Zimbardo Power

How often do you wake up worrying about money? How often do your loved ones worry about money? How often have you heard, “if only I had the money?” How often do you feel that more money would solve all your problems and would make you happy? What if I told you that you were right, to an extent. Author’s across the discussion of happiness have tried to answer the simply stated, yet complicatedly answered question, “Can Money Buy Happiness?” Authors Ed Diener and Robert Biswas-Diner attempt to answer the question in their piece of the same name, by explaining that “Yes, money buys happiness…but it must be considered in the bigger picture of what makes people genuinely rich” (Biswas-Diener 160-161). This idea that fiscal wealth is a path to happiness

In the Stanford prison experiment, Zimbardo analyzes how human behavior can change based one’s surroundings and what they are told to do. Normal college students are given roles to play in a mock prison. In this experiment, people are assigned jobs as prison guards and prisoners. The prison guards quickly adapted to their roles. They saw no problem treating the prisoners with no respect. These students use violence against the other students to show their leadership and dominance. The prisoners quickly got accustomed to their parts as well.The prisoners believed that they deserved the punishment. “The experiment shows that good people under the wrong circumstances can behave just like those that we vilify” (Zimbardo). With this experiment, Zimbardo studies the Lucifer Effect. The Lucifer Effect is understanding how good people become evil. He uses his data from this experiment to further develop the Lucifer Effect theory and find out why the Nazis treated the Jews with such cruelty. His results show that when given the opportunity and in the right environment, humans will dehumanize other

Likewise Zimbardo’s (1971) experiment, studying the way ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’ interacted, demonstrated similar ethical failings, such as consent gained without individuals being made fully aware of the involvements; physical, emotional and psychological harm subjected; violation of rights, including privacy, respect, confidentiality and the ability to withdraw (). Fascinated by the volume of ordinary individuals who executed terrible things to others during WWII, Zimbardo predicted that all people, even the good, had the potential to conduct malevolence when sited in the correct environment (Haney et al, 1973). In a mock prison participants were recruited to play a role, half as prisoners and the rest as guards. Both were dressed accordingly, with the guards wearing a uniform with mirrored sunglasses which promotes anonymity as their emotions are obscured, but yet denotes their position of power and authority. According to Zimbardo (2000) these ‘conditions of deindividuation’ allow for the facilitation of evil. Subsequently it becomes acceptable to enforce measures which degrade prisoners of their self-respect, including being stripped, deloused and ordered to carry a chain around their ankle, whilst the mandatory wearing of a smock and a cap made from a stocking demoralized them as it impacted upon their masculinity. Additionally, not only were prisoners assigned a number by which they were referred to, denying them of their identity, but each area of their daily

Social psychologist, Philip Zimbardo, has lead one of the most infamous experiments in the modern history with the Stanford Prison Experiment. The immense popularity of the experimental research on situational power, although having cultivated great recognition, has overshadowed the multiple contributions and accomplishments that Zimbardo continues to assume in his lifetime. Many of Zimbardo’s recognitions have been brought upon due to the Stanford Prison Experiment, yet in this paper will extensively examine Zimbardo’s psychological career from the beginning to the current date to recognize his notable influence in the field of Psychology, specifically the field of Social Psychology. This brief review of Zimbardo’s lengthy career will include various facts and personal accounts of Zimbardo’s regarding his life and work. Zimbardo’s lifetime of work has mainly focused and researched the multiple flaws of human’s beings, and it’s through his findings that society is truly able to progress forward positively. Zimbardo’s long career exemplifies that of an unrestricted devotion; he has and still works to better society through its various flaws, making him undoubtably impactful.

The saying ‘money can’t buy you happiness’ is very accurate. A key example of this can be seen in many studies done on people’s lives after they win the lottery. Approximately seventy percent of people who win end up unhappy, some even eventually commit suicide. Those with new found wealth often discover some people are only around for their money. According to studies, it’s common for the wealthy to feel that they are superior to people of a lower class, they can also feel a sense of entitlement. These traits can put a strain on their relationships with other people. In the pages that follow this paper will explain that possessing material items such as money, may bring temporary satisfaction, but cannot provide someone with true happiness.

Stanley Milgram and Philip G. Zimbardo both address instances in which the hierarchy between authorities and subjects is clearly defined in an experimental setting. In Stanley Milgram’s article, “The Perils of Obedience,” the experimenter researched the effect of authority on obedience. The experiment involved a teacher and a learner, in which the learner would receive shocks if he/she failed to memorize a series of words (Milgram 78). However, the learner was an actor that did not truly receive shocks (Milgram 78). Moreover, the author concludes that individuals obey out of fear or a desire to please others even when performing against their own better judgement. Comparatively, the article “The Stanford Prison Experiment,” was both written and conducted by Philip G. Zimbardo. Initiating a mock arrest, Zimbardo attempted to produce, but not enforce, elements of imprisonment among volunteers to study the relationship between authority and prisoners (Zimbardo 106). Similar to the first experiment, the study proved that any person possesses notions of sadism that require tense situations to reveal these feelings. Although Zimbardo displays the power of situations more logically than Milgram, both authors effectively acknowledge the relationship between authorization and obedience by focusing on the test subjects that were selected for the experiments.

