The Importance Of Ethical Research

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

Ethics in psychological research and testing is one of the most important issues today. The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted over 40 years ago, brought these ethical issues into the limelight and remains one of the most controversial studies in the history of studying human behavior. This paper aims to define ethics, describe risk/benefit ratio, provide a brief background on the Stanford Prison Experiment, and evaluate the impact it has had on psychological research.

To ensure that a researcher’s enthusiasm for knowledge and understanding doesn’t let them get carried away, clear guidelines for ethical behaviour in research, a Code of Ethics, have been established by governments, institutions and various professional societies such as the American Psychological Association(APA), the British Psychological Society (BPS) and the Psychological Society of Ireland (PSI).

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 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 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.

After the discussion and understanding of “The standard prison experiment” by David Bornus and “The revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: could participant self-selection has led to the cruelty?” by Thomas Carnahan and Sam McFarland, I have come to the conclusion that the aim of the “standard prison experiment” was to show a psychological study on how correctional officers would react when given complete authority.

The Stanford prison experiment is a very stimulating subject discussed in several classes. Professor and psychologist Philip Zimbardo conducted this experiment through Stanford University. Twenty-four men were randomly selected to participate in a simulated prison environment and were given papers as prisoners or prison guards.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted by a research group led by Dr. Philip Zimbardo using Stanford students during August 14 through the 20th of 1971. Dr. Zimbardo wanted to see how people reacted when they are either put in captivity or in charge of others. The study was funded by the US Office of Naval Research and grew interest to both the US Navy and the Marine Corps for an investigation to the purpose of conflict among military guards and prisoners. In the study, 24 male students were selected out of 75 applicants to take on randomly assigned roles. One of the surprises of the study was how participants quickly adapted to roles well beyond expectations. After the first eight hours, the experiment turned to be a joke and nobody was taking it seriously but then prisoners

The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study about the psychological effects of college students becoming a prisoner or a prison guard. The experiment took place on August 14-20, 1971 in a basement at Jordan Hall, which is Stanford University’s psychology building, by Philip Zimbardo, a psychology professor. Zimbaro’s hypothesis was to test each prisoner’s personality traits by having the guards mentally abuse them in a prison for two weeks. 24 men, who were healthy and stable, from Stanford had been chosen to do this experiment and get paid $15 per day to do so. The students participating in this went way beyond than what Zimbardo was thinking. After about two days, the prisoners went “crazy” as Zimbardo later described. “Less than 36 hours

Our country was founded on certain moral principles. The moral principles which guide our lives are referred to as ethics. These ethics have an impact on how we interact with the world around us and shape our personalities; this happens even if we do not realize their immediate impact. It is for this very reason that ethics in psychological research became necessary. “One may also define ethics as a method, procedure, or perspective for deciding how to act and for analyzing complex problems and issues” (Resnik, 2011). We are expected to behave or be treated a particular way in society, therefore we should be granted certain ethical treatments in regards to research.

which in turned evolved into the ?Common Rule? and now many fields have their own codified approach to ethics. Rules change as ethical conundrums within research were revealed to the entities that have sponsored the studies or exposed to the public causing an outcry for reform. Examples of bad social science research abound and once these studies are revealed to the academic community and public, generally speaking, changes within the social sciences are considered. According to Mauthner?s text, Ethics In Qualitative Research, many outstanding researches that violate or challenge ethical principles (2002). For instance, the ?Obedience to Authority? study was performed by Stanley Milgram in 1974 and consisted of participants willing to expose other actors within the study to physical harm via electrical shocks. Even though the screams from another room were faked to see how far a person would go in participating in harming other individuals, the participants in the study weren?t aware of the focus of the study and it created psychological harm to those administering simulated electrical shocks (Helm & Morelli. 1979, pg.

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