Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ideas in social psychology stanford prison experiment
Importance of social behaviour
Social psychology stanford prison experiment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Zimbard's Stanford prison experiment revealed how social roles can influence our behavior. There are many ways that people can influence our behavior, but perhaps one of the most important is that the presence of others seems to set up expectations. We do not expect people to behave randomly but to behave in certain ways in particular situations. Each social situation entails its own particular set of expectations about the proper way to behave. Such expectations can vary from group to group. One way in which these expectations become apparent is when we look at the roles that people play in society. Social roles are the part people play as members of a social group. With each social role we adopt, our behavior changes to fit the expectations …show more content…
Therefore, people usually tend to slip into predefined roles, behaving in a way that they thought was required, rather than using their own judgment and morals. It doesn’t matter if these are good people or no, they tend to conform even when that means doing horrible things. Surprisingly, people could become subject to obedience when are confronted with higher authorities or the individual personalities of people could be swamped when they are given positions of authority. Those in power become abusive, and those subject to that power become immature, passive, and rebellious. These effects do not have to do with differences in original personality, but result from the situation in which people find themselves. I would say that people in a position of absolute power can easily take it to extremes as well. By having legitimated their actions as necessary and brought on by the target, through a process of cognitive dissonance people can come to believe that they acted morally and appropriately in a given situation while the reality is relatively different. It is just incredible how great an effect the environment has on our individual behavior, capable of trumping what we would otherwise consider our steadfast moral and behavioral guidelines. Individuality so easily melts away as the social environment begins to define the individual. It is scary and amazing at the same time how quickly and easily people adopt in new social
The Implications of the Stanford Prison Experiment In 1971 Dr Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment in the basement of Stanford University. This involved imprisoning nine volunteers in a mock up of Stanford prison, which was policed by nine guards (more volunteers). These guards had complete control over the prisoners. They could do anything to the prisoners, but use physical violence.
A local newspaper ad reached out for volunteers to participate in a Psychological study, created by Philip G. Zimbardo and his research team, which sounded interesting for many individuals. Was it the best option to follow through with it? Volunteers were given a promise of being paid fifteen dollars a day of the study. Multiple members probably considered this a once in a life time event that could result in quick, easy money. Many may have heard about the Stanford Prison Experiment, but may not have been aware of the scars that it left upon the participants. Taking a deeper look into the study and the impacted outcomes on individuals will be elaborated on (Stanford Prison Experiment).
In this study Zimbardo chose 21 participants from a pool of 75, all male college students, screened prior for mental illness, and paid $15 per day. He then gave roles. One being a prisoner and the other being a prison guard, there were 3 guards per 8 hour shift, and 9 total prisoners. Shortly after the prisoners were arrested from their homes they were taken to the local police station, booked, processed, given proper prison attire and issued numbers for identification. Before the study, Zimbardo concocted a prison setting in the basement of a Stanford building. It was as authentic as possible to the barred doors and plain white walls. The guards were also given proper guard attire minus guns. Shortly after starting the experiment the guards and prisoners starting naturally assuming their roles, Zimbardo had intended on the experiment lasting a fortnight. Within 36 hours one prisoner had to be released due to erratic behavior. This may have stemmed from the sadistic nature the guards had adopted rather quickly, dehumanizing the prisoners through verbal, physical, and mental abuse. The prisoners also assumed their own roles rather efficiently as well. They started to rat on the other prisoners, told stories to each other about the guards, and placated the orders from the guards. After deindividuaiton occurred from the prisoners it was not long the experiment completely broke down ethically. Zimbardo, who watched through cameras in an observation type room (warden), had to put an end to the experiment long before then he intended
Phillip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford experiment where 24 physiologically and physically healthy males were randomly selected where half would be prisoners and the other half prisoner guards. To make the experiments as real as possible, they had the prisoner participants arrested at their homes. The experiment took place in the basement of the Stanford University into a temporary made prison.
Many ethical boundaries were crossed in the Stanford Prison Experiment. Abuse was not limited to physical, but also psychological (Burgemeester, 2011). In the movie The Stanford Prison Experiment, which depicts events that actually occurred, the guards played physiological tricks on the prisoners. The prisoners were lead to believe that they actually committed crimes and couldn’t leave the experiment. One main thing that the guards did to physically and psychologically harm the prisoners was to tamper with their sleeping schedules. They would wake the prisoners on the middle of the night and have them do exercises, and once they were done they were permitted to go back to sleep (Ratnesar, 2011). By doing this the prisoners lose sense of what
Before commencing the study all participants were briefed on the roles pertaining to the experiment without actually being assigned roles. Once roles were determined and assigned each participant was given specific instruction to their roles whether it be the role of the Guard or Prisoner. The group assigned to the prisoner role were greater in number and were instructed to be available at a predetermined time, this was done to maintain the reality of the simulation. The prisoners were arrested and escorted by real-life law enforcement officials and processed as any detainee would be in a real situation. Upon completing the processing part of the experiment the students were then transferred to the simulated prison, which was housed in the basement of the university, and assigned identifying numbers, given demeaning clothing as uniform and placed in barren cells with no personalized
These occurrences can be analyzed using social psychology because the environment, the situation, and those holding the authority influenced the behavior of others. Due to these influences, prisoners and guards acted on the roles they were given, in the way that society sees them. The description, in itself, is the definition of social psychology.
