Hofling hospital experiment: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→References: link corrected, isbn added |
||
(26 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Psychology field experiment on obedience}} |
|||
{{refimprove|date=March 2010}} |
{{refimprove|date=March 2010}} |
||
In 1966, the [[psychiatrist]] '''Charles K. Hofling''' conducted a [[field experiment]] on obedience in the nurse-physician relationship.<ref> Hofling CK et al. (1966) "An Experimental Study of Nurse-Physician Relationships". ''Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease'' 143:171-180.</ref> In the natural hospital setting, nurses were ordered by unknown doctors to administer what could have been a dangerous dose of a (fictional) drug to their patients. In spite of official guidelines forbidding administration in such circumstances, Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an [[overdose]] of medicine. |
In 1966, the [[psychiatrist]] '''Charles K. Hofling''' conducted a [[field experiment]] on obedience in the nurse-physician relationship.<ref> Hofling CK et al. (1966) "An Experimental Study of Nurse-Physician Relationships". ''Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease'' 143:171-180.</ref> In the natural hospital setting, nurses were ordered by unknown doctors to administer what could have been a dangerous dose of a (fictional) drug to their patients. In spite of official guidelines forbidding administration in such circumstances, Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an [[overdose]] of [[Medication|medicine]].<ref name="auto"> McLeod, Saul. “Saul McLeod.” Hofling's Hospital Experiment of Obedience | Simply Psychology, Simply Psychology, 1 Jan. 1970, [https://www.simplypsychology.org/hofling-obedience.html Hofling Hospital Experiment (1966)] </ref> |
||
==Procedure== |
==Procedure== |
||
A person would telephone a nurse, saying that he was a doctor and giving a fictitious name, asking the nurse to administer 20 mg of a fictitious drug named " |
A person would telephone a nurse, saying that he was a doctor and giving a fictitious name, asking the nurse to administer 20 mg of a fictitious drug named "ASTROTEN" to a patient, and that he/she would provide the required signature for the medication later. A bottle labelled "Astroten" had been placed in the drug cabinet, but there was no drug of that name on the approved list. The label clearly stated that 10 mg was the maximum daily dose.<ref name="auto"/> |
||
The experimental protocol was explained to a group of twelve nurses and twenty-one nursing students, who were asked to predict how many nurses would give the drug to the patient; ten nurses and all the nursing students said they would not do it. |
The experimental protocol was explained to a group of twelve nurses and twenty-one nursing students, who were asked to predict how many nurses would give the drug to the patient; ten nurses and all the nursing students said they would not do it. |
||
Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
==Findings== |
==Findings== |
||
Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an overdose of medicine. None of the investigators, and only one experienced nurse who examined the protocol in advance, correctly guessed the experimental results. |
Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an overdose of medicine. None of the investigators, and only one experienced nurse who examined the protocol in advance, correctly guessed the experimental results. |
||
He also found that 21 of 22 nurses whom he had given the questionnaire |
He also found that 21 of 22 nurses to whom he had given the questionnaire had said they would not obey the orders of the doctor, and that 10 out of the 22 nurses had done this before, with a different drug.<ref name="auto"/> |
||
==Conclusions== |
==Conclusions== |
||
Through the experiment, Hofling was able to demonstrate that people are very unwilling to question those who are considered "authority figures", even when they might have good reason to. This experiment helped illustrate how one could be willing to do something they are ordered to do, even if they know what they are being ordered to do is wrong (such as giving a patient too much of a drug).<ref name="auto"/><ref> Hofling, C. K., Brotzman, E., Dalrymple, S., Graves, N. & Bierce, C. (1966). An experimental study of nurse-physician relations. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 143, 171-180. </ref> This study was also very important in relation to the [[Milgram experiment]]. |
|||
The nurses were thought to have allowed themselves to be deceived because of their high opinions of the standards of the medical profession. The study revealed the danger to patients that existed because the nurses' view of professional standards induced them to suppress their good judgement. |
|||
==Books== |
==Books== |
||
*''Basic Psychiatric Concepts in Nursing'' (1960). Charles K. Hofling, Madeleine M. Leininger, Elizabeth Bregg. J. B. |
*''Basic Psychiatric Concepts in Nursing'' (1960). Charles K. Hofling, Madeleine M. Leininger, Elizabeth Bregg. J. B. Lippincott, 2nd ed. 1967: {{ISBN|0-397-54062-0}} |
||
*''Textbook of Psychiatry for Medical Practice'' edited by C. K. Hofling. J. B. |
*''Textbook of Psychiatry for Medical Practice'' edited by C. K. Hofling. J. B. Lippincott, 3rd ed. 1975: {{ISBN|0-397-52070-0}} |
||
*'' |
*''Aging: The Process and the People'' (1978). Usdin, Gene & Charles K. Hofling, editors. American College of Psychiatrists. New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, {{ISBN|0-876-30178-2}} |
||
*''The Family: Evaluation and Treatment'' (1980). ed. C. K. Hofling and J. M. Lewis, New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers |
