Subjects

Subjects

More

Why the Stanford Prison Experiment was Unethical: Zimbardo's Study of Social Roles

View

Why the Stanford Prison Experiment was Unethical: Zimbardo's Study of Social Roles

The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1973, aimed to investigate the effects of conformity to social roles and environmental influences on individual behavior. This controversial study revealed how quickly participants adapted to their assigned roles as prisoners or guards, leading to unexpected and disturbing outcomes.

  • Procedure: 24 male students were randomly assigned roles in a mock prison at Stanford University.
  • Findings: Guards became increasingly authoritarian, while prisoners experienced psychological distress.
  • Conclusions: People readily conform to social roles, especially stereotyped ones.
  • Strengths: Controlled environment increased internal validity.
  • Limitations: Lack of realism, potential role-playing, and ethical concerns.
  • Implications: Highlighted the power of situational factors on behavior.

06/07/2022

495

Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo's research
PROCEDURE:
Zimbardo et al (1973) converted a basement of Stanford
University's Psychology De

View

Conformity to Social Roles: Zimbardo's Research

The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), conducted by Philip Zimbardo and colleagues in 1973, aimed to investigate the effects of conformity to social roles and environmental influences on individual behavior. This study has become one of the most famous and controversial experiments in the field of psychology.

Procedure

Zimbardo and his team converted a basement of Stanford University's Psychology Department into a mock prison. They selected 24 male student volunteers who were deemed emotionally stable through testing. These participants were then randomly assigned to the roles of either prison guards or prisoners.

Highlight: The random assignment of roles was crucial to ensure that any observed differences in behavior were due to the situational factors rather than pre-existing personality traits.

The researchers went to great lengths to create a realistic prison environment:

  1. 'Prisoners' were arrested at their homes, blindfolded, and strip-searched upon arrival at the mock prison.
  2. Uniforms were used to promote de-individuation:
    • Prisoners wore loose smocks and caps, identified only by numbers instead of names.
    • Guards were given uniforms, wooden clubs, handcuffs, keys, and mirror shades.

Vocabulary: De-individuation refers to the loss of self-awareness and individual identity that can occur in group situations.

Instructions were given to reinforce the roles:

  • Prisoners were subjected to heavily regulated daily routines.
  • Guards were told they had complete power over the prisoners.

Findings

The experiment yielded surprising and disturbing results:

Guards:

  1. Took up their roles with enthusiasm, treating prisoners harshly.
  2. Used 'divide-and-rule' tactics to maintain control.
  3. Constantly harassed prisoners to remind them of their powerless role.

Prisoners:

  1. Rebelled within two days, ripping their uniforms and swearing at guards.
  2. After the rebellion was put down, many became subdued, depressed, and anxious.
  3. One prisoner was released on the first day due to symptoms of psychological disturbance, and two more were released on the fourth day.
  4. When one prisoner went on a hunger strike, he was punished and shunned by other prisoners.

Example: The guards' behavior escalated to the point where some began to enjoy their power, leading Zimbardo to end the study after only 6 days instead of the intended 14.

Conclusions

The Stanford Prison Experiment led to several significant conclusions:

  1. People will readily conform to expected social roles, especially those that are strongly stereotyped.
  2. "Bad situations can cause good people to do evil things" - This quote from Zimbardo encapsulates the main finding of the study.

Quote: "The Stanford Prison Experiment reveals how readily we slip into roles and how quickly we can adapt to those roles." - Philip Zimbardo

Evaluation

Strengths

Control: Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables, which increased the internal validity of the study. The selection of emotionally stable participants and their random assignment to roles ensured that observed behaviors were likely caused by situational pressures rather than individual differences.

Limitations

  1. Lack of Realism: Banuazizi and Mohavedi (1975) argued that participants were merely play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to their roles. Some participants admitted to basing their behavior on stereotypes or film characters.

    Highlight: However, McDermott (2019) countered this criticism, noting that 90% of prisoners' conversations were about prison life, suggesting they were treating the situation as real.

