The 40 Studies That Changed Psycho

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 Guard s however showed what was termed the ‘Pathology of Power’ where the participants playing the roles of guards found huge pleasure and enjoyment in their execution of power and sometimes sadistic actions which would explain their willingness to work extra time for no pay and their genuine disappointment when the study ended. Punishments with little or no justification were applied with verbal assaults and in the case of some guards, aggressive physical action. The prison became dirty and inhospitable; bathroom rights became privileges, which could be, and frequently were, denied. Some prisoners were forced to clean toilets with bare hands. Moreover, prisoners endured forced nudity and even sexual humiliation. Experimenters said that approximately one-third of the guards exhibited genuine sadistic tendencies.

What the researchers found during this study was that both the behaviors and mentalities of guards and prisoners changed. Guards became more aggressive and prisoners became passive. A group of five prisoners had to actually be released from the study because of physical and emotional changes they were experiencing. Those prisoners remaining actually began acting as if they were truly incarcerated. By the behaviors they exhibited they had all but forgotten that they were free to leave at any time and not forfeit the money they had already earned. Guards, on the other hand, actually stayed at the prison longer than they were scheduled and were actually disappointed when the study came to a close while prisoners were very happy and expressed their luck at getting released early. These results clearly demonstrate that it is the environment that contributes to the behaviors observed. Those who were given the role of guard expressed the power and control they had over the prisoners. The prisoners began to become hopeless and bend to the power of the guards.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in the basement of Stanford’s Psychology Department building by Philip Zimbardo. The exploratory study used a jail simulation to evaluate the hypothesis that prison atmospheres are brutal and dehumanizing because of the types of people who run them and are placed in them. Also the experiment tested the prison environment. This hypothesis was the prison atmosphere on its own creates the “brutal dehumanizing conditions independent” of the people who work and live in them (Noelle). Cells, solitary confinement, and a yard were created to give the prisoners and the guards the illusion of a real jail.

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.

Conclusion: People will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play, especially if the roles are as strongly stereotyped as those of the prison guards. The “prison” environment was an important factor in creating the guards’ brutal behavior (none of the participants who acted as guards showed sadistic tendencies before the study). Therefore, the roles that people play can shape their behavior and attitudes.

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

The Stanford Prison Experiment was to determine how conformity and obedience could result in people behaving in ways that are counter to how they would at on their own. The main goal of the experiment was to see how social norms and social convections might influence the behavior of participants who are playing the roles of prisoners and prison guards. The study really elaborates on the relationship between the abuser and the abused. It is interesting to see how easily the human psyche gives repetitive abuse and is conditioned to receive it and accept it. This paper will discuss the motives, procedures, findings, ethical issues, and informed consent the Stanford Prison Experiment concluded on.

Twenty-four average, healthy, participants were randomly chosen to either be a guard or prisoner. The “prisoners” would stay at the test site all day and night while the “guards” worked in shifts and could go home. According to Kendra Cherry, the participants in the study were becoming emotionally distressed; “prisoners” were depressed and anxious while “guards” were antagonistic and hostile. From this it was concluded that the guard and prisoner mentality changes who people are as people and creates a power struggle between the groups. The study used average, normal people and they all changed from who they once were. This helps explain why prison rape happens. Prison is a tense environment and it can break down the morals and good standing of anyone in there. Those who had power felt the urge to show off their dominance over those they felt were below

In the Zimbardo Prison Study, 24 subjects were split into two groups, prisoners and guards, and put into a mock prison. The study was thorough, subjects were required to do personality tests and interviews to eliminate any

One of the most famous psychological studies, the Stanford Prison experiment conducted by Philip Zimabardo, attempts to show how social roles influence our behavior. “Guards” in the study quickly assumed distressing behavior resulting in the experiment to be terminated after six days. “Zimbardo today maintains that the balance of power in prisons is so unequal that they tend to be brutal places, unless the guards observe strict regulations, to curb their worst impulses.” (Gilovich, Keltner, Chen, Nisbett, Social Psychology Fourth Edition Pg.7) The environment in a prison exhibits three major social psychology concepts that can be easily discerned through the fictional film The Shawshank Redemption. The main character demonstrates concepts of social psychology through his relationships, persuasion techniques, and encounters with aggression.

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

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)

"I have visited some of the best and the worst prisons and have never seen signs of coddling, but I have seen the terrible results of the boredom and frustration of empty hours and pointless existence"

While getting into prison, a new “self” was developed through daily interaction with other inmates or prison staff in prison (Goffman, 1961). This can form maladaptation to prison such as suicide attempt, depression, aggression, violence, and distress due to the restriction of prison environment (Goffman, 1961). Therefore, depriving situation in prison can produce self-destructive or aggressive behavior such as inmates may present misconduct like refuse to follow rules (Goffman, 1961).