Stanford Prison Experiment Philip Zimbardo

Dr Philip Zimbardo created the Stanford prison experiment in 1971, the aim of this experiment was to find out the psychological effects of prison life, and to what extent can moral people be seduced to act immorally. The study consisted of 24 students selected out of 75, the roles of these 24 men were randomly assigned, 12 to play prison guards and 12 to play prisoners. The prison set up was built inside the Stanford’s psychological department, doors where taken of laboratory rooms and replaced with steel bars in order to create cells. At the end of the corridor was the small opening which became the solitary confinement for the ‘bad prisoners’. Throughout the prison there were no windows or clocks to judge the passage in time, which resulted in time distorting experiences. After only a few hours, the participants adapted to their roles well beyond expectations, the officers starting

“The Stanford Prison Experiment” by Philip G. Zimbardo was written to explain the results of the Stanford prison experiment. Zimbardo while trying to gain support for his conclusions of the experiment, demonstrated many errors in his writing, and in his own experiment. The errors that Zimbardo commits call into question the validity of his argument, and the experiment. The goal explained by Zimbardo was “to understand more about the process by such people called “prisoners” lose their liberty, civil rights, independence, and privacy, while those called “guards” gain social power by accepting the responsibility for controlling and managing the lives of their dependent charges” (Zimbardo 733).

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

The article on the Stanford Prison Experiment titled, A Study of Prisoners and Guards in a Simulated Prison and written by the Office of Naval Research, provides us with the overall information that deals with this controversial psychological study. The study was conducted by

The air is saturated with the smell of concrete and fear. The wailing of men echoes through the dark, unholy halls. A new face makes its way in. Only thing harder than holding back tears, are trying to not show fear. They will feed of it, off of me. It will not break me; I will not break. This is what to expect from an evil place where grown men can be molded; broken and reformed into a weaker being or into a strong piece of iron. The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study put together by Phillip Zambardo to test the psychological effects of a prisoner and guard scenario in a mock prison setting. The experiment lasted seven to fourteen days and was comprised of twenty-four male students, who were picked at random to take part in the experiment. The role of guard and prisoner were also selected at random. The mock prisoners were subjugated to psychological abuse, harsh authoritarian rule by the guards, and intense living conditions to ensure maximum results were met. The experiment concluded early and a couple prisoners left due to an intense amount of stress brought on from the ordeal. Although the experiment was brief, it gave a great deal of insight into how environment can abruptly affect the psychological well-being of an individual. Zimbardo states, “Would those good people, put in that bad, evil place—would their goodness triumph?” (Cherry, 2006) Everyone has darkness within them and all it takes is a little push. Every person picked for this experiment was not

In the article Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: A Lesson in the Power of Situation Professor Philip Zimbardo claims that “the situation and the system creating it also must share in the responsibility for illegal and immoral behavior” when deciding an individual’s criminal accountability. Because the power of a situation has an enormous influencing effect on not only the subject, but the people around the situation and that dynamics in military detainment operations carry immediate risks of mistreatment and power abuse. Good people can do very bad things when in a bad situation. Zimbardo starts off his article for the Chronicle of Higher Education with several different social experiments that have been done. After explaining these studies he recalls his own experiment, the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment. Zimbardo shares these studies as a cautionary tale and for the audience to reflect on our justice system in regards to imprisonment. Due to Zimbardo’s various appeals to pathos and logos and the methods he used, the argument that he makes about the justice system is effective and relevant.

I choose to examine the Stanford Prison Study. This experiment was conducted by a famous psychologist named Philip Zimbardo. This study focused on testing if and how quickly individuals would conform to social roles they were assigned. The experiment took place on the bottom floor of the psychology building at Stanford University which was transformed into a mock prison. In order to achieve the appearance of a real prison, the cells included bare walls, limited space, and bared doors and windows. He then selected 21 males from 75 volunteers and appointed them as either a prisoner or a guard.

The psychology professor, Philip Zimbardo, from Stanford University began to test how imprisonment affects different people in August 1971. He chose twenty four out of seventy five male students. These students were the most psychologically and physically stable. Zimbardo built a mock prison in the basement of the university. Within the twenty four chosen students some were randomly selected to be guards. The guards only had to pretend for eight hours a day, and then got to return to their normal lives. The prisoners had to stay in the prison all day for seven to fourteen days.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was a classic study conducted by Dr. Philip Zimbardo to test whether external factors in the environment can influence a person to behave contrary to their dispositional tendencies. Zimbardo wanted to know what happens to a person who is “good” in an evil place. More specifically, he wanted to see if institutions such as a prison has the power to control a persons behavior or if their good nature rises above the negative environment.

Prisons in the United States have been labeled as places where cruel and unusual punishments occur and are rightfully labeled as such; not because of the demeanor of certain group of people, but because of the specific situation and scenarios these people are in. The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) was set up to help understand the development and growth of the norms based on certain roles, labels and expectations in a simulated prison environment. This paper is going to explain and describe the experiment Philip Zimbardo set up and how it relates to the real world in non-experimental situations in regards with the controversy of prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib, Iraq.

To begin, in the article, “The Stanford Prison Experiment,” the theme that the roles that people play can shape their behavior and attitudes is established through real life examples. The real life examples shown were of ordinary people put into a simulation and conformed to their roles in the experiment. This article establishes its theme very effectively. The real life examples give insight to the reader about just how powerful conformity can be. In the report created to inform reader about the events that occurred in the experiment, it states, “I was surprised at myself.

Abstract This paper will review the study conducted in 1971 called the Stanford Prison Experiment. I will start off by reviewing the reason the study was conducted, the person who conducted it, his goals, and the story of what happened as a result. My review will include the influence of the political, and cultural climate of the time, how these outside forces can directly affect our perceptions, and the choices we make. I will also discuss the goals and purpose of the study, if the study proved anything, look at the ethical standards compared to todays, and conclude by reviewing the knowledge gained as a result of the study.

In my opinion, I believe that the Stanford Prison study led to more harm than the Immunization study because according to prisoner Mr. Ramsey, “the experiment should never have taken place as it had no true scientific basis and was ethically wrong” (Leithhead, 2011). The abuse in this study was so harsh, that they had to end the study early due to “ a string of mental breakdowns, an outbreak of sadism and a hunger strike”(Leithhead, 2011). This study was conducted to see if the violent behaviors are as a result of the roles of ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’ or is it solely based on the individual’s personality. What made this study so dangerous is the face that almost everything felt so real, the guards looked real, the prisoners looked real and they both played the part that they were assigned to. The guards were asked to do whatever it takes to ensure that the law was kept, without any physical violence (Zimbardo, 1973).

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)

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