Rosenhan

CONTEXT:

American Psychiatrists developed the 'Diagnsotic and Staistical Manual' to help with diagnosis.

Laing then said that Schizophrenia was more than symptoms but was an experience.

AIM: Rosenhan wanted to find out whether psychological diagnoses were reliable or valid

-8 pseudopatients

-all used false names but correct details, except health professionals

-They went to 12 hopsitals and reported hearing 'thud' and 'hollow'

-All but 1 were diagnosed with schizophrenia and the other with depression

-reported everything else as normal

Experiment was a naturalistic observation

Study 2- no patients sent but 43 were diagnosed as schizophrenic. Further support for inability to correctly diagnose

Study 1-
One diagnosed with depression and the rest with schizophrenia

Pt's were kept in hospital on average 19 days
No pt's were found out by staff but were by patients and they said things like "you're not crazy"
The pseudo patients were given around 2,100 tablets but threw them away rather than take them

Study 2
41 people were judged to be pseudopatients but Rosenhan's did not even send any
Also, the hospital staff made more type 1 errors (saying mentally ill people were ok)

Conclusions: Professionals cannot diagnose illnesses properly. Aslo that any normal behaviour was diagnosed as a sign of abnormality.

R(m)-  Weakness: bad publicity from this may deter people with real illnesses from seeking help

E-        Weakness: The pseudopatients deliberately decieved staff

R-       Strength: there is SOME reliability in that they were all given the same diagnosis with similar symptoms

V-       Strenght: All satff behaved normally because they weren't aware it was a study so high ecological validity

S-      Strength: Wide range of people became pseudopatients so representative of all people