Evaluation of Rosenhan
- Created by: Sophstevensx
- Created on: 22-03-21 09:20
View mindmap
- Rosenhan evaluation points
- high ecological validity
- conducted in a real psychiatric hospital
- real psychiatrists making real diagnosis
- reliability
- illustrated reliability
- all pseduo patients claimed to hear the same three words
- empty, hollow and thud
- all pseduo patients claimed to hear the same three words
- low reliability
- no control or standardisation of how the different psychiatrists conducted their consultations
- all pseudo patients were misdiagnosed as being mentally ill
- illustrated reliability
- ethics
- hospital staff were deceived
- thought the pseudo patients were real patients and lied to initially about hearing voices
- in second study other hospitals were deceived into thinking pseudo patients would be sent to them
- harm
- when the staff realised their professional judgments were wrong
- hospital staff were deceived
- qualitative
- pseudo patients kept notes in a diary of their experiences whilst hospitalised which were later analysed
- quantitative
- the duration of the pseudo patients stayed in the hospital varied from 7-52 days, with an average stay of 19
- validity
- Rosenhan's study questions the ability of diagnostic systems such as the DSM
- suggests that they lack validity
- only one symptom of serious psychiatric condition was involved
- lower validity as diagnostic systems may do better with other/more symptoms
- Rosenhan's study questions the ability of diagnostic systems such as the DSM
- high ecological validity
Comments
No comments have yet been made