Presentation on theme: "A / AS Psychology.. Key Studies"— Presentation transcript:
1A / AS Psychology.. Key Studies Abnormal PsychologyKey studyD L Rosenhan (1973)
2On being sane in insane places! D L Rosenhan (1973)On being sane in insane places!
3If sanity and insanity exist How shall we recognise them? The Question…….If sanity and insanity existHow shall we recognise them?
4Specifically…….Do the characteristics of abnormality reside in the patients?orIn the environments in which they are observed?Does madness lie in the eye of the observer?
5Before we begin…….1 List two behaviours that YOU consider to be a sign of psychological abnormality2 Write down why you think each of these behaviours is abnormal
6Some definitions of abnormality Stratton & Hayes (1993) .. Abnormality ISBehaviour which deviates from the normmost people don’t behave that wayBehaviour which does not conform to social demandsmost people don’t like that behaviourBehaviour which is maladaptive or painful to the individualits not normal to harm yourself
7Look at your examples:Did your examples fall into those three categories?Can you think of any other useful definitions of abnormality?
8What was Rosenhan’s interest? How reliable are diagnoses of abnormality?
9The astonishing study……….. On being sane in insane places…... D L Rosenhan (1973)What did he do?Who were involved?
11What did they DO? The procedure…………………….. telephoned 12 psychiatric hospitals for urgent appointment (in five USA states)arrived at admissionsgave false name and addressgave other ‘life’ details correctly
12What else did they do?complained of hearing unclear voices … saying “empty, hollow, thud”Said the voice was unfamiliar, but was same sex as themselvesSimulated ‘existential crisis’“Who am I, what’s it all for?”
13What happened? ……….. All were admitted to hospital All but one were diagnosed as suffering from schizophreniaOnce admitted the ‘pseudo-patients’ stopped simulating ANY symptomsTook part in ward activities
14What happened on the wards? The pseudo-patients were never detectedAll pseudo-patients wished to be discharged immediatelyBUT - they waited until they were diagnosed as ‘fit to be discharged’
15How did the ward staff see them? Normal behaviour was misinterpretedWriting notes was described as -“The patient engaged in writing behaviour”Arriving early for lunch described as“oral acquisitive syndrome”Behaviour distorted to ‘fit in’ with theory
16The pseudo-patient’s observations… If they approached staff with simple request(NURSES & ATTENDANTS)88% ignored them(walked away with head averted)10% made eye contact2% stopped for a chat(1283 attempts)
17The pseudo-patient’s observations… If they approached staff with simple request(PSYCHIATRISTS)71% ignored them(walked away with head averted)23% made eye contact2% stopped for a chat(185 attempts)
19How long did they stay in hospital? The shortest stay was 7 daysThe longest stay was 52 daysThe average stay was 19 daysThey had agreed to stay until they convinced the staff they were sane!!
20Were they treated in the same way as normal patients... Given total of 2100 medication tabletsthey flushed them down the loosNoted that other patients did the same and that this was ignored as long as patients behaved themselves !!
21What sorts of records did they keep …….? Nurses stayed in ward offices 90% of timeEach ‘real patient’ spent less than 7 minutes per day with psychiatric staff
23What about the REAL patients? 35 out of 118 patients voiced their suspicions
24On release ………………... Schizophrenia “IN REMISSION” The pseudo-patients were diagnosed asSchizophrenia “IN REMISSION”
25Rosenhan The follow up study…………….. A teaching & research hospital was told of the first studyand warned that …Over the next three months ONE OR MORE pseudo-patient would attempt to be admitted
26What happened……….?Staff members rated ‘new patients’ on scale as ‘how likely to be a fraud’193 patients ‘assessed’41 rated as a pseudo-patient (by staff)23 rated as pseudo-patient (by psychiatrist)19 rated as pseudo-patient (by both)
27How many of these SUSPECTS were pseudo-patients?……... NONENo pseudo-patients were sentStaff were rating their regular intake
28What did Rosenhan conclude? Remember .. His question was …Do the characteristics of abnormality reside in the patients?orIn the environments in which they are observed?Does madness lie in the eye of the observer
29Rosenhan’s conclusion….. “It is clear that we are unable to distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals”In the first studyWe are unable to detect ‘sanity’In the follow up studyWe are unable to detect ‘insanity’
30Rosenhan’s study highlighted ... The depersonalisation and powerlessness of patients in psychiatric hospitalsThat behaviour is interpreted according to expectations of staff and that these expectations are created by the labelsSANITY & INSANITY
31Another Rosenhan note…….. The pseudo-patients described their stay in the hospitals as a negative experienceThis is not to say that REAL patients have similar experiencesReal patients do not know the diagnosis is false & are NOT pretending(Remember Zimbardo)
32Questions YOU should be able to answer... Methodology -This was a participant observationWho were the OTHER participants?Was this study ethical? If not why not?
33Questions YOU should be able to answer……. Why might the reports of the pseudo-patients have been unreliable?
34Look back at your ‘list’ of abnormal behaviour ……... How can we devise some general rulesto describeNORMAL and ABNORMAL behaviour
35Rosenhan ….. YOU must read this study up It is one of the most influential studies in Abnormal PsychologyIf there are such things asSANITY and INSANITYHOW SHALL WE KNOW THEM?
36On being sane in insane places... D L Rosenhan (1973)THE END