Pavlov's Paranoia Case Study

1. Pavlov approached the investigation of paranoia in a clinical setting by relying strongly on psychiatrists and their evaluations in the early 1930’s. Pavlov was inadequate when it came to having a clinical comprehension of paranoia, however by 1934, he had learned how to identify the symptoms of this mental illness. From 1931 until his death in 1936, he had studied five different cases that were diagnosed as paranoia/ paranoid states which were previously diagnosed by psychiatrists. While studying these patients he had a two-part process in a routine consideration. First, observing the patients’ behavior and a verbal examination were required, followed by the second part which included Pavlov’s explanation of etiology using the theory from …show more content…
The conceptualization of paranoid processes was majorly influenced by Ernst Kretschmer’s work done in 1927. His work was a description of the etiology of paranoia, although he had taken on a more psychological approach in comparison to Pavlov’s. Pavlov had focused more on his theory of higher neural activity which showed his thoughts on the etiology, however both had agreed on some aspects of this etiology. They both agreed that a basis of paranoia was located within an individuals’ heredity, and that paranoia was brought upon by traumatic environmental conditions. That being said, Kretschmer believed that general exhaustion was a characteristic of the individual who was prone to paranoia; whereas Pavlov felt that one a precondition for paranoia was the incapacity to deal with the aspects of their environment. As for traumatic environmental conditions, Pavlov believed that paranoia was evoked by things such as sexual problems, powerful stimulation, infections, and even conflict situations. With these situations, behavior deteriorated, and that certain centres of the brain, which portrayed paranoid ideas, were activated more than adjacent cortical areas. Kretschmer on the other hand, believed that one was sensitive to environmental events. Pavlov did agree with this, however he had taken the more physiological approach to explaining this by the use of dogs prone to paranoia. Not only were excitatory and inhibitory processes were evaluated, but genetics also was an important factor in regards to paranoia. These two individuals both shared a similar conceptualization of paranoia using an explanation that was based on a clinical experience and experiments that were similar to some aspects of paranoia. Looking from a historical perspective, Pavlov had published an article on paranoia in 1934, which could lead to the possibility that he was reacting to politics during the Soviet Union. Pavlov had a strong opinion towards the leadership of the Soviets and could have