Rosenhan 1973 - Evaluation CLINICAL CLASSIC STUDY

?
  • Created by: imogenrey
  • Created on: 28-11-17 18:25
View mindmap
  • Rosenhan 1973 - sane in insane places - evaluation
    • Generalisable
      • Used the staff of 12 different hospitals as the participants. However, all of the hospitals were located in the US so cannot be generalised to cultures outside of this area due to society differences.
      • The diagnostic tool used by the hospitals was the DSM-II. Therefore the conclusions of the study wont be representative of others like the ICD etc.
      • There was good variation in the types of hospitals used as some had good funding where as others didn't, or others had a good amount of staff and a different hospital didn't, therefore results can be applied to,a variety of institutes..
    • Reliability
      • There was a standardised procedure in terms of the symptoms each of the pseudo patients presented to the psychiatrist; for instance, hearing the words 'thud', 'hollow' and 'empty'. This means the study can be replicated to test for reliability.
      • The researcher had little control over the variables in the environment which may mean the results are impacted by confounding variables.
      • As the procedure was replicated in 12 different hospitals it has test-re-test reliability.
    • Application
      • Showed how the reliability and validity of the DSM-2 was not good and lead to improvements in the DSM-3
      • Lead to improvements in the healthcare system such as poor conditions and over prescription of medication.
      • The study highlighted the negative impact of being labbeled as abnormal as although the pseudo patients didnt have the disorder 11/12 hospitals discharged with the disgnosis of schizophrenic in remission
    • Validity
      • High mundane realism as the task was not artificial and took place in real hospitals; therefore there is less chance of demand characteristic
      • Also as the participants (the staff) didn't know about the study there was no unnatural behaviour
      • High ecological validity due to the more natural environment of the study apposed to a lab experiment.
    • Ethics
      • There was deception of the staff members which also means there was no right to withdraw offered.
      • Care time was taken away from real patients for the pseudo ones
      • Cost Benefit analysis may show how while there was negative costs the study did a lot of good for society in terms of diagnosis and mental health/care.
      • Staff members may have felt guilty after study or not wanted to have taken part.

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Abnormality resources »