To what extent is mental illness a cultural, intimate phenomenon? Should we be making universal assumptions about how the mind works and how best to fix it? And how do we tackle cultural diversity in experiencing mental illness? The book is divided into four main chapters, each tackling a mental health epidemic in a different country. The first looks at the dramatic rise of eating disorders, namely anorexia, in Hong Kong in the 1990s, a place where previously self-starvation existed as a rare and separate phenomenon. The second chapter discusses the 2004 tsunami that swept through Sri Lanka, bringing the notion of PTSD to the country. Its third sees the changing view of schizophrenia in Zanzibar, a country where schizophrenia is seen as a form of possession by djinn, whilst the fourth chapter presents the commercialisation of depression in Japan where pharmaceutical giant Glaxo-Smith-Kline (GSK) pushed Japanese psychiatrists to change the Japanese word describing depression from melancholy to ‘cold of the soul’, proposing the idea that depression is like a cold; common and curable.
‘Americans have been mass producing ideas about how mental illnesses exist’ Armed with evidence from the literature and conversations with mental health experts, anthropologists and patients, Watters offers a panoramic view of the nature of the mental health issues in these countries and presents a refreshingly curious way of thinking about fundamental ideas. He does not tell these stories as simple tales, but asks readers to challenge their own core beliefs through them. Crazy Like Us is a clever, fresh take on old assumptions. Watters does not just explain concepts of cultural diversity, but embodies them by completely engrossing himself, and the reader with him, in intimate local experiences of mental health. Most notably, he reminds the reader that ideas get outdated, but constructive criticism never gets old.
A flaw in the system: The errors in eyewitness testimony Damyana Raykova
W
hen asked to rate the accuracy of our own memories, the majority of us are confident that what we remember is a true picture of what happened. Contrary to popular belief, we are actually not good at retrieving accurate details from memory and memory distortions are much more common than we think. This misplaced trust in memory usually doesn’t pose a problem in life, but can prove hugely important in court cases, where eyewitness testimony can swing a jury and determine a defendant’s future. Eyewitness testimony is often given substantial consideration when coming to a verdict because we all believe that our memories are accurate. This means that both witnesses and juries have a lot of confidence in these accounts. But when testimony is conflicting, a case may
depend on almost arbitrary factors such as how believable each witness seems.
‘the eyewitness testimony of just one man was enough for a false conviction’ Studies dating back to as early as the 1930s indicate that memory retrieval is an easily distorted process. Circumstance, cultural norms, and prior beliefs can drastically change what individuals think they’ve seen. Even once a memory is formed it can be distorted during retrieval, with the way a question is worded having an influence on what is remembered.
9
