22/01/2026
This is why it’s so important to treat people as individuals and not just the label they walk in with, because who says that label is accurate? And even if it is, does it really serve a purpose?
Whilst it’s useful to know what’s happened in the past and it can help with identifying unhelpful patterns in the present, taking a solution-focused approach is about seeing where we are today and working out what we need to do to get to where we want to be.
1973: The Psychology Experiment That Exposed Psychiatry’s Blind Spot
In 1973, a psychologist asked a question so uncomfortable that it shook an entire profession.
Can psychiatrists actually tell the difference between sanity and mental illness?
To find out, David Rosenhan designed one of the most controversial experiments in the history of psychology. It did not involve deception through chaos or extreme behavior. It relied on something far more ordinary.
Normal people. Acting normal.
The Setup
Rosenhan recruited eight volunteers. They were mentally healthy. No history of psychosis. No psychiatric diagnoses. Among them were a graduate student, a pediatrician, a psychiatrist, a housewife, and a psychologist.
They were sent to 12 different psychiatric hospitals across the United States.
Each volunteer presented with just one complaint.
They said they occasionally heard vague voices saying words like “empty,” “thud,” or “hollow.”
Nothing dramatic. Nothing delusional. No backstory of paranoia or distress.
Every single one of them was admitted.
Most were diagnosed with schizophrenia. A few with manic depression.
The moment they were admitted, the experiment truly began.
What Happened Inside
Once inside the hospitals, the volunteers stopped pretending.
They reported no more voices.
They behaved calmly.
They spoke clearly.
They followed rules.
They interacted politely.
They told staff the truth.
In other words, they acted exactly as they always had.
But something strange happened.
Their normal behavior was no longer seen as normal.
Taking notes was written up as “compulsive writing.”
Waiting quietly was labeled “withdrawn behavior.”
Asking questions about discharge was interpreted as “obsessive concern with illness.”
Everything was filtered through the diagnosis.
Once labeled, nothing could be seen outside that label.
Who Saw the Truth
The most unsettling part of the experiment did not come from doctors.
It came from other patients.
Again and again, fellow patients approached the volunteers and said things like:
“You’re not sick.”
“You don’t belong here.”
“You’re a journalist or a professor checking up on the place.”
People labeled as mentally ill recognized sanity immediately.
Professionals did not.
Not a single volunteer was released as sane.
Instead, they were discharged with a new diagnosis:
“Schizophrenia, in remission.”
In other words, they were still considered ill. Just temporarily quiet.
The Hospital That Tried to Prove Him Wrong
After Rosenhan published his findings, one hospital publicly challenged him. They claimed his results were exaggerated and promised they could detect fake patients.
Rosenhan responded calmly.
He told them that over the next three months, he would send pseudo patients to their hospital.
The staff became vigilant.
During that period, the hospital flagged 41 patients as suspected impostors.
Another 42 were considered possibly fake.
Rosenhan then revealed the truth.
He had sent no one.
Every person they suspected was a real patient.
What the Experiment Actually Proved
The Rosenhan experiment did not claim that mental illness is fake.
It showed something far more disturbing.
That in institutional settings, context and labels can override observation.
That once someone is defined as “ill,” everything they do is interpreted through that lens.
That professionals can miss reality not because they are cruel, but because systems train them to see categories instead of people.
Rosenhan summarized it simply:
“We cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals.”
Why It Still Matters
The study forced reforms in diagnostic practices and influenced the development of later editions of the DSM. But its deeper warning remains unresolved.
Labels are powerful.
Institutions are rigid.
And once a system decides who you are, it may stop looking.
The Rosenhan experiment did not expose broken people.
It exposed a system that struggled to see people at all once a label was applied.
And that question has never fully gone away.
