Famous
Psychological
Experiments
.
David ROSENHAN (1929-2012)
Being sane in insane places
 On Being Sane in Insane Places, Science, 1973
The
Anti-psychiatric movement (T.Szasz: The Myth of Mental Illness),
the end of the Vietnam war
Psychiatrist
sanity
title x actual competence to distinguish insanity from
Our
perception of the world - a matter of perspective (being
overwhelmed by our own subjectivity)
Professor
of Law and Psychiatry at Stanford University
Design of the experiment
Eight
volunteers – 3 women, 5 men (3 psychologists, psychiatrist,
pediatrician, student, painter, and a housewife)
One
month (October 1972)
Every
single subject at a different psychiatric hospital (a wide array of
clinic standards)
At
the entry examination: False name and occupation
Auditory hallucinations –voice saying “Thud, Empty and Hollow”
No other referred symptoms
After
the admission – immediately reporting the voice has
disappeared and everything feels fine
The experiment
Clear
instructions on how to report the symptoms
Limiting
personal hygiene (creating the shady impression), training
how to avoid swallowing the pills
Fear
of the medications, fear of getting raped
Shock
upon experiencing the treatment by the psychiatric staff – „the
invisible“
Violent
Sanity
behavior by some of the staff members
of the pseudopatiens often recognized by the fellow patients
instead of the staff
The procedure of the experiment
Diagnosis
on admission (7x schizophrenia and 1x bipolar affective
Diagnosis
on release: illness in remission
disorder)
Duration
The
of the hospitalization 7 – 52 days; 19 days on average
significance of „the label“ - real information evaluated through
the bias of the anticipated diagnosis
Criticism

Large response – defense of biological psychiatry
Robert Spitzer (Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1975)
Methodology and research conclusion, problems of verification

One hospital administration challenged Rosenhan to send
pseudopatients to its facility, whom its staff would then detect.
Rosenhan agreed and in the following weeks out of 193 new patients
the staff identified 41 as potential pseudopatients - Rosenhan had sent
no one to the hospital.

Conclusion
Debate
on the scientific rigor of psychiatric diagnosis and psychiatry
as a discipline itself
An impulse to update the DSM
A question of the societal pressure on the identification of mental
illnesses.
The quality of the psychiatric care
Later similar experiments
 (Slater in 80s – no hospitalizations, more welcoming approach,
antipsychotics, eventually AD, most frequent dgn. psychotic
depression)

Context
Rozenthal,
Jacobson (1966) – The expectation effect
A fictitious test – a scholar aptitude tests of the children – the result
presented to the teachers as a prediction of the future progress of the
students
After one year, the students randomly selected as the talented ones
improved in the school subjects as well as, surprisingly, the IQ tests.
A
self-fulfilling prophecy – a social projection, that has an influence
on the reality strong enough to eventually become the truth
(the attitude towards oneself, the evaluation of the others,
expectancies of the future )
The Golem effect, the Pygmalion effect
www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6bmZ8cVB4o
Elisabeth LOFTUS (born 1944)
False memories
A professor at the Washington University (as well as various other
universities)


Cognitive psychology, psychology of the memory

Involved in the forensic psychology
Many internationally recognized experiments as well as honorary
degrees


Several hateful reactions (had to hire personal bodyguards)

Tackled the issue of child abuse
Original experiments
A
large amount of experimental work on the inaccuracy of memories
The memory is suggestible
The influence of the question
Yellow
light on the traffic lights
A man with a beard
A speed of the car, the broken glass
How I got lost…
The design of the experiment
The creation of an experimental memory, that would remind the
participant of the trauma without having a traumatic effect in itself

24 participants– each is assigned a notebook containing the of three
true stories from their childhood (the stories were rewritten in
accordance with the reports of their relatives) and one fictitious story
(created with the cooperation of the relatives) about getting lost in a
shopping centre – just one article long.

The participant enters the lab, reads the notebook and then is
supposed to add their own memories – if they didn‘t remember a
particular story, they‘d just write that they don‘t remember

Participants are made to repeatedly tell their „childhood stories“
after a certain time interval

The results
25%
participants claimed to remember the memory of getting lost in
a shopping centre
Including
details that the participants made up themselves (but
trusted them as if those were the „real memories“)
Increase
of the details as the time interval grew longer (after two
days, a week, several weeks) – confabulation
The
soft towels, the blinking light bulbs, the genre of music, an old
balding man wearing a blue flannel jacket and glasses…
The witness problematic
Deconstruction
Influence
of some of the testimonies of child abuse
of the context including some types of the psychotherapy
Deconstruction
of the concept of the supression
A
memory suppressed for many years that suddenly emerges with
many vivid details included
Controversy: you make the victims seem as the liars
The
iniciative for the defense of parents accused of child abuse, as
well as other cases of accusations
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB2OegI6wvI
J.DARLEY(born 1938) B.LATANÉ(born1937)
The Bystander effect
Social
psychology
The bystander effect- the more people are in proximity to a situation
potentially dangerous to someone else, the less likely they are to
intervene to help the said person in danger
The
reason for this is presumed to be the idea that the person can rely
on the others to help or otherwise take care of the situation
Darley,
J. M. & Latané, B., 1968, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology.
The case of Kitty Genovese
A 28 year old woman murdered on 13.3.1964 in Queens, New York
early in the morning

Assaulted and repeatedly stabbed, she shouted for help. The
people watching the situation from her window shouted at the
assaulter to leave the woman alone but never actually helped the
woman.

