Stanford Prison Experiment

Another issue in Zimbardo’s experiment was in the treatment of the prisoners. The guards would curse at the prisoners and force them to ridiculous and arbitrary tasks such as forcing them to pick thorns out of their blankets which the guards had dragged through the bushes (737). Even the prisoners would make detrimental remarks about their fellow prisoners (737). The extreme actions taken by the guards resulted in some prisoners developing anxiety symptoms, one symptom even exhibiting itself in a psychosomatic rash when one prisoner’s parole was rejected by the parole board (738). The American Psychological Association makes it very clear on this type of behavior in their code of ethics they state that “any direct or indirect participation in any act of torture or other forms of cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment or punishment by psychologists is strictly prohibited. There are no exceptions.”

Stanford Prison Experiment: In this experiment it took a group of people and made half of them guards and half of them prisoners. The guards were given sunglasses to make them feel more powerful and have a mask to hide behind and the prisoners had chains put on their legs so they can feel a loss of freedom. In the experiment they were not given any rules to how there supposed to treat the prisoners, because these were fake prisoners they challenged the fake guards power. Since the guard’s were not given

In the article “ stanford prison experiment” by saul mcleod, his purpose of issuing this experiment, was to simulate the reality of being in a prison, having to obey to guards, and guards having to be in order and command other prisoners. Within a very limited short time guards and prisoners started to settle in into their new roles with guards adopting very quickly and easily, which which gave them confidence. Just so in lord of the flies shortly after ralph is elected as the leader, there are two groups separated, one to keep the fire going to alert any passing ships or planes, than another group led by jack to keep the food coming to survive, for the meantime to get rescued, this is a sign of how comfortable they are getting until

Ethics were removed in hopes that the experiment was as accurate as possible. Many individuals broke down physically as well as psychologically. The experiment was halted on the sixth day, but was intended for two full weeks. The conclusion of this experiment was that individuals welcomed conformity and took on these social roles as best they could. This experiment main goal was to investigate whether the brutality reported among guards in the American prisons was due to having a sadistic personality of the guards, or had more to do with the environment of being in a prison.

The guard attempted to hide this situation from the people running the experiment because of them “being too soft on the prisoners.” Another guard, not aware he was being observed, paced around the “yard” while the prisoners slept, watching his “captives” and aggressively hitting them with his nightstick. A majority of the prisoners still involved in the experiment started to accept the loss of their identities and the abusive treatment they received, because of the belief that they “deserved it.” The guards formed a corrupt but unified team that used their power to inspire fear and complete control over the prisoners. The prisoners, in response, became mentally compromised and developed depression, feelings of helplessness, and feelings of psychosis.

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.

Some other preconditions were to make the experimental setting bear a resemblance as closely to a functional simulation of the psychology of imprisonment as humanly possible. He also wanted to make sure that there was the absence of any earlier indoctrination in how to play the randomly assigned roles; to leave that up to each participant’s prior societal teachings of the meaning of prisons and the behavioral scripts associated with the oppositional roles (Zambardo, 2005). Although he had a significantly large abundance

She begins recounting the notorious details, how innocent college students labeled prisoners and guards displayed psychological abuse after only six days of confinement, and makes reference to Stanley Milgram’s obedience study and Abu Ghraib, where similar maltreatment, perceived or real, was conducted on civilians by civilians. She addresses and refutes the accepted belief that the Stanford Prison Experiment proved that anyone could become a tyrant when given or instructed by a source of authority. Instead, she suggests that Zimbardo’s inquiry points toward but does not land on one exact conclusion. She explains the influence of the setting, the presentation of the roles, Zimbardo’s participation, and perhaps a sense of expectation felt, all of which can be reflected in the shocking behavior of a few guards. She argues that it should not have been so shocking. Konnikova discredits the neutrality of Zimbardo’s experiment by insisting that people who would respond to an ad for a psychological study of prison life were not “normal” people. However, with her diction and choice of evidence she displaces the study's culpability in a way that ultimately blurs and undermines her claim.

The year was 1971 and no one was ready for the results that the study, known as the Stanford Prison Experiment would conduct (Whitbourne). A test subject’s fate was determined by the flip of a coin, twelve prison guards and twelve prisoners (Zimbardo). Now that Zimbardo knew he had test subjects, he assembled a team to begin construction of the “Stanford County Jail.” With the help of a former imprisoned convict, the prison was built to be as realistic as possible. Zimbardo said, “The Prison was constructed by boarding up each end of a corridor in the basement of Stanford’s psychology department building (Zimbardo). That corridor was the ‘yard’ and was the only outside place where prisoners would

Philip Zimbardo ended the experiment on the grounds that the behavior of the guards was escalating to a point where it was ethically wrong to treat a person this way, as well as the way the guards broke so many of the initial rules (Zimbardo). The guards misused their power by using it to humiliate and abuse the prisoners. Because of the way this experiment was cut short, data was limited, but this does not mean that what was collected is not useful or helpful. The audio, video, and rating scales of the individuals’ moods were all collected and compiled as the experiment progressed. The data recorded showed that guards and prisoners adjusted easily to their given roles, treating the situation very seriously and realistically. One of the men, Dave Eshelman, who was placed as a guard was interviewed about his time in the prison. In this quote he talks about taking up the role of a guard, and how it affected his mind and the experiment personally:

The Stanford Prison experiment was terminated of August 20, 1971 only 6 days after it began. The experiment was destined to fail because the psychologist Philip Zimbardo failed to follow the APA’s ethical guideline. Dr. Zimbardo put himself in the experiment causing him to be unaware of his responsibilities to the community he worked in. Zimbardo and the correctional officers also violated the Justice and respect for people's rights and dignity. The guards were given too much power and instead of stopping them Zimbardo and his team just sat back and watched.

The guards were beginning sexually, fun and game against the prisoners. I should have ended the experiment earlier but instead I didn’t even seeing emotional breakdowns and sexual abuses Dr. Zimbardo: Wouldn’t do anything differently because I wouldn’t have the scientific theory of social roles can influence our behavior but what I should have done was once I saw a tragic scene I should have stop the experiment instead I didn’t and made it worse for the

This experiment (pg.23) brought out the worst in the authoritative group part of the research. The guards had no humanly regard for the prisoners and lost all morals and their code of ethics (pg.30), if they had any. They harassed, tortured and humiliated the prisoners as if they had just become the righteous group by using their power to make the prisoners turn on each other. On the other side, the prisoners took their roles too seriously as well. Most became to differential susceptible (pg.6) and vulnerable to the abuse.

Designed and led by renowned psychologist Philip Zimbardo, the Stanford prison experiment in 1971 is a case study that illustrates the overriding power of the situation to transform good people into authoritarians and sadists (McLeod, 2016). The study illuminates the dark side of human nature, which can emerge under the right set of circumstances. This experiment is truly a classic psychology study and is best known for its realism which provided a setting that simulated the confinement of prisoners and guards. Throughout the experiment, Zimbardo implemented multiple research methodologies including primary and secondary research tools. In the beginning, the Stanford Psychology Department interviewed middle class, white males that were both physically and mentally healthy to pick.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was designed to allow 24 participants (college students) to be arrested in a mock police state scenario without any charges being brought against them. The participants were hooded and put into a prison cellblock with other mock prisoners. The purpose of the experiment was to see how non-criminals would be affected by the prison culture and the oversight of prison guards. Philip G. Zimbardo (2004)