  2. Role of Dispositional Influences: Fromm (1973) suggested that Zimbardo exaggerated the power of the situation and minimized the role of personality factors. For example, only one-third of the guards behaved in a brutal manner, while others showed sympathy towards prisoners.

  3. Alternative Explanations: Steve Reicher and Alex Haslam's BBC Prison Study (2006) offered a different perspective based on social identity theory. They found that prisoners could take control of a mock prison when they developed a shared social identity, while guards failed to do so.

  4. Ethical Issues: Zimbardo's dual roles as both researcher and prison superintendent raised significant ethical concerns. For instance, when a participant wanted to leave the study, Zimbardo responded as a superintendent rather than a researcher.

Definition: Ethical issues in psychological research refer to concerns about the well-being and rights of participants, including informed consent, protection from harm, and the right to withdraw.

The Stanford Prison Experiment remains a powerful demonstration of how environmental factors and social roles can influence human behavior. Despite its limitations and ethical concerns, it continues to spark discussions about the nature of human behavior in institutional settings and the potential for abuse of power.

Can't find what you're looking for? Explore other subjects.

Knowunity is the #1 education app in five European countries

Knowunity has been named a featured story on Apple and has regularly topped the app store charts in the education category in Germany, Italy, Poland, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Join Knowunity today and help millions of students around the world.

Ranked #1 Education App

Download in

Google Play

Download in

App Store

Knowunity is the #1 education app in five European countries

4.9+

Average app rating

15 M

Pupils love Knowunity

#1

In education app charts in 12 countries

950 K+

Students have uploaded notes

Still not convinced? See what other students are saying...

iOS User

I love this app so much, I also use it daily. I recommend Knowunity to everyone!!! I went from a D to an A with it :D

Philip, iOS User

The app is very simple and well designed. So far I have always found everything I was looking for :D

Lena, iOS user

I love this app ❤️ I actually use it every time I study.

Sign up to see the content. It's free!

Access to all documents

Improve your grades

Join milions of students

By signing up you accept Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Why the Stanford Prison Experiment was Unethical: Zimbardo's Study of Social Roles

The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1973, aimed to investigate the effects of conformity to social roles and environmental influences on individual behavior. This controversial study revealed how quickly participants adapted to their assigned roles as prisoners or guards, leading to unexpected and disturbing outcomes.

  • Procedure: 24 male students were randomly assigned roles in a mock prison at Stanford University.
  • Findings: Guards became increasingly authoritarian, while prisoners experienced psychological distress.
  • Conclusions: People readily conform to social roles, especially stereotyped ones.
  • Strengths: Controlled environment increased internal validity.
  • Limitations: Lack of realism, potential role-playing, and ethical concerns.
  • Implications: Highlighted the power of situational factors on behavior.

06/07/2022

495

 

12/13

 

Psychology

16

Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo's research
PROCEDURE:
Zimbardo et al (1973) converted a basement of Stanford
University's Psychology De

Conformity to Social Roles: Zimbardo's Research

The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), conducted by Philip Zimbardo and colleagues in 1973, aimed to investigate the effects of conformity to social roles and environmental influences on individual behavior. This study has become one of the most famous and controversial experiments in the field of psychology.

Procedure

Zimbardo and his team converted a basement of Stanford University's Psychology Department into a mock prison. They selected 24 male student volunteers who were deemed emotionally stable through testing. These participants were then randomly assigned to the roles of either prison guards or prisoners.

Highlight: The random assignment of roles was crucial to ensure that any observed differences in behavior were due to the situational factors rather than pre-existing personality traits.

The researchers went to great lengths to create a realistic prison environment:

  1. 'Prisoners' were arrested at their homes, blindfolded, and strip-searched upon arrival at the mock prison.
  2. Uniforms were used to promote de-individuation:
    • Prisoners wore loose smocks and caps, identified only by numbers instead of names.
    • Guards were given uniforms, wooden clubs, handcuffs, keys, and mirror shades.

