Definitions of insanity in college students

College Student Journal, Dec, 2008 by John F. Geiger, Lawrence Weinstein

The legal concept of insanity has had many definitions throughout the years, and the precise definition used is critical in determining the status of a person in the legal system. Past research has demonstrated that different professions working in the legal system cannot agree on the definition of insanity (Weinstein & Geiger, 2003). However, many times the final decision of sanity vs. insanity is made by 12 laypersons-the jury. In the present study, 177 undergraduate students were asked to rate seven different definitions of insanity. There were differences in the level of agreement between the seven definitions, and also differences between professionals and college students were found for 3 definitions: The medical model, the sociological model, and the psychometric model. In addition, depression and alcoholism were viewed as more onset controllable than paranoid schizophrenia.

**********

Insanity is a concept that most people are familiar with, but also one that they have difficulty clearly defining. Although insanity is purely a legal term, many people would be surprised to realize that psychology does not offer a definition of insanity that most psychologists agree upon. A survey of some frequently used abnormal psychology textbooks (Coleman, Butcher, & Carson, 1990; Comer, 2002; Davison & Neale, 2003; Holmes, 1993; Mears & Gatchel, 1989; Nietzel, Speltz, McCauley, & Bernstein, 1998; Oltman & Emery, 2001; Ullman & Krasner, 1985) revealed at least seven different models or definitions of insanity:

1. A moral model that described insanity as sinful behavior.

2. A medical model, which defined insanity as a disease with diagnosable symptoms and a prognosis.

3. A statistical model, which defined insanity as infrequent or rare behavior.

4. A sociological model which discussed behavior within a society and those who observed that behavior as the two criteria for defining insanity.

5. A psychometric model which defines insanity as scoring above or below a certain point on a test.

6. A professional judgment model, which suggests that any behavior being treated by a qualified physician or clinical psychologist is abnormal.

7. A legal model which defines insanity as abnormal behavior or thinking which shows lack of ability to understand the laws of society, or to appreciate the wrongfulness of one's actions.

With seven prominent definitions of insanity in use, it seems probable that when two people are discussing insanity or abnormal behavior, they may not be working from the same definition. In the legal world where a jury is compromised of 12 individuals who many times make the final decision as to a defendant's sanity or insanity, it is very unlikely that all these individuals start with the same working definition of insanity. Even if they are given the precise legal definition of insanity during jury instructions at the end of the case, their interpretation of the testimony and evidence during the trial is likely to be influenced by the definition which they bring with them to the trial. Support for this influence comes from McGraw and Foley (2000) who pointed out that most people form definitions of insanity independently of the legal definitions. Skeem and Golding (2001) found that mock jurors form a prototype of insanity, and that these conceptions often contradict the legal definitions of insanity. There were an average of seven characteristics of insanity in the prototype, but the mock jurors did not substantially agree on the subset of features that made up the prototypes.

One factor that seems to affect the layperson's determination of insanity is the seriousness of the crime. The more serious the crime and its outcome, the more likely the accused was determined to be sane, and deserving of a prison sentence (McGraw & Foley, 2000). Many people believe that the insanity defense is overused, and is too successful, so a judgment of insanity is seen as letting someone off too easy. Mock jurors in another study (Doyon, 2001) based their definitions of insanity on their belief as to the controllability of the onset of the disorder, where schizophrenia and PTSD were seen to be low in controllability, and led to judgments of insanity. Depression and alcoholism were seen as high in controllability, and the defendant was often judged as sane when diagnosed with these conditions.

There is even disagreement about the definition of insanity among professionals in the legal system, as Weinstein and Geiger (2003) found that lawyers, judges, and physicians showed significant differences as to the degree they endorsed four of the seven definitions. Judges endorsed the legal model more highly than did lawyers and physicians, but the exact opposite was found for the medical model. Also, judges endorsed the statistical model more highly than lawyers did, whereas lawyers endorsed the sociological model more than the judges or physicians. These results show that even the professionals in the legal field are speaking different languages when the term "insanity" is used.