Overview and Significance of Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment Have you ever wondered why ordinary people do unusual things that seem alien to their natures? Why do good people sometimes act evil? Who do smart people sometimes do dumb or irrational things? Zimbardo is one of the most significant social psychologist and all his work aims to find the answers to these questions. The purpose of this paper is to go into depth on the previous prison experiment, how it came about, and how the findings play a role in society today. The Life and Times of Zimbardo Philip George Zimbardo was born in New York City on March 23, 1933. His parents originally migrated from a small town called Cammarata, about 40 miles from Palermo, Sicily. Stateside his …show more content…
Eventually the prisoners started rebelling, irritating the guards purposely, and that is when the study actually began. After around three days of the guards and the prisoners going back and forth prisoner 8612 had an emotional breakdown. Originally everyone thought that he was just a weak individual but looking back at it, five other prisoners started having emotional breakdowns as well. I think this stemmed from having all their freedom, their rights taking away over night. Having to clean toilets with your bare hands, and being humiliated sexually in front of your peers. On the fifth day of the study Zimbardo invited his girlfriend to come see the experiment and when she was down there she broke down crying and left because she witnessed bags over the prisoners head as they walked to the bathroom. She said, “It’s terrible what you are doing to those boys in tears.” At first Zimbardo didn’t realize what she meant so he defended his study stating that this is the natural humanistic way but when she said “I don’t want anything to do with you if this is the real you.” He then realized what he was doing was unethical and causing real psychological harm and that moment is when he stopped his study just six days in. Reality of the Simulation This brings up the question why do “good” people do bad things? Although this was an experiment, many feel to this day that this was the real deal. Prisoners believe they lost their true identity. One prisoner stated in
The prisoners became dependent, helpless, and passive. On the other hand, the guards acted exactly opposite. “They became abusive and aggressive at the simulated prison, bulling and insulting the prisoners’. “After the experiment was completed, most of the guards said that they enjoyed the power. Some of the others said that they had no idea of what they were capable. Everyone in the experiment was surprised at the results as well as saying, It was degrading.
The prisoners were emotionally and mentally harmed during the experiment. The prisoners started to lose their identity, and instead started identifying themselves as their number. One participant even went on a hunger strike for the time that he was in the prison. Another participant had to leave the study because he became excessively disturbed as time went on. After the study was done, people had trouble separating what the people did in the study to how they were in real life, which caused a problem when they all had to meet after the trial was over. This ethical violation is very apparent because Dr. Zimbardo did have to end the study before the two weeks was done.
Likewise Zimbardo’s (1971) experiment, studying the way ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’ interacted, demonstrated similar ethical failings, such as consent gained without individuals being made fully aware of the involvements; physical, emotional and psychological harm subjected; violation of rights, including privacy, respect, confidentiality and the ability to withdraw (). Fascinated by the volume of ordinary individuals who executed terrible things to others during WWII, Zimbardo predicted that all people, even the good, had the potential to conduct malevolence when sited in the correct environment (Haney et al, 1973). In a mock prison participants were recruited to play a role, half as prisoners and the rest as guards. Both were dressed accordingly, with the guards wearing a uniform with mirrored sunglasses which promotes anonymity as their emotions are obscured, but yet denotes their position of power and authority. According to Zimbardo (2000) these ‘conditions of deindividuation’ allow for the facilitation of evil. Subsequently it becomes acceptable to enforce measures which degrade prisoners of their self-respect, including being stripped, deloused and ordered to carry a chain around their ankle, whilst the mandatory wearing of a smock and a cap made from a stocking demoralized them as it impacted upon their masculinity. Additionally, not only were prisoners assigned a number by which they were referred to, denying them of their identity, but each area of their daily
Method of conduction- To conduct the experiment Zimbardo and his team chose university’s basement of psychology’s department and turned it to a mock prison. The surroundings of prison were made like the surroundings of prison in real life. Cells of prison were not big, walls and windows were barred. In this experiment Zimbardo acted as prison’s superintendent and he also played his duties of a researcher.