Vocabulary: De-individuation refers to the loss of self-awareness and individual identity that can occur in group situations.

Instructions were given to reinforce the roles:

  • Prisoners were subjected to heavily regulated daily routines.
  • Guards were told they had complete power over the prisoners.

Findings

The experiment yielded surprising and disturbing results:

Guards:

  1. Took up their roles with enthusiasm, treating prisoners harshly.
  2. Used 'divide-and-rule' tactics to maintain control.
  3. Constantly harassed prisoners to remind them of their powerless role.

Prisoners:

  1. Rebelled within two days, ripping their uniforms and swearing at guards.
  2. After the rebellion was put down, many became subdued, depressed, and anxious.
  3. One prisoner was released on the first day due to symptoms of psychological disturbance, and two more were released on the fourth day.
  4. When one prisoner went on a hunger strike, he was punished and shunned by other prisoners.

Example: The guards' behavior escalated to the point where some began to enjoy their power, leading Zimbardo to end the study after only 6 days instead of the intended 14.

Conclusions

The Stanford Prison Experiment led to several significant conclusions:

  1. People will readily conform to expected social roles, especially those that are strongly stereotyped.
  2. "Bad situations can cause good people to do evil things" - This quote from Zimbardo encapsulates the main finding of the study.

Quote: "The Stanford Prison Experiment reveals how readily we slip into roles and how quickly we can adapt to those roles." - Philip Zimbardo

Evaluation

Strengths

Control: Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables, which increased the internal validity of the study. The selection of emotionally stable participants and their random assignment to roles ensured that observed behaviors were likely caused by situational pressures rather than individual differences.

Limitations

  1. Lack of Realism: Banuazizi and Mohavedi (1975) argued that participants were merely play-acting rather than genuinely conforming to their roles. Some participants admitted to basing their behavior on stereotypes or film characters.

    Highlight: However, McDermott (2019) countered this criticism, noting that 90% of prisoners' conversations were about prison life, suggesting they were treating the situation as real.

  2. Role of Dispositional Influences: Fromm (1973) suggested that Zimbardo exaggerated the power of the situation and minimized the role of personality factors. For example, only one-third of the guards behaved in a brutal manner, while others showed sympathy towards prisoners.

  3. Alternative Explanations: Steve Reicher and Alex Haslam's BBC Prison Study (2006) offered a different perspective based on social identity theory. They found that prisoners could take control of a mock prison when they developed a shared social identity, while guards failed to do so.

  4. Ethical Issues: Zimbardo's dual roles as both researcher and prison superintendent raised significant ethical concerns. For instance, when a participant wanted to leave the study, Zimbardo responded as a superintendent rather than a researcher.

Definition: Ethical issues in psychological research refer to concerns about the well-being and rights of participants, including informed consent, protection from harm, and the right to withdraw.

The Stanford Prison Experiment remains a powerful demonstration of how environmental factors and social roles can influence human behavior. Despite its limitations and ethical concerns, it continues to spark discussions about the nature of human behavior in institutional settings and the potential for abuse of power.

Can't find what you're looking for? Explore other subjects.

Knowunity is the #1 education app in five European countries

Knowunity has been named a featured story on Apple and has regularly topped the app store charts in the education category in Germany, Italy, Poland, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Join Knowunity today and help millions of students around the world.

Ranked #1 Education App

Download in

Google Play

Download in

App Store

Knowunity is the #1 education app in five European countries

4.9+

Average app rating

15 M

Pupils love Knowunity

#1

In education app charts in 12 countries

950 K+

Students have uploaded notes

Still not convinced? See what other students are saying...

iOS User

I love this app so much, I also use it daily. I recommend Knowunity to everyone!!! I went from a D to an A with it :D

Philip, iOS User

The app is very simple and well designed. So far I have always found everything I was looking for :D

Lena, iOS user

I love this app ❤️ I actually use it every time I study.