Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment

The Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment has to be one of the cruelest and disturbing experiments I have witnessed since the Milgram experiment. This experiment was pushed far beyond its means and went extremely too far. I know experiments in 1971 weren’t as thorough and strategic as today's but I know today's rules and regulations never allow cruel and unusual punish just to test out one’s theory’s. I don’t believe criminologists should be permitted to conduct replications of Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment. I also know that the ACJS and other organizations who set the rules and guidelines for experiments would not promote or condone an experiment that is dangerous and is unethical such as Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment. There were no boundaries or a level

Soon everything the prisoners did became a privilege, including using the bathroom. Lights were shut off at ten o’clock at night and after that point, the prisoners would be forced to use the buckets left in their cell as toilet; this further tarnished the environment of the prison.

Some other preconditions were to make the experimental setting bear a resemblance as closely to a functional simulation of the psychology of imprisonment as humanly possible. He also wanted to make sure that there was the absence of any earlier indoctrination in how to play the randomly assigned roles; to leave that up to each participant’s prior societal teachings of the meaning of prisons and the behavioral scripts associated with the oppositional roles (Zambardo, 2005). Although he had a significantly large abundance

Society has an influence in most of our daily activities, especially when these activities involve other people. During the Zimbardo Prison Experiment two groups of students were asked to play one of two roles, a prisoner and a guard. The good people that played the guards were completely caught up in their role as prison guard and created a new identity to match their situation. Their normal behavior would not have worked in an environment where they must be strict to keep "criminals" in check, therefore they had to change their behavior into a more ruthless and aggressive manner to fit their new role. During the reign of Nazi Germany most of the soldiers were not apparently capable of doing the acts that were committed, but because of the

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted by Zimbardo, who wanted to see how social situations and a difference of power effected people. The social situation was prison with the power dynamic being that of guards and prisoners. Five of the prisoners dropped out of the study due to the mental abuse that was inflicted upon them and causing them extreme stress. This study was to be two weeks however the study was cancelled after six days by Zimbardo when he realized how unethical his experiment was on the participants. It is unsettling how quickly power can influence and corrupt a person.

I was actually interested in watching this movie before I took this class. This may sound weird I have a serious interest in what went on inside prisons and what can make or break someone. The Stanford Prison Experiment was it was held at Stanford University during August fourteenth through August twenty first, 1971. The research group was led by psychology professor Philip Zimbardo using college students. Though background information of the experiment and my response to the experiment.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. Participants were randomly assigned to play the role of "prisoner" or "guard". The participants who were assigned the role of the guard were given sticks and sunglasses and then those who were assigned the role of the prisoner were arrested by the Palo Alto police department. The prisoners were forced to wear chains and prison garments. They were then later transported to the basement of the Stanford Psychology department, which was converted into a jail.

The Asch’s experiment is very closely related to Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and Milgrams experiment of obedience, in which the researcher tries to explain and demonstrate how easily human beings can be persuaded into unusual behaviour by higher figures in authority, or by the opinions of the group of people around them.

This paper serves to summarize The Zimbardo Prison Experiment, better known as The Stanford Prison Experiment which was conducted by Phillip Zimbardo in 1971 at Stanford University. The purpose of the study was to conduct research in order to better understand the psychological components of human aggression and submission to include conformity and obedience in a prison environment with a select group of subjects playing roles as either prison guards or inmates, however, I should note, according to McLeod, S. (2016), The Navy’s intent or purpose for the experiment was to better understand how to train members of the armed forces on how to cope with stress associated with captivity as opposed to making American Prison systems more humane. Another interesting point of note is that Zimbardo conducted this experiment shortly after World War II, and the Vietnam War where concern was raised as to some of the atrocities carried out in those wars where “ordinary” people conducted heinous acts per instruction from so-called authoritative figures. Experiments with similar objectives were carried out by Stanley Milgram and others. (Jones, A. D., & Milgram, S. 1974)

