Similarities between the Stanley Milgram, and Stanford prison experiment extend beyond the conventional commonalities of psychological experiments. The approach of setup were at extremes with one having a student teacher relationship, compared to that of a prisoner and a guard, but the results of human responses were unnervingly relatable with both teacher and guard, being in the superior position and allowing themselves to degrade the inferior to extremes of death. Psychologist Zimbardo may have compromised the legitimacy of his experiment with the inability to remove himself, as he admitted in his conclusion, to remain objective and from influencing the results, but the authenticity of the reactions were not compromised. The motivation, some of the interviewes claimed, was to have control of the situation. Whether control meant psychological harassment or not eating, everyone had an excuse that they were playing roles in an experiment to justify the drastic measures of manipulation taken …show more content…
The superior figure would inflict harm on the inferior because of the justification that they would not be responsible for their own actions. Consequently, this remains the central theme for inflicting harm on others even in mass groups such as the Holocaust; humans are able to continue unethical behaviors if their view of authority justifies their behaviors for them. Even though the Stanley Milgram exercise was conducted in 1969, the comparison to today's society mimics that of the 1930. Desires for control in society remain prominent issues and demonstrate the little change there has been in the previous forty or eighty years. Both experiments successfully exemplify the cruel nature of humans in response to pressure or lack of control but neither address the question of how to change behaviors ingrained in society for
Society and government require people to be obedient towards authority, but is it always the best thing to do? During the aftermath of World War II many of the major leaders of the Nazi regime were put on trial for crimes against humanity (History.com). These trials were known as the Nuremburg war trials, were most of the convicted proclaimed that they were “just following orders” (McLeod 584). Being an accomplice to a crime is also against the law. In the Nuremburg trials, those accused were not breaking the law that their government had created, they were actually following it.
Situational effects and personality come into conflict when discussing behavior. Personality is someone’s “usual pattern of behavior, feelings, and thoughts” (Twenge, 2017, p.20). It remains constant throughout different situations, but some situations can be stressful enough to make a person act out of character. The transition between a person’s normal personality and behavior to a more evil, sinister behavior fascinates a man named Philip Zimbardo, who conducted the infamous Zimbardo Prison Experiment, or Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE). Zimbardo is an American psychologist at Stanford University and the mastermind behind the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment (The Story).
Milgram himself concluded how easily ordinary people ‘can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority". (Milgram 1974) As this report has highlighted the research is not without controversy with many questioning to what extent Milgram’s experiment is true to real life and has been criticized for not highlighting further situational variables in determining obedience to authority. Regardless of this, there is no doubt Milgram highlighted a rather troubling phenomenon.
In 1971, Philip Zimbardo set out to conduct an experiment to observe behavior as well as obedience. In Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment, many dispute whether it was obedience or merely conforming to their predesigned social roles of guards and prisoners that transpired throughout the experiment. Initially, the experiment was meant to test the roles people play in prison environment; Zimbardo was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards, disposition, or had more to do with the prison environment. This phenomenon has been arguably known to possibly influencing the catastrophic similarities which occurred at Abu Ghraib prison in 2003.The
In 1971, Philip Zimbardo, then a professor of psychology at Stanford University, devised one of the most famous psychological experiments of the twentieth century. In what is known as the Stanford Prison Experiment, he assigned twenty-four young men roles as prisoners and guards, and observed the group dynamics that ensued. To his horror, the study had to be shut down after just six days because the guards were psychologically abusing the prisoners. When the Abu Ghraib story broke in 2004, Zimbardo immediately spotted parallels with his research. He later testified as an expert witness on behalf of Ivan "Chip" Frederick II, a former staff sergeant sentenced to eight years for his role in the abuse of detainees.
Since the beginning of the human existence, man has always dominated and ruled over one another be it empires, corporations, or small groups. Authority and obedience has always been a factor of who we are. This natural occurrence can be seen clearly through the psychological experiments known as The Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment. Both of these studies are based on how human beings react to authority figures and what their obedience is when faced with conflict.
