Rosenhan Study Flashcards
What is the background of the study
Long history of trying to classify abnormal behaviour
Medical model by psychiatrist told to treat mental illness as comparable to physical illness
Anti psychiatry movement - criticise the medical approach to abnormality and rosenhan was one of them
What was the aim
To gets the hypothesis that psychiatrist can’t reliably tell the difference between people who are sane and insane
What was the method and design
Field experiment
Participant observation
Why was the sample? (2)
8 pseudopatients
Attempting to gain admission into 12 different hospitals
They have a false name and job (to protect further health and employment records )
What was the procedure of the main study
They phoned hospital asking for an appointment they arrived at admissions office saying that they had been hearing voices
They said the voice was unfamiliar, same sex as themselves and said words like empty hollow and thud (meaningless of life)
They gave a false name and job but all other details including ups and downs and relationships etc were true
After being admitted they stoped simulating any symptoms of abnormality
They took part in ward activities speaking to patients and staff and always said they were fine when asked
They wrote notes about their observation : secretly then open when no one cared
In 4 hospitals, patient asked staff when they’d be presented at staff meeting to observe behaviour of staff towards patients
Similar study carried out in Stanford university - students asked staff a simple question
What are the results from the main study
All but one admitted with diagnosis of schizophrenia and then discharged with diagnosis of schizophrenia in remission despite no clear symptom of the disorder
Hospital for 7 to 52 days
Patients suspected their sanity (35 of 118 voiced this)
Normal behaviours all seen as aspects of their illness
Patients waiting in line hour before lunch seen as oral acquisitive syndrome rather than just boredom
What were the results of the patients asking th staff a question
71% of psychiatrist move in with head averted
Only 4% stopped and talked
How was powerlessness and depersonalisation represented
Patients deprived of human rights and freedom
Medical records open to all staff members
Toilets with no doors
Brutal to patients but stopped when other staff members came - saw staff as credible witnesses but not patients
2100 tablets given to patients. Only 2 taken, other swallowed and flushed - staff took no notice of behaviour as long as they were cooperative
What was the IV and DV in pain study
Made up symptoms of pseudo patients
Psychiatric admission and diagnostic label
What was the procedure of the secondary study
The staff of a teaching and resrwcah hospital were falsely informed that for the next 3 months one of Mose pseudo patients would attempt to be admitted into their hospital
Staff asked to date on a 10 point scale each new patient as to the likelihood of them being a pseudo patients
What were the results from the secondary study
41/193 confident judges as pseudo patient by at least one staff member
19/193 suspected by one psychiatrist and another staff member
What were the results of the mini experiment (asking questions - uni and there )
4% responses from psychiatrist, 71% move on head averted
All 14 at uni responded to
What are 3 conclusions from the study
Diagnosis is invalid as psychiatrist can’t detect sane people from insane people
Failure to detect insanity (2) and failure to detect sanity (1)
Stickiness of psychiatric labels more than medical labels - everything that a person does is interpreted by the label
2 strengths of the procedure
Many hospitals used - generalised
Participant observation - a lot of detail and first hand experiences
2 weakness of procedure
Deceiving hospital staff
Doctors expected to treat and provide diagnosis - if ignored that also would have been problem
