential to understanding abnormality
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Uses concrete, relatable cross-cultural examples — Norwegian versus Spanish social behavior, land use among American settlers versus Indigenous peoples — to ground abstract claims about cultural relativism in behavior.
- Maintains a consistent argumentative thread: that abnormal behavior cannot be defined in isolation from the cultural and historical context in which it occurs.
- Balances multiple influencing factors (genetics, social environment, culture, history) without overweighting any single cause.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative cultural analysis as an argumentative strategy. Rather than asserting a single universal definition of abnormal behavior, it systematically contrasts behavioral norms across cultures and time periods to show that definitions are context-dependent. This technique — using counter-examples to challenge assumed universals — is a foundational move in social science writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a theoretical framing of genetics and environment, then progressively narrows to cultural specifics: social behavior, non-verbal communication, and historical examples of norm-setting. It closes by reflecting on the utility and limits of defining abnormal behavior, with a call to incorporate historical perspective. This funnel structure — broad theory to specific examples to critical reflection — is a well-suited model for short expository essays in psychology and social science.
Introduction: Behavior, Genetics, and Social Context
Experience and genetic inheritance both influence human behavior. The manner in which individuals develop is driven by social circumstances and experiences within the context of their inherited genetic potential (Walker, 2002). The central scientific question is how hereditary potential and experience interact to generate human behavior. Abnormal behavior is generally understood as behavior that deviates from what is considered normal or expected. Most people instinctively avoid what they perceive as abnormal. For instance, a person acting oddly or dressed in unusual clothing on a bus or train may prompt others to choose a different seat. People are similarly uncomfortable around those who are unclean, and tend to keep their distance. Based on these everyday reactions, abnormal behavior can be broadly understood as behavior that falls outside the parameters of what a given society considers the norm.
Culture as a Driver of Behavior and Thought
Every individual is born into a cultural and social context and subsequently develops numerous social relationships. The features of a person's social environment shape how he or she learns to behave and think through rewards, example, punishment, and instruction. This environment includes school, home, religion, and neighborhood. Additionally, a child's interactions with peers, friends, media, entertainment, and relatives are also key drivers of behavior (Kleinman & Lin, 2001). How a child responds to all these influences — or which factor will prove most powerful — is unpredictable. However, there is considerable similarity in how people raised within the same culture respond to the same influences. Culturally shaped behaviors such as body language, speech patterns, and forms of humor become deeply ingrained in the human mind and tend to operate without individuals being fully aware of them.
The culture to which an individual belongs plays a prominent role in how that person interacts with others. People often notice cultural differences immediately upon meeting someone new. Although personal character matters greatly in social interaction, where a person was raised also shapes their approach to others. For example, a Norwegian at a party would rarely approach a stranger spontaneously just to say "hi" unless under the influence of alcohol, whereas a Spaniard might readily invite another person to join the group.
Non-Verbal Communication and Cultural Norms
This difference is not a hard rule, but it is a meaningful tendency, particularly when comparing Mediterranean Europeans to northern Europeans. A Mediterranean European may require more time before behaving spontaneously than his or her northern counterpart. Another dimension worth examining is non-verbal communication. Depending on an individual's cultural background, physical contact, gestures, and the acceptable distance between two people can vary considerably (Walker, 2002). For instance, physical contact while walking close to strangers in the street may be perfectly normal in some cultures. For many Europeans, however, a stranger walking closely beside them would feel intrusive and strange.
The concept of personal space is similarly culturally determined. In imperial China, for example, people were forbidden from approaching the emperor too closely, and direct eye contact with him was considered an even graver transgression. Such examples underscore how deeply cultural norms govern everyday behavior and spatial relationships between individuals.
Conclusion
Efforts to define abnormal behavior seem to trigger as many questions as they answer. One advantage of these definitions is that society chooses a general criterion for defining abnormal behavior and then uses that criterion to judge cases. The concept of abnormal behavior is used to change or control persons whose uncommon patterns of functioning threaten or upset the social order. These definitions could appear extreme, yet few would argue that the pressures of achieving success in society play no role in producing abnormal behavior. As such, when defining abnormal behavior, it is essential to consider how the past has framed the same concept. History provides rich illustrations of behaviors regarded as abnormal for a given society, place, and time. Earlier examples help make the process of understanding and categorizing abnormal behavior clearer and more complete.
References
Kleinman, A., & Lin, T.-Y. (2001). Normal and Abnormal Behavior in Chinese Culture. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Plante, T. G. (2006). Mental Disorders of the New Millennium. Westport, Conn: Praeger.
Walker, S. S. (2002). Ceremonial Spirit Possession in Africa and Afro-America: Forms, Meanings, and Functional Significance for Individuals and Social Groups. Leiden: Brill.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.