Goldstein Flashcards
What was the aim of Goldstein?
To see if females experience less severe symptoms of sz than males.
To check the reliability of DSM 3.
What was the sample used in Goldstein?
Data collected over 10 years.
Information for 199 patients was used to check reliability.
90 sz patients with a hospital stay of less than 6 months from a New York psychiatric hospital were used to check for gender differences.
What was the method used in Goldstein?
Self report
What was the procedure used in Goldstein?
Hospitals gave detailed histories about 199 patients and DSM 3 was used to re-diagnose patients by 2 experts who were blind to the hypothesis and any previous diagnosis (single- blind).
Primary data: collected about symptoms using trained interviewers who used a specific set of questions.
Questionaires measured premorbid functioning through the collection of information about social isolation, relationships and interest from the ages 6-20 years.
Secondary data: used to find out about the number of times that a patient was rehopsitalised and for how long.
Data was collected at a 5 and 10 year interval.
What were the results of Goldstein?
Strong correlation of 0.80 between the experts in their diagnosis.
169 of 199 were re-diagnosed with sz.
Women had less re-hospitalisations than men and stayed for less time.
Premorbid factors affected rehopsitalisations and social functioning affected length of stay.
What was the conclusion of Goldstein?
Sz is a more severe disorder in males who experienced longer stays in hopsital than females.
DSM 3 was a reliable measure of mental disorders.
Premorbid and social functioning are important aspects of mental health.
What was good and bad about having a restricted sample in Goldstain’s study?
Use of sz patients from a NY psychiatric hospital to check for gender differences in sz.
This increases the reliabilty as we are able to replicate this sample to check for the consistency in findings about the gender differences in sz.
However, this also lowers the generalisabilty as we can’t generalise the results on gender differences in sz symptoms to those living outside of New York (for example in rural areas).
Why was the population validity high in Goldstein’s study?
High population validity as they use sz patients and so it is reflective of who Goldstein wanted to check the gender differences of- sz patients.
So giving us an accurate measure of the gender differences between males and females in sz symptoms.
Why was the reliability high in Goldstein’s study?
The interviewers used a specific set of questions in each of the clinical interviews with the sz patients to measure their symptoms.
So increasing the reliability as we get a consistent collection of data about the sz patient’s symptoms.
What is a positive and negative of the correlational data in Goldstein’s study?
Collection of correlational data which gives us the relationship between DSM 3 and reliability, however, it doesn’t exactly tell us how the DSM 3 is consistent.
So meaning that this isn’t a full explanation of the cause and effect- we can’t predict how reliable DSM will be in all diagnosis cases.
How useful is Goldstein’s study?
Tells us how gender affects sz symptoms and so allowing us to potentially put more practical applications in place to help prevent males from devloping sz.
However, The use of historical data, we don’t use DSM 3 anymore, we now use DSM 5 in modern psychiatry and so this study isn’t relevant to diagnosis of disorders in today’s society.