*''The Family: Evaluation and Treatment'' (1980). ed. C. K. Hofling and J. M. Lewis, New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, {{ISBN|0-876-30233-9|}} |
||
*''Law and Ethics in the Practice of Psychiatry'' (1981). New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, ISBN |
*''Law and Ethics in the Practice of Psychiatry'' (1981). New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, {{ISBN|0-87630-250-9}} |
||
*''Custer and the Little Big Horn: A Psychobiographical Inquiry'' (1985). Wayne State University Press, ISBN |
*''Custer and the Little Big Horn: A Psychobiographical Inquiry'' (1985). Wayne State University Press, {{ISBN|0-8143-1814-2}} |
||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
* [[Milgram experiment]] |
* [[Milgram experiment]] |
||
* [[Strip search phone call scam]] |
|||
==References== |
==References== |
||
Line 40: | Line 42: | ||
[[Category:Conformity]] |
[[Category:Conformity]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Interpersonal relationships]] |
||
[[Category:Human subject research in the United States]] |
[[Category:Human subject research in the United States]] |
||
⚫ | |||
[[Category:Psychology experiments]] |
[[Category:Psychology experiments]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Persuasion]] |
||
⚫ |
Latest revision as of 19:07, 17 June 2024
This article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2010) |
In 1966, the psychiatrist Charles K. Hofling conducted a field experiment on obedience in the nurse-physician relationship.[1] In the natural hospital setting, nurses were ordered by unknown doctors to administer what could have been a dangerous dose of a (fictional) drug to their patients. In spite of official guidelines forbidding administration in such circumstances, Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an overdose of medicine.[2]
Procedure
[edit]A person would telephone a nurse, saying that he was a doctor and giving a fictitious name, asking the nurse to administer 20 mg of a fictitious drug named "ASTROTEN" to a patient, and that he/she would provide the required signature for the medication later. A bottle labelled "Astroten" had been placed in the drug cabinet, but there was no drug of that name on the approved list. The label clearly stated that 10 mg was the maximum daily dose.[2]
The experimental protocol was explained to a group of twelve nurses and twenty-one nursing students, who were asked to predict how many nurses would give the drug to the patient; ten nurses and all the nursing students said they would not do it.
Hofling then selected 22 nurses at a hospital in the United States for the actual experiment. They were each telephoned by an experimenter who identified himself as Dr. Smith, who asked them to administer the drug and said that he would write up the paperwork as soon as he got to the hospital. Nurses who followed the instruction were stopped at the door to the patient room before they could administer the "drug".
The nurses should have refused "Dr Smith's" instructions for any one of several reasons:
- The dosage they were instructed to administer was twice the recommended safe daily dosage;
- Hospital protocol stated that nurses should only take instructions from doctors known to them; they should not have followed instructions given by an unknown doctor over the phone;
- The drug was not on their list of drugs to be administered that day, and the paperwork required before drug administration had not been done.
Findings
[edit]Hofling found that 21 out of the 22 nurses would have given the patient an overdose of medicine. None of the investigators, and only one experienced nurse who examined the protocol in advance, correctly guessed the experimental results. He also found that 21 of 22 nurses to whom he had given the questionnaire had said they would not obey the orders of the doctor, and that 10 out of the 22 nurses had done this before, with a different drug.[2]
Conclusions
[edit]Through the experiment, Hofling was able to demonstrate that people are very unwilling to question those who are considered "authority figures", even when they might have good reason to. This experiment helped illustrate how one could be willing to do something they are ordered to do, even if they know what they are being ordered to do is wrong (such as giving a patient too much of a drug).[2][3] This study was also very important in relation to the Milgram experiment.
Books
[edit]- Basic Psychiatric Concepts in Nursing (1960). Charles K. Hofling, Madeleine M. Leininger, Elizabeth Bregg. J. B. Lippincott, 2nd ed. 1967: ISBN 0-397-54062-0
- Textbook of Psychiatry for Medical Practice edited by C. K. Hofling. J. B. Lippincott, 3rd ed. 1975: ISBN 0-397-52070-0
- Aging: The Process and the People (1978). Usdin, Gene & Charles K. Hofling, editors. American College of Psychiatrists. New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, ISBN 0-876-30178-2
- The Family: Evaluation and Treatment (1980). ed. C. K. Hofling and J. M. Lewis, New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, ISBN 0-876-30233-9
- Law and Ethics in the Practice of Psychiatry (1981). New York: Brunner/Mazel Publishers, ISBN 0-87630-250-9
- Custer and the Little Big Horn: A Psychobiographical Inquiry (1985). Wayne State University Press, ISBN 0-8143-1814-2
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Hofling CK et al. (1966) "An Experimental Study of Nurse-Physician Relationships". Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 143:171-180.
- ^ a b c d McLeod, Saul. “Saul McLeod.” Hofling's Hospital Experiment of Obedience | Simply Psychology, Simply Psychology, 1 Jan. 1970, Hofling Hospital Experiment (1966)
- ^ Hofling, C. K., Brotzman, E., Dalrymple, S., Graves, N. & Bierce, C. (1966). An experimental study of nurse-physician relations. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 143, 171-180.