Power is a very interesting thing to hold. Many good-natured men have been destroyed by power and turned away from their morals as a result. When giving a man absolute power, it’s ingrained in the human brain to take it to a new level. This ideal is present in every type of government, regardless of whether it’s a dictatorship or a government supported by autonomy. Modern day government suffers from this power hungry greed.
These occurrences can be analyzed using social psychology because the environment, the situation, and those holding the authority influenced the behavior of others. Due to these influences, prisoners and guards acted on the roles they were given, in the way that society sees them. The description, in itself, is the definition of social psychology.
When put into the position of complete authority over others people will show their true colors. I think that most people would like to think that they would be fair, ethical superiors. I know I would, but learning about the Stanford Prison Experiment has made me question what would really happen if I was there. Would I be the submissive prisoner, the sadistic guard, or would I stay true to myself? As Phillip Zimbardo gave the guards their whistles and billy clubs they drastically changed without even realizing it. In order to further understand the Stanford Prison experiment I learned how the experiment was conducted, thought about the ethical quality of this experiment, and why I think it panned out how it did.
Would you go into prison to get paid? Do you believe that you will come out the same or become different? Do not answer that. The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment that was conduct in 1971 by a team of researchers led by psychology professor Philip Zimbardo. Seventy applicants answered the ad and were narrowed down to 24 college students, which half were assigned either to be guards or prisoners by random selection. Those 24 college students were picked out from the of 70 applicants by taking personality tests and given diagnostic interviews to remove any candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse. The experiment lasted six days but it was supposed to last two weeks, it was so traumatizing that it was cut short. Zimbardo was the lead researcher and also had a role in pretend prison. Zimbardo’s experiment was based on looking
When put into an authoritative position over others, is it possible to claim that with this new power individual(s) would be fair and ethical or could it be said that ones true colors would show? A group of researchers, headed by Stanford University psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo, designed and executed an unusual experiment that used a mock prison setting, with college students role-playing either as prisoners or guards to test the power of the social situation to determine psychological effects and behavior (1971). The experiment simulated a real life scenario of William Golding’s novel, “Lord of the Flies” showing a decay and failure of traditional rules and morals; distracting exactly how people should behave toward one another. This research, known more commonly now as the Stanford prison experiment, has become a classic demonstration of situational power to influence individualistic perspectives, ethics, and behavior. Later it is discovered that the results presented from the research became so extreme, instantaneous and unanticipated were the transformations of character in many of the subjects that this study, planned originally to last two-weeks, had to be discontinued by the sixth day. The results of this experiment were far more cataclysmic and startling than anyone involved could have imagined. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the discoveries from Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and of Burrhus Frederic “B.F.” Skinner’s study regarding the importance of environment.
Prisoners must always address the guards as "Mr. Correctional Officer," and the warden as "Mr. Chief Correctional Officer."
Social psychology, as defined by the Microsoft Bookshelf, is the branch of human psychology that deals with the behavior of groups and the influence of social factors on the individual. Social roles are one of the many sub - categories of social psychology. I believe social roles to be the way we, as individuals, act in certain situations; such as home life, educational and economic statue, peer groups, etc. The Prison Simulation by Haney, Banks & Zimbardo is just one of the vast studies in this area. In this study we will see how people take roles in life, and in simulated life situations. Social roles are not fictitious, it is in fact a very real occurrence that many people deal with ever day, whether it be with them selves or with other individuals.
Individuals change because of their environment and from their influences. Society cannot define neither a good or bad individual because it is impossible. In surveys, the results showed that students did not follow authority figures but followed peers. In the studies, individuals followed authority figures without question. The weakness of this study is that most individuals do not realize their behavior changes when going to a different environment or situation. Another weakness of this study is that the data does not fully represent everyone. The study only represents a small portion of a college campus. The strength of this study shows that individuals are more influenced into following their peers instead of being told what to do. The limitations of the study are that human behavior is a characteristic that is hard to understand. One second a person can be good, and the next second he could be doing evil deeds. This study needs further research and should take a closer look at how individuals are more willing to follow their peers than an authority figure. The study shows that anyone can be good or bad. Society has painted the image that individuals need to be accepted by others and are willing to forget themselves in order to get accepted. The study shows that the students that were surveyed, did not follow the rules of society. The students stuck with their morals and behavior. Society paints the images of individuals but