Stanford Prison Experiment Philip Zimbardo

In the film, The Stanford Prison Experiment, Phillip Zimbardo conducted a phycology experiment quite like no other, in which he demonstrated the methodology and ideals as presented in chapter two. He followed the scientific method rather than the ethnographic method throughout the experiment. In an ethnographic experiment subjects are observed in their natural settings rather than placed into a foreign setting and observing the changes that occur. The purpose of the experiment was to see how human behavior changes according to situational variables and to determine whether or not they are directly related. An ethnographic experiment involves surveys, existing information, and a control group. Zimbardo’s experiment did not consist of any of

these factors. He proved his hypothesis to be correct by observing the direct relationship between the variables in the experiment. The independent variables were the prisoners and guards because they were randomly assigned their roles. The dependent variable was the outcome of the experiment, the results. The results depended on how the test subjects responded to the mock prison.
Another example of methodology from the experiment is the type of data collected. The data would be classified as qualitative rather than quantitative because of the constant observation and post experiment interviews. The experiment did not require calculating numbers and therefor, would not classify as quantitative.
The ideals in the film violate the code of ethics mentioned in our book written by the American Psychological Association in the year 2002.

The code of ethics is there to “assist researchers in avoiding bias, to adhere to professional standards, and to protect respondents from harm.” The experiment did indeed begin to harm the respondents. It was even difficult for Zimbardo to notice the negative effect it started to have on the respondents because he was also so caught up in his role as the prisons superintendent. There was not an official institutional review board for this experiment, however a third party observer, graduate student Christina Maslach, spoke out clearly stating her objection to the harsh environment the college students were put in and pointed out the immorality of not putting an end to the experiment. After many aggressive arguments with Zimbardo, he ultimately put an end to the experiment more than one week earlier than planned. He later on admitted in an interview the difficulty of playing the role of the prison warden in a participant observational experiment. He also mentioned in an interview, “Although we ended the study a week earlier than planned, we did not end it soon enough.” The students all signed an informed consent before the start of the experiment but no one was fully aware of the reality of the experiment, including

Zimbardo.
In conclusion, there are many factors in the film’s experiment that can be related to the topics in chapter two. Regardless of the unexpected outcome, the results of the Stanford Prison Experiment were necessary in order to be able to study societies more accurately showing that the power of the situation is stronger than the individual.