More handpicked essays just for you.
Meaning and importance of integrity
The controversial side of stanford prison experiment
Essay on research ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
I find the Stanford Prison Experiment of 1971 by Philip Zimbardo a very interesting and important experiment. Though, the purpose of this experiment according to Zimabardo was to see the impact of becoming a prison guard or prisoner, I would take this experiment as the difference between a prisoner and prison guard. In other words, this experiments plays a significant role in showing the behavior or reaction of both prisoner and prison guard under certain circumstances. Nevertheless, it was an experiment between two groups; prison guard and prisoners, in a total of 24 members, and even more interestingly, none of the members had any criminal record in their profile. Again the purpose was to simply evaluate the difference of behaviors or action between these two groups under different situations. …show more content…
First of all, integrity means being honest to the participants, which requires telling the participants everything that will or might happen during the experiment. However, for this experiment, the participants had no clue about what will happen during the experiment except for knowing their role only, which was either a prison guard or a prisoner. Same thing applies to the Professional and scientific responsibility principle, which went against the ethical code as the participants knew their role only, but not any specific information about what might happen during the experiment and how to appropriately behave under certain circumstances. Respecting people’s rights and dignity principal is the one extremely went against the ethical codes. This is the one created all the problems and completely changed the expectation of the experiment. The most important right of any experiment is to protect the participants from any harm, but this experiment couldn’t protect it. As the prison guards were in higher position, they behaved like a real prison guards and did what a typical prison guard does. Nevertheless, prison
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.
“Our young research participants were not the proverbial “Bad Apples” in an otherwise good barrel. Rather, out experimental design ensured that they were initially good apples and were corrupted by the insidious power of the bad barrel, this prison (229).” Philip Zimbardo, author of The Lucifer Effect, created an experiment of twenty-four college age men. He randomly assigned these ordinary, educated, young men with a role as either Guard or Prisoner. He questions whether or not good people will do bad things if they are given the opportunity. After the experiment is complete, he begins to compare the situations that occurred in the Stanford Prison Experiment with real life situations in Abu Giraib and Guantanamo Bay Prison. He points out many similarities that parallel the Stanford Prison Experiment. In every situation depicted, there is a good person in a seemingly “bad barrel” – or a bad situation that brings bad actions out of a good person.
In Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study, Zimbardo was interested in finding out how voluntarily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a stimulated role-playing experiment. Participants were picked to be either a prisoner or a guard and were placed in a prison environment for six days before Zimbardo had to shut the experiment down (Cherry, 2014). For the IRB ethical guideline respect of persons, each participant was given an informed consent about the study. Participants also had a preliminary interview in which participants with anxiety issues were told not to participate due to effects of the study. However, consent could not be fully informed because even Zimbardo himself did not know what was going to happen in the study (McLeod, 2008). Participants in this study also had the right to withdraw although they felt like they could not because they were being conformed to a prison environment. Confidentiality was also included in the study because participants had to complete a release form for their video footage to be used. Participants were also given an ID number during the experiment, therefore, remaining anonymous not only to other members of the study, but also anyone who watched the footage (McLeod, 2008).
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.
The Stanford Prison Experiment commenced in 1973 in pursuit of Zimbardo needed to study how if a person are given a certain role, will they change their whole personality in order to fit into that specific role that they were given to. Zambrano significantly believed that personality change was due to either dispositional, things that affect personal life and make them act differently. Or situational, when surrounded by prisoners, they can have the authority to do whatever they want without having to worry about the consequences. Furthermore, it created a group of twenty-four male participants, provided them their own social role. Twelve of them being a prisoners and the other twelve prison guards, all of which were in an examination to see if they will be able to handle the stress that can be caused based upon the experiment, as well as being analysis if their personality change due to the environment or their personal problems.
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
How would you act if you were locked up in a concentration camp and the guards made you suffer? If I were in there, I would listen to the guards because I want less suffered. In addition, I would not try to stand out in the crowed to receive punishment by the guards. In the Movie, The Stanford Prison Experiment, students were split to be two group, guards and prisoner. In the oppressive environment and authority to the guards, the guards were out of control, and they kept on punish prisoner until they broke down. The prisoners were treated as less than human, and they won’t get what they need. Furthermore, these guards will act more aggressive every day to try to force the prisoner to conform. In the film The Stanford Prisoner Experiment, the guards become immoral because they got
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. The purpose of the experiment was a landmark study of the human response to captivity, in particular, to the real world circumstances of prison life. In social psychology, this idea is known as “mundane realism”. Mundane realism refers to the ability to mirror the real world as much as possible, which is just what this study did. Twenty-four subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of "prisoner" or "guard" and they were made to conform to these roles.
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. The experiment was a landmark study of the human response to captivity, in particular, to the real world circumstances of prison life. In social psychology, this idea is known as “mundane realism”. Mundane realism refers to the ability to mirror the real world as much as possible, which is just what this study did. Twenty-four subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of "prisoner" or "guard" and they were made to conform to these roles.
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.
These strict guidelines along with over 10 others helped shape the prison. The guards at the beginning of the experiment formed these guidelines. Their authority, from the start, was absolute. They did not allow prisoners to speak, eat or even use the restroom without permission. Sometimes, unimaginably, the inmates were not granted permission. Day one of the experiment was full of confusion and learning for everyone involved. The events
In Kyle Patrick Alvarez’s 2015 film The Stanford Prison Experiment, he illustrates Stanford professor Philip Zimbardo’s 1971 study of the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. In Zimbardo’s experiment, he had his subjects adopt roles as either prisoners or prison guards and set up a mock prison in the basement of Jordan Hall, Stanford’s psychology building. In psychology, a role is a set of expectations concerning the ways in which people are supposed to behave in certain situations. Generally, the prison guards were psychologically abusive to the prisoners, making prisoners endlessly repeat menial tasks and attempted to make them turn against each other. Although some of the guards felt bad about doing these things,