Although this experiment suffers from multiple ethical dilemmas I think Zimbardo tried to design and achieve a safe study. The main ethical problem in this study is that the prisoners suffered mental and possible physical damage including fear, anger, and stress. One prisoner was even removed from the experiment after thirty-six hours because of uncontrollable screaming, crying, and anger tirades. In addition, three other individuals were removed after it appeared they had experienced emotional damage that could be long-lasting. All of the emotions experienced by the prisoners were discussed in class as elements making a study unethical. However, it is important to note that Zimbardo attempted to prevent these types of results by having participants psychologically examined prior to the experiment being conducted. This was discussed in class as a justification of harm. This process is called screening; it removes possible candidates
Zimbardo was an active participant in the experiment he was basically the warden instead of being an observer, he was shaping the experiment in a way. In the documentary that was viewed in class, it was noticeable that the participants were all men. The sample is relatively narrowed down it is rather small in comparison a bit biased in a way. If there were women in the study the way things would have been different. The men would have behaved differently the result maybe would have been different. The result of the experiment is very astonishing as it surpasses what Zimbardo intended to. Particularly about the participant's behaviour before and during the experiment, the prisoners began behaving like one and associated themselves with the numbers they were given (Zimbardo, p. 130). It was amazing how quick their behaviour and thinking change in a matter of time. It was not even a whole week. The other surprise was when one of the guards who was using the shades started acting more violently when he started using them. The “prisoners” was treated unfairly and abused they forgot that they were just people volunteering for the study, they could have just said something to Zimbardo and they could have left without putting themselves in a difficult situation. Though the people that suffered depression was let
The next rumored rebellion was supposed to happen after parents left from visiting hours. Prisoner #8612, who was rumored to be the leader of the rebellion, left the night before due to emotional disturbance, uncontrollable crying, and rage. Zimbardo was convinced it was a trick, so he told #8612 to stop being weak. He gave him the alternative to be an informant, who tells information about other inmates. He soon went into a rage that was out of control, and stated, “You can’t leave. You can’t quit”. He was then released, but Zimbardo was ready to put him back in the experiment if he went through with the rebellion. Zimbardo had planned to dismantle the jail after visitors left, call in more guards, chain the prisoners together, put bags over their heads, and transport them to a
In 1971, psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues created the experiment known as the Stanford Prison Experiment. Zimbardo wanted to investigate further into human behavior, so he created this experiment that looked at the impact of taking the role of a prisoner or prison guard. These researchers examined how the participants would react when placed in an institutionalized prison environment. They set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building. Twenty four undergraduate students were selected to play the roles of both prisoners and guards. These students were chosen because they were emotional, physically, and mentally stable. Though the experiment was expected to last two weeks, it only lasted six days after the researchers and participants became aware of the harm that was being done.
The Zimbardo prison experiment was a study of human responses to captivity, dehumanization and its effects on the behavior on authority figures and inmates in prison situations. Conducted in 1971 the experiment was led by Phlilip Zimbardo. Volunteer College students played the roles of both guards and prisoners living in a simulated prison setting in the basement of the Stanford psychology building.
And how within just a few days some of the participants assigned as prisoners believed that they were actual prisoners and could not leave the experiment. It is also frightening how even the guards that were considered “good guards” did nothing to intervene against the more sadistic guards. Zimbardo even makes a comment toward the end of the documentary about how people believe that good will always
It could be argued that more strict action was required to control misbehaving inmates, but the abuse and dehumanizing treatment of the prisoners was nowhere near acceptable. Although both groups acted unjustly towards the other group it was expected that the guards would act more fairly and be more respectful to the prisoners even if prisoners had acted out of line in some way. After many prisoners suffered severe psychological trauma the experiment was abruptly ended
Some fell into depression and suffered emotional distress. As a result, they had to leave the experiment before it could be terminated. Philip Zimbardo who was the prison superintendent also lost himself in the
We also learned that due to authority some people just accepted their role as seen with the prisoners. The experiment had a lot of negative physiological effects on the prisoners. The guards dehumanized and humiliated the prisoners making them feel powerless. The environment of the prison also lead to harsher behaviors from the prison and prisoners were put in psychologically damaging situations. The harsh environment caused most prisoners to experience emotional trauma.
This paper serves to summarize The Zimbardo Prison Experiment, better known as The Stanford Prison Experiment which was conducted by Phillip Zimbardo in 1971 at Stanford University. The purpose of the study was to conduct research in order to better understand the psychological components of human aggression and submission to include conformity and obedience in a prison environment with a select group of subjects playing roles as either prison guards or inmates, however, I should note, according to McLeod, S. (2016), The Navy’s intent or purpose for the experiment was to better understand how to train members of the armed forces on how to cope with stress associated with captivity as opposed to making American Prison systems more humane. Another interesting point of note is that Zimbardo conducted this experiment shortly after World War II, and the Vietnam War where concern was raised as to some of the atrocities carried out in those wars where “ordinary” people conducted heinous acts per instruction from so-called authoritative figures. Experiments with similar objectives were carried out by Stanley Milgram and others. (Jones, A. D., & Milgram, S. 1974)
In 1971 Philip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) in the basement of Stanford University as a mock prison. Zimbardo’s aim was to examine the effect of roles, to see what happens when you put good people in an evil place and to see how this effects tyranny. He needed participants to be either ‘prisoners’ or ‘guards’ and recruited them through an advertisement, 75 male college students responded and 24 healthy males were chosen and were randomly allocated roles. Zimbardo wanted to encourage deindividuation by giving participants different uniforms and different living conditions (the guards had luxuries and the prisoners were living as real prisoners). The guards quickly began acting authoritarian, being aggressive towards the prisoners and giving them punishments causing physical and emotional breakdowns. Zimbardo’s intention was for his study to last for 2 weeks, however, it