Re:David Rosenhan’s fraudulent Thud experiment set back psyc...
by smileypete on Monday January 27, 2020 @06:30AM
(#22158382)
>article makes no mention of the followup experiment where it seems a hospital invited a repetition and then claimed to have found 40 or so fake patients during the agreed period
'a hospital' - which hospital?
Makes sense to carefully re-examine the other claims of the paper.
Re:David Rosenhan’s fraudulent Thud experiment set back psyc...
by 77pt77 on Monday January 27, 2020 @12:32AM
(#22157056)
> Interestingly, the article makes no mention of the followup experiment where it seems a hospital invited a repetition and then claimed to have found 40 or so fake patients during the agreed period.
The reason is simple. This article is pure propaganda along the lines of the book "The great pretender" by Susannah Cahalan.
The experiment might have flaws, but this second part is conclusive and no critics ever address it.
This is just another brick on the long propaganda road to a destination that is very worrisome.
Re:David Rosenhan’s fraudulent Thud experiment set back psyc...
by warbaker on Monday January 27, 2020 @01:24PM
(#22162230)
My default position on the follow-up is likewise skepticism. It seems like the filters at the time were so low that it is likely the follow-up is just a better constructed lie.
Or at least that's the version told in Adam Curtis' documentary The Trap (part 1)[1] which engages in Curtis's usual enthusiasm for fashioning a sweeping historical narrative out of somewhat sparse materials - in this case presenting the "Thud" experiment and its followup as a pivot point in the tale of how R. D. Laing's anti-psychiatry ironically led to the advent of the DSM IV era.
However that may be, if Curtis' account of the followup is correct it seems harder to argue the diagnostic prowess of the psychiatrists was not open to question, regardless of the status of the original experiment.
1: In the section beginning here: https://youtu.be/y97Ywl7RtUw?t=2204