It was a curious case of juxtaposition, the circumstances of both my brother and his close friend, and I often wondered if they ever truly saw the irony of it. There was my brother, who loved cigarettes and was the epitome of self-destruction, and then there was his 22-year-old friend, who had recently been diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. I couldn’t fathom how my brother could continue smoking, voluntarily giving himself the same disease that was eating his best friend alive. With little exaggeration, I can say that baffling behaviors like this utterly fascinate me, driving me uncover the complex motivations of others. In particular, Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment ignites this passion within me: how could a mock situation transform

Maria Konnikova, in “The Real Lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment,” discusses two social psychology experiments: one conducted in 1971 and another in 2007. The 1971 experiment, led by Philip Zimbardo, studied what it means psychologically to be a prisoner or a prison guard. The subjects who took on the role of guards, without being instructed to do so, began humiliating and psychologically abusing the prisoners. The prisoners became submissive and took the abuse with minimal protest. This was taken to mean that people, with little prodding, naturally tend toward tyranny.

The Office of Naval Research sponsored The Stanford Prison Experiment in an attempt to provide answers to some of the elemental problems within the prison system. Namely, whether guards, prisoners or both harbor any of the blame for the oppressive nature that exists within the prison environment and the intrinsic psychology behind their tumultuous relationships. The authors, Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo hypothesize that the assigned roles of the participants (i.e., guard or prisoner) will significantly impact their actions and attitudes.(Haney, Banks & Zimbardo, 1973) Before choosing from the willing participants, the experimenters conducted research into what it is like for real life inmates and guards, in an attempt to emulate, as closely as possible, a real world prison environment for the experiment.

Throughout this essay I will be comparing Zimbardo and Reicher and Haslam as I find their work very interesting due to the prison environment. This is simply due to my ambition to work within a prison, so these studies appeal to me thoroughly. Zimbardo (1971) is most well-known for his work within social psychology, specifically his research regarding “the Stanford Prison experiment”. This is due to him being one of the first psychologists who looked further into deindividuation, (Drury, 2012) which was one of the main aims of the study. One of Zimbardo’s (1971) ideas, that he wanted to investigate and understand was, “the development of norms and the effects of roles, labels and social expectations” (Zimbardo, 2014).

The Stanford Prison experiment was conducted in 1971, during the summer, at Stanford University. The mastermind behind the experiment was Philip G. Zimbardo, a psychologist and a professor at Stanford University. To help closely simulate a prison environment they called upon an expert. “Our study of prison life began, then, with an average group of healthy, intelligent, middle class males” (Zimbardo 4). With this group of middle class males they were then split into two groups, guards and prisoners. Once at the prison the environment became harsh. “There were no windows or clocks to judge the passage of time, which later resulted in some time-distorting experiences” (Zimbardo 6). The prison environment, the harsh ruling of the guards, and the stress being in jail took a tole on the prisoners. As Zimbardo once said, “We wanted to see what the psychological effects were of becoming a prisoner or prison guard” (4). It was not only the prisoners that paid the price of being forced into prison life. Many of the guards went through psychological change. “Most of the guards found it difficult to believe that they had behaved in the brutalizing ways they had. Many said they hadn’t known this side of them existed or that they were capable of such things” (McLeod 4). Why do humans readily conform to the specific roles they are assigned? The prisoners and the prison guards both fall victim to this. The Stanford

Another issue with our system is that some police officers may abuse their power and engage in practices that are discriminatory and unlawful. When people are given the power to rule or are pressured to obey to authority figures, their behavior tends to change. Philip Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment conducted in the summer of 1971, at Stanford University brought many contributions to the understanding of situational forces’ influence on human behavior. The purpose of this study was to understand the development of norms and the effects of roles, labels and social expectations in a prison environment and to understand the impact of situational variables on human behavior. The experiment started off by arresting the students who agreed to participant for $15 a day and who were randomly assigned to play the role of prisoners for the following two weeks in the “Stanford County Prison”, a mock prison located inside the University. This group of students were searched and stripped naked by the other group of participants playing the role of guards. The prisoners would only be called by their ID number, in order to make the experience become much more realistic. On the other hand, the guards were assigned to maintain orders and commend respect. However, they did more than they were asked to do. As they were assigned a role with great power they permitted themselves to abusing and dehumanizing the prisoners. Not to forget that this was just an experimental prison and not a really life