The Negative Influence Of The Teenage Mind

“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).

The Stanford Prison Experiment was a clear example of how humans can adapt to specific social roles and behave differently under the pressure of control. The experiment illustrated the concepts of deviance and social control through participants behavior. Although the prisoners were not really prisoners, they believed that they were. The behavior of the prisoners began to morph along with the experiment. By day two, the prisoners were showing deviance by barricading themselves inside their cells. The environment and treatment of the prisoners were likely causes of the disobedience. Similarly, the guards showed signs of social control throughout the experiment. Guards were able to show control over the prisoners through various actions, such

When asked if teenagers can understand the true meaning of love, I would have to weigh in that I do not believe teenagers can perceive the concept of love.

In the experiment, people were picked randomly and one as a teacher and one as the student. They were told to take a quiz and give electric shocks of increasing intensity as punishment if the student can’t answer. During the experiment, many people were concerned as someone can be heard shouting but only a few people who decided to stop and stick to their morals. But the others kept on going because they were just following orders from a superior (Milgram 77). "The Stanford Prison Experiment” by Philip Zimbardo, is about an experiment that was made to understand the roles people play in prison situations. For the experiment, Zimbardo converted a basement of the Stanford University psychology building into a mock prison. The participants were told to act as prisoners and guards. It was planned to be a two-week experiment but was forced to shut down in 6 days, all because of people quickly getting into their roles and started acting like the real prisoners and guards (Zimbardo 104). To compare both experiments, although they differed vastly in design and methodology, the point of both experiments was to observe how far an individual would go in inflicting increasing pain on a victim. Also how people obey under authoritative circumstances, when given power or different roles, however the writers differ in the seriousness of the fight for individuality and the use of reality.

The control adolescents express over the choices they make, like the rise and fall of the tide, is fluid and dependant on multiple factors. These factors--biography, biology and current situation--are essential to the adolescent decision-making process as they manage to influence, but not control, the choices we make.

In social psychology, social influence is a process where someone’s beliefs, thoughts and behaviour change by being exposed to beliefs, thoughts and opinions of others. It manifests in several forms, such as obedience, compliance and conformity. All these types of social influence have been studied by numerous researchers who investigated the reasons why people conform to social norms and obey to authorities, such as Milgram’s classic studies on obedience. His experiments support the popular idea of ‘banality of evil’ –Hannah Arendt (1963)’s famous phrase referring to the capability to accomplish dreadful things out of banal reasons–, revealing that people conform submissively and thoughtlessly to the orders that authorities deliver, no

During teenage years your brain is under the influence of massive hormonal messages. Our brains are being reshaped. Depending on what the teen is doing will shape our brains that certain way. As a teen, being exposed to drugs, alcohol, inappropriate websites, violent movies/video games will affect and shape our brains and how our future will be by exposing our brains for addiction. There is constant changes in the teenage brain as well as the social and academic changes makes it hard for teens to figure out who they are at such a young age.

Are you under 25? If you are, how well do you think your brain is developed? In the video “The Teen Brain: Under Construction” claims that the brain is finished developing around the age of 25. This assertion starts many arguments on whether an 18 year olds should be considered an adult. Many say that 18 year olds should be considered adults, but many disagree. I deem that 18 year olds should not be considered adults, because their brains are not fully developed yet.

Are you the type of person to make decisions based off of the group you're involved with, or do you go your own way and make your own decisions? Whether being involved in a group, or you tend to be a follower, those certain things have a bigger influence on how someone acts, compared to individual human views, that can be founded off of social psychology. Being involved with the group, has the biggest impact on how people choose to obey or disobey certain actions because of the societal pressure, family and religious backgrounds, and having the fear of not fitting in, or conforming.

Philip (2009) to try and see what was being said about prison treatment was true, this was called the Stanford prison experiment. This experiment only lasted 6 days due to the circumstances versus 6 weeks. Zimbardo had to find out whether the prisons were brutal due to the guards or due to the environment. It was clear that the role of the guards was the issue and not the environment. This was discovered when a sample was chosen from the population. Each induvial was set up to be a guard or a prisoner at random. In this study researchers got see the unfortunate power of social situations. Once prisoner and guard roles were assigned each group were told that they were being watched by the researcher and his colleagues, the guards were to not hit the prisoners, and debriefed about the experiment. Although all this was told the guards took situations into their own hands and the power took over. The guards began simply viewing them as prisoners and the prisoners began to fear the guards. It is important to note the researcher did not intervene but continued to observe when the hitting was taking place. This is particularly important because not only are the guards fitting the rod but the researcher is at fault for the fundamental attribution error but viewing the situation for what it

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.

Imagine a thirteen year old middle school girl, wearing Guess boots and an Abercrombie hood in order to fit in. Visualize a thirty five year old man listening to the top forty radio stations and watching American Idol, so he can have something to add to the discussion with his co-workers over coffee break. The various types of behaviours stated before are pertained to as conformity. Conformity refers to the process by which an individual's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours are influenced by other individuals. Except, how do these necessities manipulate a being? Social psychologists have conducted an assortment of experiments and concluded that, through a range of forms of social influence, groups can alter their members’ personality.

The value of the Stanford Prison Experiment in relation to humanity as a whole by showing how circumstances can completely change a person and what he or she is willing to do. It shows that humans can be influenced to the extent that their innate character traits can be manipulated. It also shows that power and authority can change the behavior of naturally good people. That it can turn some people into someone who will do anything to maintain the feeling of power. This experiment has allowed psychologist a new view on human behavior and how easy it is to manipulate.

What forms a person’s predisposition to act in a certain way in any given situation? Is our personality something that we are born with or does it develop over time, and furthermore once it is ‘developed’ can it be significantly influenced by our surroundings? It is something that each of us wonders as we go about our daily lives. We wish that our circumstances were different so that we could be different people. Most of the time this type of thinking, if verbalized, receives responses along the lines of ‘life is what you make it’ putting pressure back on our actions to change who we are. We are raised to believe that our circumstances are a result of our actions and not the other way around. The Stanford prison experiment results are in opposition to this mentality that life is what you make it. Perhaps our circumstances can change our behavior and personality completely, and if so this may mean that disobedience should appear as a virtue instead of a harmful habit of the arrogant. Erich Fromm was a distinguished psychologist and philosopher who wrote an essay entitled Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem ten years before Zimbardo’s experiment in 1973. Fromm writes that disobedience is an integral part of human nature that allows us to progress as a species and as individuals. The authoritarian and humanitarian principle also defines the different personalities that human beings have as depicted Zimbardo’s experiments.

There is a fundamental human need to belong to social groups especially if people were to live and work together, it is likely that they need to agree on common beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviours in order to get along and fit-in. Thus, we learnt to conform to rules of other people, the more people see others behaving in a particular way or making particular decisions, the more likely people will feel obliged to follow the suit. This is called conformity and can be defined in different ways, Aronson, Wilson & Akert (2014) stated it is the changing of one’s behavior due to the real or imagined influence of other people. According to Deutsch and Gerard (1955), social influence should be distinguished into two types, the informational social influence and normative social influence. The occurrence of social influence has implied to many real life events, which has drawn many researchers to attention. This has lead many researchers to design distinct experiments to try and understand the cause of the conformity, whether conformity is situation dependent, and whether we are able to resist social influences.