Type: Exploratory
Pages: 3 | Words: 792
Reading Time: 4 Minutes

The research question in this article is focused on trying to establish whether or not elements of depersonalization and derealization possess any form of relationship with other psychiatric symptoms. Depersonalization is the non-delusional belief that one’s existence, in physical terms, ceases to exist. On the other hand, derealization is the non-delusional belief by a mentally sick-person who believes that the immediate surroundings cease to exist. Thus, the research finding is meant to unravel the aforesaid form of relationship through collection of relevant data which should depict independence of the syndrome from other diagnosis as well as other facets of psychopathology.

Brief Description of the Experiment and Methodology:

The experiment was identified under the name; “United States-United Kingdom Diagnostic Project of 1972. A total of 866 participants were used and they were divided between the two countries whereby United States-New York produced 442 participants while the United Kingdom-London produced 424 participants. Notably, the participants were derived from a population sample which was sensitive to age-facet. In fact, the project used participants who ranged from 20- 59 years of age. In the course of data collection, the research assistants administered a structured mental-state interview.

The interview process was conducted through referencing of about 700 items which had a typical form of relationship with the patient’s mental state. Furthermore, the structured interview was administered in a period between 48-72 hours upon admission of the participating patient to a healthcare facility.  With respect to the administration of the structured interview, the participants were allowed access to a diagnosis which was arrived at by harmonization of the findings of two or more project psychiatrists immediately after the completion of the mental state interview processes altogether. In addition to this, there were more interviews conducted by both the participant and an informant who covered most of the participant’s individual background with respect to possible elements of past psychiatric symptoms.

With respect to the methodologies used, it is clear that at first, there was a facet analysis which was applied to the collected information consisting of a sample of 500 participants and cross-validation procedures were later applied to the 366 participants. Notably, these procedures were considered to be similar to those conducted in earlier researches especially the research conducted by Fleiss and Cooper in respect to the 25 facets used.

Results- Findings:

Using correlation co-efficient as a manner of expounding on the research, it was found out that depersonalization-derealization facets were scored at a reliable rate at an individualistic point in time so that the intraclass correlation coefficient between immediate interviewer and observers on a sample of 37 participants were determined at 0.91. The correlation coefficient between the interviewer in the project and psychiatrists, who used audiotapes, was established by 24 participants of the project. These participants depicted a 0.68 coefficient value.

It is worth noting that in the course conducting research, the test-retest reliability concept was not used thus, the intraclass correlation coefficient was established at 1.3 for 25 participants who were interviewed within two occasions and within a span-period of one week. In addition to the coefficient figures established as above; it is determined that correlations between the depersonalization-derealization facets as well as other facets were considered to bear an insignificant influence in the determination of the research project. The facet which was attributed with depression depicted a 6 % variance while a 5 % variance was given to the facet which described elements of phobic anxiety.

Interpretation of the Findings:

The research findings assume an independent functionality in terms of depersonalization and derealization with respect to other symptoms and forms of diagnosis. Furthermore, the result findings indicate that there is an immediate descriptive functionality of both depersonalization and derealization. This was established through confirmation made by cross-validation procedures. In this case, there was cross-validation of facets which were directed to the notion of psychopathology.

It is crucial to note that the aforementioned facets provided an extensive description of the mental feelings that matter are unreal, people living within the vicinity of the matter are perceived as acting a part on the unreal perception, the participant used in the course of the study is not a human being; the latter being focused on the fundamental facet that the participant is unreal whenever they embark on looking for their respective images in the mirror.

Basing the research upon a critical fundamental approach, it is safe to postulate the similarity of the findings with those determined by earlier researchers who established that both depersonalization and derealization were, in fact, non-specific to elements of other behaviors as a whole. Moreover, the research findings postulated to the assumption that there were no sex-related facets which could be established with the aforesaid results. The outcome of the research showcased the assumption that there was a decreasing frequency in terms of the facets described. 

Copy-pasting equals plagiarizing!

Mind that anyone can use our samples, which may result in plagiarism. Want to maintain academic integrity? Order a tailored paper from our experts.

Get my custom paper
3 hours
the shortest deadline
original, no AI
300 words
1 page = 300 words
This is a sample essay that should not be submitted as an actual assignment
Need an essay with no plagiarism?
Grab your 15% discount
with code: writers15
Related essays
1 (888) 456 - 4855