Classic Study: Rosenhan (1973)

Question 1

What was the aim of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 1

To see whether psychiatrists could tell the difference between those who are sane and insane

Question 2

What was the IV, DV and type of experiment used in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 2

IV - symptoms that the pseudo-patients reported

DV - whether they were admitted to hospitals and the diagnosis they were given

Field experiment used - involved participant observation too

Question 3

What was the sample like in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 3

12 different hospitals in the USA across 5 different states

Some hospitals were old, some new, some understaffed, some were research hospitals

Question 4

Who were the pseudo-patients in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 4

8 sane people including:

• some psychologists
• a painter
• a housewife

Consisted of 5 men and 3 women

Question 5

How did the pseudo-patients gain admission to the hospitals in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 5

Phoned the hospital asking for an appointment

On arrival, reported symptoms of hearing voices - ‘empty, hollow and thud’

Gave false names and jobs but all other details were correct

Question 6

How did the pseudo-patients collect data in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 6

Took part in ward activities, speaking to patients and staff as they might ordinarily

Collected data by keeping a diary of their observations in a notepad

Question 7

How did the pseudo-patients carry out their observation of the behaviour of staff towards patients in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 7

In 4 of the hospitals the pseudo-patients had to approach a member of staff and ask a simple question like:

-‘when will I be discharged?’

Then noted down the staff member’s response

Comparison was made to Stanford University students asking a professor a simple question

Question 8

What were the results of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 8

Pseudo-patients remained in hospital for between 7 and 52 days - average time was 19 days

Overall, 2,100 tables were prescribed - only 2 tablets actually taken, the rest flushed down the toilet

35 out of 118 genuine patients recognised that the pseudo-patients were fake

Pseudo-patients normal behaviour was often seen as aspects of their supposed illness

88% of the nurses ignored the patient when patients questioned when they would be discharged

Question 9

What was the conclusion of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 9

Psychiatrists were unable to tell the difference between sane and insane patients

Type 2 error - labelling a health person as being sick

Question 10

What was the secondary study in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 10

One hospital was alerted to the first study and told some pseudo-patients would try and gain admission over the next few months

Staff had to rate on a scale, how likely each patient was to be genuine or not

193 patients visited the hospital during this time

Question 11

What were the results from the secondary study in Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 11

10% of patients were believed to be pseudo-patients

None of the patients were actually pseudo-patients

Type 1 error - where you label a sick person as being healthy

Question 12

What are the strengths of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 12

Ecological validity

Population validity

Validity of findings

Collection of primary data

Validity of diagnosis

Question 13

What are the weaknesses of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 13

Subjectivity

Population validity

Validity of findings

Reliability of findings

Integrity of research

Question 14

Why is ecological validity a strength of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 14

Field experiment using participant observation in a real life setting of a mental institution/hospital. This is a strength because it increase the ecological validity making them more generalisable to real life settings.

Question 15

Why is population validity a strength of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 15

Used staff and patients in 12 different hospitals across 5 different states in America. This is a strength because this allows the results to be generalised to other mental institutions in the USA increasing the population validity

Question 16

Why is validity of findings a strength of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 16

Collected both quantitative and qualitative data from observations. This is a strength because qualitative data provides insight into behaviour of the staff and patients, increasing validity of the findings

Question 17

Why is the collection of primary data a strength of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 17

Pseudo-patients collected primary data from first-hand observations of staff and patients in psychiatric hospitals. This is a strength because data was collected directly by pseudo-patients meaning it’s up to date and could assess the accuracy of the DSM which increases the validity of the findings

Question 18

Why is the validity of diagnosis as strength of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 18

Highlighted issues surrounding the basic procedures used for admitting patients to the hospitals and problems with the DSM. This is a strength because it led to development of an updated DSM resulting in improvements in procedures used to diagnose mental illnesses which increased the validity of diagnosis

Question 19

Why is subjectivity a weakness of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 19

Data was collected using a participant observation where the pseudo-patients wrote notes on their observations. This is a weakness because the notes will represent the pseudo-patients own subjective interpretation and could lead to bias and decrease the validity

Question 20

Why is population validity a weakness of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 20

The sample studied was all American hospitals and would only be representative of hospital practices with the American healthcare system. This is a weakness because the findings may have been limited generalisability beyond American hospitals to other cultures and findings may be criticised for being ethnocentric. This would decrease population validity.

Question 21

Why is the validity of findings a weakness of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 21

Experiences of the pseudo-patients could have differed from that of real patients who didn’t have the comfort of knowing the diagnosis was false. This is a weakness because their hospital experience would be less authentic and not expose the pseudo-patients to the same kind of depersonalisation that genuine patients experience. This would decrease validity of the findings.

Question 22

Why is the reliability of findings a weakness of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 22

The pseudo-patients were operating as individual researchers in different hospitals and having different experiences. This is a weakness because it wasn’t possible to have a standardised procedure across the hospitals and this would decrease the reliability of the findings.

Question 23

Why is the integrity of research a weakness of Rosenhan’s study?

Answer 23

Rosenhan deliberately misled hospital staff into believing that pseudo-patients were insane and providing false names and symptoms on admission. Staff were unaware their behaviour was being observed. This is a weakness because researchers deceived the hospital staff and patients lowering the integrity of the research. However, if staff had known about the pseudo-patients the results would have been compromised which was shown in the secondary study.