Abraham Lincoln once said, “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” Power can bring out the evil in anyone. At one point, most people have faced adversity through the social standings made by a society. But when someone who has faced adversity through social standings has the chance of power by using social standings they take it. Even if they have been on the other side before and hated it.

When receiving power in society, people would be envious of man’s power and will attempt to gain the same authority, as evidence by Jack’s behavior when he acts savage while getting power. In the article, “Simulated prison ‘71 Showed a Fine Line Between ‘Normal’ and ‘Monster’” by John Schwartz, he examines how a psychological Stanford University study turned people into ‘monsters’. The university created a simulated prison that choosed 24 random students to be either prison guards or prisoners for two weeks. Within days the guards begin to act kartic, by placing plastic bags over people's heads, and forcing people to perform sexual acts. The main goal of this experiment was to “ give insight on how ordinary people can, under the right circumstances,

Why is money so powerful? People say that money cannot buy you happiness, but can it be involved in your pursuit of happiness? Is there any other object more powerful than money? From the basics of looking at money, we use it to buy everything we have. For example, we use it to buy our homes, clothes, and food; just anything for us to survive.

The point that Zimbardo makes about higher power equals higher control has to do with the topic of social influence, as well as obedience. We already know from our textbook readings that social influence is the exercise of social power by a person or group to change the attitude or behavior of others. We also know by our textbook readings that obedience is performing an action in response to a direct order. I think an important example of this topic can be found from the video. It is the shock experiment. I remember watching videos about this in both introduction to Psychology and in Human Growth and Development class here at NHTI and thinking the same thing that I thought while watching it today: How could someone do this? I know that it is because they are conforming to obedience but I pretty positive that I would never be able to do this experiment.

Why is it people find it hard to register that love is richer than anything anyone can give? In this short story, "The monkey's paw" the whites had to assimilate the hard way that lustful desires implicate unfortunate consequences, being greedy brings sorrow, and family is all one needs. Who knew what this wishing talisman could really do? If the whites only knew they would lose the love and family they always had for something that would be so temporary. Although, money can be great, it does not bring happiness.

Respondents did not say directly that money can buy them happiness. But many of them noticed some more funds would improve their wellbeing. This opinion partially contradicts studies’ results. Money plays a great role in happiness of poor societies, where “rich” often means a permanent access to food sources and blessings of civilization. Person

Everyone wants to live a happy life. Even those people that hate everything about everyone. The trick is how to get that wanted happiness. Is money a way to achieve this happiness? People, philosophers, professors, and ordinary, everyday people have been pondering this age-old question about the relationship between money and happiness and if money can buy happiness for a very long time. Much research and many surveys have been asked and performed by excited researchers and agog economists. A lot of experiments and presentations galore were rendered by inquisitive University professors and intrigued university undergraduates to provide useful data. As it turns out, money can and will buy happiness for everyone that spends it at the right time and on the right things.

Throughout history there have been hundreds upon hundreds of influential figures, although not all of them have devoted their career to understanding the human mind. Of the few who have devoted their time to this hugely important task, Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo’s theories and experiments have made him stand out, and differentiate himself from the rest in his profession. Zimbardo 's area of expertise in the field of psychology is social psychology, the branch that deals with social interactions, including their origins and their effects on the individual. Zimbardo may be most well known for his Stanford Prison experiment, an experiment that seems to address the definition of social psychology perfectly. In this experiment Zimbardo had clinically healthy and sane people volunteer for the position of a prison guard or a prisoner and see how they behaved, for fifteen dollars a day. The prison was actually the basement of the Stanford psychology building, where the experiment would take place for a planned 14 days. As said before, the prisoners and guards were all tested as mentally healthy, and for the sake of the experiment were arrested, and processed on a random morning, August 14th 1971. (Zimbardo, 2007, p. 23). The results of this experiment are outstanding, shocking, and somewhat disturbing, making this one of, if not, the most unethical psychological experiments. Although the experiment is considered wildly immoral, Zimbardo is one of the most influential psychologists

We all have heard the phrase “money can’t buy you happiness.” That phrase is a lie because mostly everything in today’s society revolves around money. The things people like revolve around money too. What a coincidence? Let’s say a person is upset so they go buy their favorite ice cream because they know it will make them happy. That person had the money to invest in something that made them happy. Or on an even bigger let’s say someone has been fantasizing about a car and they finally get enough money to purchase their dream car. This person is likely to be very happy. If it was not for the money, they would not have gotten that dream car, so basically the money made them happy. The truth is money makes people happy.