As I was choosing which 8 point project to do, a friend in the class suggested researching Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment. Prior to this assignment, I actually had not heard about this experiment. After researching this happening, and reading the full story, as written by Dr. Zimbardo, I, in all honesty, immediately began to feel ill. How could people be so horrible to one another? How could the people portraying the guards live with themselves after treating the prisoners so poorly? There was so much that happened here that was so, so wrong, all because of power. In this paper, I will be explaining why this experiment could not, and should not, be conducted today. The first major point in the ethical rules of experimentation …show more content…
Because of the lack of specific guidelines, these boys (the “prisoners”) were treated however the “guards” felt like treating them, which happened to be completely horrific due to the enormous amount of power appointed to them. Psychologists now have specific rules that must be carried out when experimenting, many of which correlate with treatment of people during an experiment. For one, the researcher is not allowed to harm the subject. They must do everything in their power to eliminate stress and harm of any sort. The people involved in the prison experiment were not required to do that, in any way, shape, or form. The “guards” could basically do whatever they wanted to the “prisoners”, which, in turn, created great emotional damage, surely scarring them for life. It was, overall, extensively emotionally and psychologically damaging, which is a prime example as to why such an experiment could not be executed in today’s …show more content…
There are too many contraventions to the code of ethics that are set up for present day experimentation. As mentioned earlier, upon reading this story, I was completely disgusted. I was specifically outraged at the man who conducted this experiment; How could he do this to those innocent people? How could he let this happen? So, I did some additional research, because this story had literally upset me to the point of tears. I came across his TED talk. I am not sure if you have watched Philip Zimbardo’s TED talk, but it was very insightful, and extremely disturbing. However, after viewing the video, I understood his purpose behind this experiment; can good people be transformed to evil? According to social psychologists, there are primarily three specific ways people can, essentially, “turn to the dark side”: dispositional, situational, and Zimbardo’s discovery, systemic. Through this experiment, Zimbardo observed how the system of the jail affected the participants: for the “guards” there really wasn’t a system. Their power was unlimited; they had no boundaries. Because of this, they started doing small, evil acts, which quickly escalated to larger-scale acts of near malice. For the “prisoners”, the system was unsteadily and randomly created and reliant upon the “guards”, creating a very unhealthy system
In “The Standford Prison Experiment”, Philip G. Zimbardo, shows an example of how people who have power uses to abuse others to help show their dominance and power by using the prison experiment that was used at Stanford. Showing how people with power who are the guards are hurting the defenseless prisoners. This is shown in the article by the author when he said “I have singled him out for the special abuse both because he begs for it and because I simply don’t like him”( Philip 75). Showing how when guards were giving their power they demonstrated on the prisoners who in this experiment were seen as the victims or the prey of the violence that was used on them. To then show how they have power and quash the prisoner's moral of rebelling.
Before graduate student, Christina Maslach raised concerns about the environment in the mock prison and the morality of continuing the experiment, Zimbardo, who served as the prison warden, did not take the abusive behavior of the jail guards seriously. In conclusion, in the Stanford prison experiments, a few ethical principles were not adhered to, as prisoners’ human rights were not regarded, putting the participants in possible danger. What should have been different in the Stanford prison experiment?
In the six days that the experiment ran they saw the personalities that the prisoner and prison guards took.
Official Stanford Prison Experiment website: http://www.prisonexp.org/ What makes good people do bad things?: http://www.apa.org/monitor/oct04/goodbad.aspx An interview with Philip Zimbardo: http://nautil.us/issue/45/power/the-man-who-played-with-absolute-power In the Stanford Prison Study, students were given roles as prison guards or inmates. The participants were chosen carefully, so that most of the participants would end up being "Average Joes".
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
He started to behave in a way that was cruel and far harsher than the rest of the guards and at the end of the experiment claimed it was because he was conducting his own experiment to see how far they would let him go until they retaliated. The way he behaved portrayed that, even though he might not have come into the experiment with the intention to release that behavior from within, but his actions became a roll that he took too far. A sociocultural component shown in the film were the ways that the volunteer guards interpreted the stigmas around being a prison guard. That they should be cold, strict, and unnervingly verbally abusive. Time upon time in the film, the volunteer guards were verbally abusive of their power with the prisoners.
This experiment was conducted in Stanford University by Dr. Zimbardo. During this two week long session, Dr. Zimbardo had several volunteers agree to act as prisoners and as prison guards. The prisoners were told to wait in their houses while the guards were to set up the mock prison, a tactic used by Dr. Zimbardo to make them fit into their roles more. The official police apprehended the students assigned to the role of prisoner from their homes, took mug shots, fingerprinted them, and gave them dirty prison uniforms. The guards were given clean guard uniforms, sunglasses, and billy clubs borrowed from the police.
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
Parents were coming to Zimbardo saying that they had been told to get a lawyer so that their child could be let out of “prison”. Zimbardo then called a lawyer to come and ask legal questions to the prisoners. The lawyer did know also that this was just an experiment. The participants were taking the roles to seriously so Zimbardo decided to stop the experiment, Guards was only becoming more abusive with their
Students from Stanford University signed up to become guards and prisoners for one-two weeks for $15 per day. None of the subjects who were guards were going to receive training on their role prior to the experiment. However, they still managed to receive the full prison experience. Zimbardo attempted to recreate elements of a typical prison.
The experiment was executed well. Yet, there are unethical practices happened during the experiment. First, the participants were not fully informed about the experiment. The researchers did not explain to the participants the processes in conducting the experiment. The participants were not informed that they would be arrested by cops in their homes.
The second aspect that should be highlighted from the author’s hypothesis is that guards themselves, the authority was in a specific mind-set which comes with the role, and most significantly the uniform which played a major role. This enabled them, psychology to commit the negative acts against the prisoners in the experiment. What reinforces this idea the uniforms enabled this is the experiment encouraged negative as well as positive engagement with the prisoners. However most of those involved in the guard roles engaged almost entirely in negative behavior.
This connects to the idea of guards having the capability of turning evil through an atmosphere of the prison environment where they can turn evil and have no remorse feelings towards the prisoners. From the article, "Stanford Prison Experiment," by Saul McLeod, he explained that the evil tactics that were made by the guards were from the atmosphere of the prison environment because the norm for a prison guard is to act tough and have no remorse feelings towards the prisoners when assigning punishments. He also added that guards acted this way because they lost their sense of personal identity when they dressed up as a guard, which can show they may have believed that they were actual guards and the experiment was real, which might’ve triggered their dark side with harsh punishments. Therefore, losing their personal identity in a prison environment may have been the factor where they triggered their evil side during the prison
The Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 illustrated the direct relationship between power of situations and circumstances to shape an individual’s behavior. During this study 24 undergraduates were grouped into roles of either a Prisoner or a Guard, the study was located in a mock correctional facility in the basement of Stanford University. Researchers then observed the prisoners and guards using hidden cameras. The study was meant to last two weeks. However, the brutality of the Guards and the suffering of the Prisoners was so intense that it had to be terminated after only six days.