Stanford Prison Experiment Essay

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.

Groupthink can be defined as a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in irrational decision-making. In 1971, twenty-four psychologically stable men took part in a trial known as The Stanford Prison Experiment. The purpose of the experiment was to prove that an individual’s perception of their own power is heavily influenced by social context and societal expectations of their role. The men involved in the experiment were assigned either the role of a prisoner or a guard to represent positions in society, both with power and without. More specifically, the conductors of The Stanford Prison Experiment focused on analyzing the different behavioral

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

The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was study organized by Philip George Zimbardo who was a professor at Stanford University. Basically, SPE was a study of psychological effect. He studied about how personality and environment of a person effect his behaviour. Experiment he performed was based on prison and life of guards. He wants to find out whether personality get innovated in person according to given environment (situational) or due to their vicious personalities that is violent behaviour (dispositional). The place where the whole experiment was set up Philip Zimbardo and his team was Stanford University on August 14Th to August 20th in the year 1971 (Wikipedia).

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

In Maria Konnikova’s “The Real Lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment” she reveals what she believes to be the reality of sociologist Philip Zimbardo’s controversial study: its participants were not “regular” people.

The Stanford Prison Experiment sought to recreate a prison experience to study behaviors of prisoners and guards. The authors were seeking answers to the question of dispositional hypothesis which states “that the state of the social institution of prison is due to the “nature” of the people who administer it, or the “nature” of the people who populate it, or both” (A Study of Prisoners and Guards in a Stimulated Prison, 1971, pg. 2). In other words, they were studying whether the prisoners and guards behaviors changed due to their personalities or was it the prison environment that caused these changes. The authors considered the recidivism rate that was 75 percent at the time, conditions in prisons, and the belief that prisons

Even though the prison in this article is not real, the prisoners still went through the same struggles as real prisoners. “‘Real’ prisoners typically report feeling powerless, arbitrarily controlled, dependent, frustrated, hopeless, anonymous, dehumanized and emasculated” (Zimbardo 3). The prisoners felt as if this prison was real and that they were real prisoners. Dehumanization played a large part in their feelings of being real prisoners. “Here he began the process of becoming a prisoner- stripped naked, skin-searched, deloused and issued a uniform, bedding, soap, and towel” (Zimbardo 1).

In the Stanford Prison Experiment, a group of college kids were offered money to help out a psychiatric professor with an experiment. The experiment was to see how college kids who were being held in captivity (Zambrano 1)

This short clip called “The Power of the situation” goes into depth of the Stanford’s prison experiment. It first goes into explaining how people can be impacted if given certain attributes which later results in different behaviors. The video explains in which how it was possible for Hitler to become dictator and have so many people under his control. Kurt Lewen and his research team found that dictators changed people’s behaviors when they were given uniforms because it gave them a new identity. They did an experiment by setting three groups of boy with 3 different leaders and leadership styles to see what the resulting effects of each were.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was a psychological experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo. Initially expected to last two weeks, it instead lasted a mere six days before coming to an end. The experiment successfully shows that all people, despicable or kind, are capable of truly terrifying things, and also reinforces an already well-known theory, the power of the situation. Originally, the Stanford Prison Experiment was going to be a full two week experiment in order to fully solidify the concepts they were trying to prove. Despite this, the experiment only lasted six days due to the admittedly surprising result: the violent psychological state that both the guards and prisoners had come to, though in completely different ways, and thus

Obedience is a significant part of human nature. Whether or not people realize it, they obey many different people and even objects in their everyday lives. Some obvious instances where people obey others are police officers, teachers, and parents. Other instances where people obey, but may not realize it are road signs, laws, and social norms. When people obey, do they obey by choice or do they obey by compulsion?

The Stanford prison experiment was unique because they wanted to watch and learn the behaviors of a prisoner and a prison guard, observing the effects they found some pretty disturbing things among the students. Dr. Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues at Stanford University stayed true to what they believed, and they did what they felt they needed to do to find a set of results for their simulation. Unfortunately they where swallowed into the experiment, when they became the roles, just as the students where. So from their point of view I want to say that what they where doing was ethical, and being that the prison experiment was stopped before its half way mark showed that they realized that it was time to call it quits. Dr. Zimbardo noticed

They were given ranks from the junior to the senior being the highest, with the urge to be promoted; most of the guards enhanced their bizzare cruelty against the prisoners to seek promotions. As a norm, the guards who appeared to be the most sadist against the prisoners got higher ranks that earned them more benefits. The advancements of the sadists influenced the humane guards to also seek the promotions.It did not take long for the prisoners to develop fears and stigmas. They were extremely afraid of the sadist nature of the guards. The situation was out of control and horrendous. The guards represented the Lucifer effect; they were ‘living evils’ the prisoners had no other choice but to abide by the authoritative power of the guards. They were submissive to extents of willing to do anything to create good relationships with the guards, hoping to seek some favors for their survival. It was an experience that traumatized them in so many different

This report on the Stanford Prison Experiment will define the ethical issues related to prisoner treatment and prison culture in a mock scenario created 1971. The findings of this study define the inclination towards corruption and riotous behavior within the overarching relationship between guard and the prisoners. In a short period of time,. The prisoners became hostile and sought to start a riot in order to free themselves from abuses of the prison guards. In some instances, the issue of role-playing limited to reality of the event, but the ethical issues related to issue of prison corruption became evident in the study. The Stanford Prison Experiment provided some important aspects on how good people can became violent lawbreakers within the orison system. In essence, the ethical and experimental conditions of the Stanford Prison experiment define the corrupting culture of prisons in American society during the early 1970s.