Empirical Studies worksheet Name: Snir Boniel
Name of Study : On being sane in insane places. Year: 1973
Name of Psychologist : D. L. Rosenhan
Level of analysis applicable to : Cognitive and even Social-Cultural
What is the principle that explains this behavior?
– None
Specific Learning Outcome : LO 3, 4, and 5!
Key concepts/theoretical propositions of study (the aim):

Are the characteristics that lead to diagnosis from the patients or from the observers ?

If mental health professionals have established criteria, they should distinguish between insane and sane .

Thus, should test mental health professionals

Normal people would ask to seek psychiatric analysis, and Rosenhan would check to see if they would be discovered.

(From A-level): Necessary to illustrate the problems involved in determining normal vs. abnormal. Also, testing poorness of reliability and consequences of institutionalization .
Are there any ethical issues with this study or its results?

Are we questioning mental health professionals? Changing education?

DECEPTION
 Going “against the accepted stream”

Forcing participants to go into hospitals!
Type of study : Naturalistic observation
Method – including participants, details of the study & results (Use bullet points)

8 sane subjects – incl himself, 3 women 5 men.

Goal: present with admission to 12 psychological hospitals

Each pseudo-patient arranged meating with hospital and complained about hearing unclear, unfamiliar, of the same sex and said single, random words said by voices.

Other than that, they acted completely normal, BUT changed their names and occupations.
 They were all admitted to hospitals, and all but one was “with” schizophrenia.

Once inside, they had to leave, they behaved completely normal, and sought release by convincing staff they were sane

They observed and recorded this experience from their point of view.
RESULTS: Taken from reports of pseudo-patients

Length of stay: wide range from 7-52 days, avg 19 days.

No one was detected as false by any hospital staff

When released: recorded as schizophrenia in remission

In about 1/3 of the cases, real patients raised suspicions about the fake patients

Not much contact was made between staff and fake patients. One of the tests was to ask common questions to the staff o Responses – most often moves on, head averted o Very rarely pauses to talk

Much too many, even careless pills

Nurses/psychiatrists/psychologists frequently did not treat patients as people.

Significance of findings – applications – criticisms (Cite specific studies)

Rosenhan supports that normal people cannot be distinguished from the mentally ill in a hospital setting .
 Basically, if you get a “label” as schizophrenic , you are stuck with that label forever.
Rosenhan’s study largely revolutionized the mental health profession. There was no distinguishing between sane and insane.
Criticism: The hospitals criticized the study in that such diagnosis mistakes could not have been made by their hospital. To test this, Rosenhan told the hospital that during the next 3 months he will send one or more pseudo-patients into the hospital. Over this time period, out of nearly 200 admitted, nearly 40 were considered pseudo-patients. In reality, Rosenhan sent none, thus supporting his point again!
In summary: Thomas Szasz says that mental illnesses are not diseases and cannot be properly understood as such, they are just problems in living , and thus the “crazy talk” experienced by some with “mental illnesses” is not a valid reason for labeling a person as insane, it’s just a miscomprehension between two people.