Philip Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment

It is often uncomfortable to imagine how cruel we can become under the right circumstances. After all, it is in human nature to nonchalantly assume that one would maintain mental stability and good intentions, no matter the situation. Phillip Zimbardo, a psychology professor at Stanford University, put this innate misconception to the test in a 1972 experiment with college students. Zimbardo received surprising results–to say the least– and it is clear that he was unprepared for the wicked behavior shown after just 24 hours of the simulation. In many ways, he failed to protect the participants from long-lasting effects and trauma. During the experiment, a group of college-aged men were divided into two groups: prisoners and correctional officers.Throughout

For example, researchers are expected to protect participants from greater-than-usual harm or discomfort, including fear or embarrassment (Myers & DeWall 2019). Prisoners were told to do counts of pushups or jumping jacks and publicly insulted in front of other prisoners; they wore a single, loose nightgown with only a number–their new name– printed on it; they could even be sentenced to the hole, or solitary confinement, for up to an hour. Of course, these occurrences distinctly show the excessive cruelty the prisoners faced. At the time, there was very little regulation on research studies, but there is no doubt that these traumatic events affected the lives of participants, so Zimbardo faced no repercussions, but it is obvious that there was a severe level of negligence and malpractice on his part. Zimbardo had a responsibility as the ringleader of the study to keep everyone involved safe and stable, and he certainly failed to do so. Perhaps he should have revised the experiment to create a more controlled environment. The guards were given two rules: do not hit the prisoners, and do not keep them in the hole for longer than an

Specifically, Zimbardo should have either created rules prior to the experiment, or stepped in once the guards began to starve, isolate, and sleep deprive prisoners. While Zimbardo assigned prisoners with numbers, and used none of their names, he still broke the ethical guidelines of confidentiality. It is vital to keep all data and information gathered from participants anonymous, so as not to affect their lives outside of the study (Myers & DeWall 2019). While he did not reveal their names or identifying information, he still publicly arrested the prisoners for anyone to see, such as neighbors, family, or any passersby (Mourinho335, Youtube, 2023). He obtained real police officers to question, cuff, and drive to the Stanford Psychology Building with the participants. During the six-day study, the prisoners wrote letters to their families, asking them to come visit. They were even given visiting hours, and if they misbehaved according to the guards’ standards, that time with their loved ones was taken