38 people witnessed the murder and no one intervened to help the
victim
 A strong reaction of the public, some even demanded trial for the
witnesses

An intense discussion among the specialised circles on why the
people didn‘t help

Design of the experiment
Presented as a research on the adaptation of the students to the life
on the campus
 The participant was seated in an empty room with a microphone,
told to describe their student life for two minutes when their turn comes
 There were sound recordings of two minute speeches from other
students played from other rooms, the participant was convinced that
there were other people parttaking in the experiment at the same time
 In the first recording, a student described their struggles with epilepsy
and the stress they undergo
 After another recording, the speaking time for the participant
followed, then possibly other recordings as well
 Then a recording of the „epileptic seizure“ of the first student was
played out, a six minute semi-coherent speech ending in callings for
help

The procedure of the experiment
31%
of the participants tried to help
The
sizes of „groups“ differed – the smaller group was the participant
convinced to be a part of, the more likely he was to help
Out
of the participants thought to be alone with the „student having
a seizure“ 85% called for help in under three minutes
The
participants who didn‘t react on the calls for help were very
nervous, scared, commented on the situation, but they weren‘t able to
get themselves to decide to intervene
Smoke in the room
a second experiment
What
if we ourselves – while surrounded by others – end up in a
dangerous situation?
The definiteness of the threat
The cohesion of the group
The diffusion of responsibility
The participant is meant to fill out a questionnaire on the nature of the
life on the campus while seated in a room that will at one point start
visibly filling up with smoke.
If the participant sits in the room alone, he leaves the room to get
help almost immediately.
If the participant sits in the room with other students who show no
signs of concern about the smoke (informed contributors to the
experiment), they won‘ t reach out to get any kind of help
The thought processes the intervening bystander undergoes:
1.
noticing that there is a problem
2.
realising that an intervention is necessary
3.
taking the personal responsibility
4.
deciding on what the action should look like
5.
taking the action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdpdUbW8vbw
S. Milgram (1933 –1984)
Obedience of the authority
An advert in the newspaper – was announced as a research of learning
process (and offered 4 USD for participation)

A room with a microphone and a speaker, a board with buttons labelled with
voltages from 15 V to 450 V (including descriptions such as: a minor shock, a
severe hit…the last button being labelled with a cross)

„An examination of the pain on the learning process“ – the participant is
supposed to give the other person electric shocks if giving a wrong answer

The participant hears the „student“ sob at 75 V, scream at 120 V, groan that
they can‘t bear the pain anymore at 180 V, and further escalating, ending
with plain silence after the 300 V.

The „leader of the experiment“ was present in the participant‘s room,
encouraging him: „Please, continue“, „It is necessary for you to continue“ etc.

All of the participants continued up until the 300 V and 63% of the
participants continuued until the end of the scale, although they did so
with hesitation and expressed their concern, that the „student“ may
die.

As a proof that a cruel and inhumane behavior towards another
human being - can also be caused just by plain obedience.

Many „teachers“ directly said that their „student“ is responsible for
their suffering (he entered the test voluntarily and didn‘t know what he
was supposed to know)

The participants were informed about the actual purpose and
procedure of the experiment.

The study was critisized for its ethical complications (deception of
the participant, stressful and potentially traumatizing enviroment for the
participants…)

S.Milgram, Obedience to Authority, 1974.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOYLCy5PVgM
L.Festinger (1919-1989)
Cognitive dissonance
The
cognitive dissonance – people are more likely to change their
opinions and principles than to change their behaviour
The solution of a situation showing a conflict of stances is (mostly)
decided by their current behaviour (they are more likely to suppress
the opinion).
A sect led by Dorothy Martin who believed she was receiving
information from extra-terrestrial creatures who have been warning her
about the apocalypse.
 Festinger (and his students) joined the sect to study it undercover
Martin set the date of the apocalypse. Once the date passed and no
apocalypse happened, she declared that the world has been saved
by the rays of light that came from the members of the sect.
The faith of the members of the sect was not threatened, but actually
strengthened
He verified his hypothesis in praxis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=korGK0yGIDo
P.Zimbardo
Stanford prison experiment









Stanford University 1971
24 volunteers – physically and mentally healthy, balanced
individuals randomly divided into two groups – the prisoners and the
guards (12+12)
All of them were paid for the participation, fully aware that they
were partaking in a social experiment.
The rules (inspired by the Palo Alto prison)
The prisoner must be completely quit doing mealtime, after the
lights go down and outside of the prison
The prisoners must call the guards by the title Mr. Correctional
Officer, the prisoners are to be addressed by numbers
Any mistake or failure of a prisoner may be punished, the guards
may use any method except for the physical violence
The guards: 15 USD a day, mirror sunglasses a wooden baton
The prisoners: sans underwear, a chain around the ankles
.
The experiment had to be cancelled after six days – an unexpected
violence of the guards, a rebellion of the prisoners, psychological
breakdowns…

Drastic change of behavior mainly in case of the guards, shocking for
both researchers and participants

A healthy individual, when subjected to extreme conditions, may
drastically change their behavior in a very short time

Criticism of the study
 Not very representative data (a small number of participants)
The experiment takes one‘s responsibility for their own action
 A risk of a long term damage on the participants

Awareness of the fact it‘s an experiment x a real situation
(concentration camps)

Significant differences in the behavior of the guards (a role of
individual personality traits)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYv3J12pARM