The experimental study that I chose to write about is the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was run by Phillip Zimbardo. More than seventy applicants answered an ad looking for volunteers to participate in a study that tested the physiological effects of prison life. The volunteers were all given interviews and personality tests. The study was left with twenty-four male college students. For the experiment, eighteen volunteers took part, with the other volunteers being on call. The volunteers were then divided into two groups, guards and prisoners, randomly assigned by coin flips. The experiment began on August 14th, 1971 in the basement of Stanford’s psychology building. To create the prison cells for the prisoners, the doors were taken off of laboratory rooms and replaced with bars and cell numbers. There was a room especially made for solitary confinement referred to as “the hole”. There was a camera at the end of the hall to record everything that happened as well as intercom devices in the cells in order to listen in on what the prisoners were saying and make announcements to the prisoners. Upon arrival, each prisoner was searched and stripped naked. Next came a degradation procedure that was designed in order to humiliate the prisoners and make sure they weren’t bringing in any germs. Next came the uniforms, which consisted of a smock-like dress with a prisoner identification number. The prisoners had to wear a heavy chain on their ankle at all times and they were given rubber sandals for footwear. The goal of their attire was to embarrass the prisoners and make them feel emasculated. The purpose of the heavy chain on their ankle was to be a reminder of their oppression. The prisoners were to remain anonymous and only refe... ... middle of paper ... ... abusive behavior in prison. Zimbardo designed the experiment in order to induce depersonalization, disorientation, and deindividualiztion in the volunteers. This experiment does not fit in with other work in the field of psychology because the conditions the participants were living in was inhumane and the experiment leaders didn’t realize this until someone outside of the experiment pointed it out; it was an extremely unethical experiment. This experiment left many of the participants emotionally traumatized and it is often compared to the Milgram experiment, which was performed a decade earlier. As a result of the layout of the experiment, Zimbardo found it difficult to keep conventional scientific controls in place and did not remain a neutral onlooker. One of the critics of this experiment, Eric Fromm, challenged the generalization of the experiment’s results.
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.
On August 14, 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment had begun. The volunteers who had replied to the ad in the newspaper just weeks before were arrested for the claims of Armed Robbery and Burglary. The volunteers were unaware of the process of the experiment, let alone what they were getting themselves into. They were in shock about what was happening to them. Once taken into the facility, the experimenters had set up as their own private jail system; the twenty-four volunteered individuals were split up into two different groups (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.
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.
In the Stanford Prison Experiment, a study done with the participation of a group of college students with similar backgrounds and good health standing who were subjected to a simulated prison environment. The participants were exposed completely to the harsh environment of a real prison in a controlled environment with specific roles of authority and subordinates assigned to each individual. The study was formulated based on reports from Russian novelist Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky had spent four years in a Siberian prison and his view on how a man is able to withstand anything after experiencing the horrors of prison prompted Dr. Philip Zimbardo a Professor of Psychology at Stanford and his
“Male college students needed for psychological study of prison life. $15 per day for 1-2 weeks.
Cherry, K. (n.d.). The stanford prison experiment an experiment in the psychology of imprisonment. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/stanford-prison-experiment.htm
The ideas of social psychology mentioned above can be applied to the Stanford Prison Experiment; in which the environment, the participants, and construals brought about behaviors that may not have been how the participants actually would behave in real life.
The ideas of social psychology mentioned above can be applied to the Stanford Prison Experiment; in which the environment, the participants, and construals brought about behaviors that may not have been how the participants actually would behave in real life.
To begin the experiment the Stanford Psychology department interviewed middle class, white males that were both physically and mentally healthy to pick 18 participants. It was decided who would play guards and who would be prisoners by the flip of a coin making nine guards and nine prisoners. The guards were taken in first to be told of what they could and could not do to the prisoners. The rules were guards weren’t allowed t o physically harm the prisoners and could only keep prisoners in “the hole” for a hour at a time. Given military like uniforms, whistles, and billy clubs the guards looked almost as if they worked in a real prison. As for the prisoners, real police surprised them at their homes and arrested them outside where others could see as if they were really criminals. They were then blindfolded and taken to the mock prison in the basement of a Stanford Psychology building that had been decorated to look like a prison where guards fingerprinted, deloused, and gave prisoners a number which they would be calle...
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."
First, the students could have been given detailed information about the research and its procedures beforehand. Although, Dr. Zimbardo was himself unaware of how individuals would react under a given situation, which made it difficult for him to lay down any specifics about the study. This information could have been included in the consent forms and repeated before the experiment was started, so the participants could understand what they were getting themselves into. Dr. Zimbardo should have assigned a research assistant to act as the prison superintendent to avoid conflict of interest. The guards should have been trained before starting the experiment and briefed about the daily tasks they had to perform. This would have ensured a controlled experimental environment. The participants should have been debriefed after the experiment and referred to a counselor to ensure their psychological well-being. I feel that the summation of all these approaches would certainly have improved the experiment and minimized any harm to the participants. We cannot isolate the best approach from the ones listed above, as each plays an important role in the experiment. These approaches would have to be implemented with extreme care, as the reputation of the institutions associated with the research would be at
After watching the video on the Stanford Prison Experiment, there are substantial amounts of ethical concerns that are seen with the way this study was conducted from beginning to the very end. The first ethical issue perceived to be one of the leading concern in this experiment which was that this experiment overall was gone too far there wasn’t appropriate control or limitation made to this experiment, I think this was mainly was because of the role Zimbardo played in the experiment being an administrator of the prison as well as the doctor who was conducting the study and cause of this he didn’t know where to stop and end his experiment when it was going too far because he became a part of the study.