One of the most infamous experiments conducted in the history of psychology was the Stanford Prison Experiment. The main objective of this experiment was to see what effects would occur when a psychological experiment into human nature was performed. As I read through the material provided, I noticed that my thoughts on the matter were similar to many; that it was a complete failure as a scientific research project. However, his findings did provide us with something much more important that is still being talked about today; insight into human psychology and social behavior.
On day six Zimbardo and Milgram decided to conclude the experiment. Zimbardo originally intended to explore how prisoners adapt to powerlessness, but he has contended that the experiment demonstrates how swiftly arbitrary assignment of power can lead to abuse. (Maher, The anatomy of obedience. P. 408) Once the experiment was completed Zimbardo and Milgram concluded that generally people will conform to the roles they are told to play.
Authority gives a person the chance to feel superior, and as seen throughout this film, those within the position of authority will only then abuse this opportunity. Given the chance for people to gain authority or rather the sense of authority is enough to awaken the evil within. Within the movie, The Stanford Prison Experiment the guards were enabled to set a line of difference between the prisoners and themselves. They were able to make the prisoners feel weak or emasculated, forcing the students to strip and wear the assigned prison clothes that barely covered their genitals (Alvarez). Forcing the prisoners to wear these feminine articles of clothing and assigning them a number, gives the opportunity to strip away their personality and
In the article “The Stanford Prison Experiment” by Saul Mcleod it takes the reader through the process of an experiment by the University of Stanford were they got a group of people and split them up into to groups one group of people were guards and the other group of people were the prisoners, now in the experiment the guards were in charge of the prisoners, the prisoners relied on the guards for everything whether it be food or water or even a new set of clothes but as the experiment went on the guard abused their power making prisoners do miniscule task such as clean toilets with toothbrushes re make their beds after they had just been made and other thing, is is an example of the guards having to much power and they abused it at their
Introduction What happens when good people are put in an evil place? Does humanity overpower evil, or does evil triumph over it? When good people are put in an evil place, the triumphing of evil can be explained through a mix of mob mentality and labeling theory. First, I will discuss the events of the Stanford Prison Experiment, and how it turned good people into bad. Second, I will present the events of Abu Ghraib, and how evil triumphed there as well.
He is a selfish psychologist who just wanted to get a result. He did not realize that he is starting to act like a prison superintendent than a researcher. He only realizes it when Christina Maslach, objected the experiment after she saw that the prisoners were being harassed by the guards. Even if the study has received a lot of ethical criticism, the result still helps Zimbardo to make a conclusion that is helpful for his future endeavor in research.
The study showed that the guards abused their powers that they had gained. Zimbardo had to eventually shutdown the experiment early due to the danger some of the kids faced. Mcleod also reports about the Milgram Experiment that was conducted in 1963. Dr. Milgram wanted to see if somene would intentually hurt somebody if somebody of authority told the to. Both studies show that power and authority can make people evil.
Unit 1 Written Assignment Literature Review of article on Standard Prison Experiment Introduction This article concerns the Stanford Prison experiment carried out in 1971 at Stanford University. The experiment commenced on August 14, and was stopped after only six days. It is one of the most noted psychological experiments on authority versus subordinates. The studies which emerged from this have been of interest to those in prison and military fields due to its focus on the psychology associated with authority.
Normal People Behaving Evil The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment to see if normal people would change their behavior in a role-play as a prisoner or a prison guard. The experiment was conducted by Dr.Philip Zimbardo in 1973 at Stanford University that caused numerous amount of trauma to prisoners by prison guards in their role-playing position which forced Dr. Zimbardo to officially terminate the experiment six days after it was introduced. Due to the cruel aggressive behaviors from the guards, the experiment led to a question, "Do "normal" people have the capability of behaving badly?" The answer to that question is that most likely an individual who behave normally will have the capability of expressing evil behavior due to the environment that they are surrounded.