Zimbardo Experiment

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).

In 1971, Philip George Zimbardo—psychologist and professor at Stanford University conducted prison experiment to test the effect of situations. In contrast with prediction as lengthy and boring, the experiment’s result shocked the world. The Stanford Prison Experiment has indicated the significant power of roles, or situations, on human behaviors; thus, brings about many influences on society. According to Zimbardo in “ Obedience to Authority,” he asked the students during the spring term to reverse role and lecture him a topic that would interest him.

Method of conduction- To conduct the experiment Zimbardo and his team chose university’s basement of psychology’s department and turned it to a mock prison. The surroundings of prison were made like the surroundings of prison in real life. Cells of prison were not big, walls and windows were barred. In this experiment Zimbardo acted as prison’s superintendent and he also played his duties of a researcher.

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 year was 1971 and no one was ready for the results that the study, known as the Stanford Prison Experiment would conduct (Whitbourne). A test subject’s fate was determined by the flip of a coin, twelve prison guards and twelve prisoners (Zimbardo). Now that Zimbardo knew he had test subjects, he assembled a team to begin construction of the “Stanford County Jail.” With the help of a former imprisoned convict, the prison was built to be as realistic as possible. Zimbardo said, “The Prison was constructed by boarding up each end of a corridor in the basement of Stanford’s psychology department building (Zimbardo). That corridor was the ‘yard’ and was the only outside place where prisoners would

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.

A rumor of an escape plot surfaced, the inmate that had been released earlier was supposedly planning on coming back on the day of family visits, and bringing friends in order to break all of the inmates out. Zimbardo and his cronies would not allow this. As the family showed up for their visitation, Zimbardo, being an expert in manipulating people’s minds, made the families think that it was a safe, happy and healthy environment for their children; but as the families left the supposed prison, Zimbardo had the guards clean out a storage closet on the fifth floor and kept the inmates in the room until the next day. Zimbardo himself sat in the now empty prison and waited for the imitation ex-con to return with his friends in an attempt to free the others. It never happened. The only person that showed up that night was a co-worker of Zimbardo’s who asked him only how his experiment was going.

The Zimbardo prison experiment was a study of human responses to captivity, dehumanization and its effects on the behavior on authority figures and inmates in prison situations. Conducted in 1971 the experiment was led by Phlilip Zimbardo. Volunteer College students played the roles of both guards and prisoners living in a simulated prison setting in the basement of the Stanford psychology building.

The two experiments were a tested at different time periods and for different purposes. For instance, the Milgram experiment was originally tested to study obedience to authority, in response to Adolf Eichmann trial, a Nazi war criminal, that stated he,” was just stating orders under the Reich.” The experiment proved to be that under authority rule, actions, even if morally wrong and unethical can be still taken forward with due to a strict authority presence.

The Stanford Prison Experiment By: Carey Wellington Introduction What are the psychological affects of being in prison or becoming a prison guard? That's what Philip Zimbardo wanted to find out in 1971. They put an ad out in the paper that stated that male college students were needed for a psychological study for prison life (Shocking “prison” experiment, n.d.). 70 people applied, which was a representative sample of people, they then went through interviews and personality tests that eliminated people who had psychological and medical problems, or with a history of crime and drug abuse.

In Zambardos experiment the guards were given the essentials and required parts in order to display they were guards. The following items were given to the guards, sunglasses to avoid eye contact with prisoners, whistles, handcuffs and a guards uniform. It did not take a lot of time before the guards began to take their roles seriously. On the first day the guards began to intimidate and torment the prisoners. It was to be believed Zimbardo acknowledged the guards were taking the role seriously because they found joy in teasing and harassing their prisoners. The guards were gaining control and respect by degrading and brutalizing the prisoners. The abuse itself dehumanized the prisoners, as well as the spitting in the face. They sprayed them

The risk to human participants in the noteworthy experiments Milgram (1963) and Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo (1973) has advanced our understanding of power and obedience by highlighting the significant influence of social situations on personal behaviour. However, as many subsequent experiments on power and obedience have produced similar findings yet with a greater regard to ethical principles and minimising risk to participants, the risks to participants were only necessary to a small extent.

The Zimbardo (1971) study was an intense demonstration of the affects that prison can have on people. As I read I was shocked over many of the aspects of the study and concerned with the consequences the study may have. Lack of training for the guards and their control that they would have over the prisoners was what I thought was the first mistake of the experiment. Throughout the study, I continued to asked myself, what if a guard takes it too far will there be consequences? What should be considered too far since there were no direct rules established for the guards? While reading, I felt anticipation of what was going to be the outcome, fearing for the prisoners. The simulation of the uniform, chain, and stocking were appropriate in creating

Is it possible to fathom healthy, grown men having physical and emotional breakdowns and psychosomatic rashes all because of a mock prison experience? Surely it would be unethical and inappropriate to imprison 20 strangers into a basement of a universities’ psychology building merely to observe how they would act towards one another. But to Philip Zimbardo this unheard of experiment was just another day on the job. This young psychology major could have never predicted that his landmark experiment would become such a highly talked about documentation of the true evils of the human population.