-
-
institutions don't actually do what they claim to do. institutions develop internal logic that propels them in the direction of their vested interests. this almost never aligns with what the nominal purpose of the institution actually is.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Ah I took two other, contradictory ideas away from it: (1) Institutions can easily be incentivized to be more effective (they started identifying actual pseuds) (2) Institutions can easily be incentivized towards perverse behavior (they started misclassifiyng sufferers as pseuds)
-
in the highlighted section, from the second "study" in response to being challenged, Rosenhan sent NO pseudo-patients at all. They identified _only_ false positives (which in this case meant false negatives, those were real patients with potential real problems).
-
The first study’s insinuation was that these hospitals typically can’t detect patients who don’t actually have problems (pseuds)... that being privy to the metric made them behave perversely and identify false positives is interpretation (2) of study 2.
-
The contradictory interpretation (1) of study 2 is that just being privy to the metric led them to apply the proper criteria & make classifications where they utterly failed to do so before (in real practice, without Rosenhan having to send any ad-hoc pseuds).
-
They both popped into my mind because it wasn’t clear whether they were actual positives or false positives—whether the punchline is that they were prodded into being more effective or that they were nudged into being (even more) dysfunctional.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.