The Stanford Prison Experiment was a social psychology study that aimed to investigate the effects of power and authority on human behavior. In the experiment, participants were randomly assigned roles as prisoners or guards in a simulated prison environment. The results of the experiment showed that the participants' behavior was heavily influenced by their role and the power dynamics at play. The guards became increasingly authoritarian and abusive, while the prisoners became submissive and
In 1971, Philip Zimbardo set out to conduct an experiment to observe behavior as well as obedience. In Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment, many dispute whether it was obedience or merely conforming to their predesigned social roles of guards and prisoners that transpired throughout the experiment. Initially, the experiment was meant to test the roles people play in prison environment; Zimbardo was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards, disposition, or had more to do with the prison environment. This phenomenon has been arguably known to possibly influencing the catastrophic similarities which occurred at Abu Ghraib prison in 2003.The
Nathan Adkins AP Psych 4th Hour October 5th, 2017 Stanford Prison Experiment Dr. Philip Zimbardo wanted to conduct an experiment where he could study the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner/prison guard. The experiment was canceled after only 6 days because it showed to be detrimental to the subjects’ mental health and wellbeing.
Back in 1971 there was a prison experiment that took place in Stanford University and it explains clearly why these cases happen in the prison and jail environment. Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist did this study to show what kind of behavior happens when they people are given authority and it also shows how they use their power affecting the situation they are put into. In this research paper we are going to visit the case of Los Angeles Men’s central jail and find out what went wrong. We will also take a look into what happened in Abu Gharib prison and see if this is an ongoing trend in the correction facilities. We will then look back on the Stanford Prison study conducted by the psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 to see if this experiment truly proves that behavior does change resulting in the abuse of the inmates by the officers.
The Stanford prison experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo, vividly demonstrated the influence of social roles, social norms, and scripts on human behavior. In this study, participants were randomly assigned the roles of either guards or prisoners in a simulated prison environment. The participants quickly internalized their assigned roles and began to conform to the corresponding social norms and scripts. The social roles in the Stanford prison experiment were evident as participants took on the roles of guards and prisoners. The guards, for example, displayed behaviors associated with their role, such as asserting authority, maintaining control, and enforcing rules within the prison.
Joshua Arredondo Professor Bdaha Psych 001 18 April 2017 Zimbardo’s investigation: Stanford Prison Experiment Critiquing whether the experiments that Zimbardo imposed on the people that were involved was robust or not, it detailed much more information that was suddenly discovered to become a detriment to what his work was implying in doing. Zimbardo’s studies were measured in 1973, where his idea of American prisoners and guards had personalities that were damned to explain why the brutality levels started to increase in the jail institutions. Becoming inevitable with yourself is leading something to believe it’s true and the guards and prisoners were discovering it was certain and how it can conflict with them not respecting how the law
This connects to the idea of guards having the capability of turning evil through an atmosphere of the prison environment where they can turn evil and have no remorse feelings towards the prisoners. From the article, "Stanford Prison Experiment," by Saul McLeod, he explained that the evil tactics that were made by the guards were from the atmosphere of the prison environment because the norm for a prison guard is to act tough and have no remorse feelings towards the prisoners when assigning punishments. He also added that guards acted this way because they lost their sense of personal identity when they dressed up as a guard, which can show they may have believed that they were actual guards and the experiment was real, which might’ve triggered their dark side with harsh punishments. Therefore, losing their personal identity in a prison environment may have been the factor where they triggered their evil side during the prison
Jimbardo is a member of the AA. This essay critically examines the ethical dimensions of the Stanford Prison Experiment, exploring the aftermath of the experiment, participant mistreatment, and broader implications for research in psychology involving
Stanford Prison Experiment Philip Zimbardo questioned, “What happens when you put good people in an evil place? Does humanity win over evil, or does evil triumph?” (Zimbardo, 1971) In 1971 a psychologist named Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment on the effects prison has on young males with the help of his colleague Stanley Milgram. They wanted to find out if the reports of brutality from guards was due to the way guards treated prisoners or the prison environment.
They had to completed or answer to the survey questions about their profiles especially their mind state or. In result, 24 respondents with stable behaviour were selected for the test. They were assigned to be 10 prisoners and 11 guards in order to fulfil their task in the “mock-prison” 24 hours per day or 8-hours shifts according to their role for 2 weeks. The guards were taught about the task, role and mission to stimulate a real prison environment. On the other hand the prisoners were treated as real prisoner: liberty limitation, no privacy, under surveillance.
Despite the expectations that every guard would act with hatred towards the prisoners, some showed sympathy and wanted to help the prisoners escape. This experiment is not reliable if Zimbardo doesn’t mention the outliers. It is difficult to determine how these same participants would have acted if they were actually convicted of a crime or truly a correctional officer. Out of the few people he examined, there could not be a standard created on how any person would act when placed in a similar scenario.
The study choices in gathering prisoner’s emotions and prison officer’s treatment with the prisoners could appear as bias. When you think about it, prison systems are in place for many reasons. To become an inmate, one most think of their behavior choices prior to becoming a prisoner. Moreover, to think the conduct prison officers must maintain to protect the prison facility. The prison system is a funny thing.
The Zimbardo Prison Experiment showed the power of situations and roles; “Within hours of beginning the experiment, some guards began to harass prisoners. At 2:30 A.M. prisoners were awakened from sleep by blasting whistles for the first of many “counts.” The counts served as a way to familiarize the prisoners with their numbers. More importantly, they provided a regular occasion for the guards to exercise control over the prisoners” (Mcleod). Nobody was telling the guards to do what they were doing, or enforcing this behavior in any way.
The second aspect that should be highlighted from the author’s hypothesis is that guards themselves, the authority was in a specific mind-set which comes with the role, and most significantly the uniform which played a major role. This enabled them, psychology to commit the negative acts against the prisoners in the experiment. What reinforces this idea the uniforms enabled this is the experiment encouraged negative as well as positive engagement with the prisoners. However most of those involved in the guard roles engaged almost entirely in negative behavior.
The Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 illustrated the direct relationship between power of situations and circumstances to shape an individual’s behavior. During this study 24 undergraduates were grouped into roles of either a Prisoner or a Guard, the study was located in a mock correctional facility in the basement of Stanford University. Researchers then observed the prisoners and guards using hidden cameras. The study was meant to last two weeks. However, the brutality of the Guards and the suffering of the Prisoners was so intense that it had to be terminated after only six days.
