With regard to the above question, I will be evaluating the concepts of conformity and obedience. In relation to this the work of Zimbardo, Haslam and Milgram will enable me to explain a variety of ways in which those around us may influence the way we behave.
Conformity is defined as a change in behaviour and/or attitude as a result of group pressure (Hogg & Vaughan, n.d.). In 1971 Phillip G Zimbardo carried out an experiment with the aim of determining the psychological changes of both prisoners and guards. He did this by placing 18 college undergraduates in a simulated prison environment (Prisonexp.org, 2014). The time course for the experiment was 14 days; however, it was ended precipitately after only 6 days as the guards were seen to abuse the prisoners at night. Christina Maslach also questioned the morality of the study after witnessing the participants chained together with bags over their heads. This forced Zimbardo to re-evaluate the situation as a research psychologist as he himself had conformed to the role of the prisons superintendent (Prisonexp.org, 2014).
It was clear throughout the study that all participants had conformed to the role they were given. Prisoners started to believe that they were in a real prison, which ultimately lead to the participants becoming depressed and some of the guards had developed sadistic like qualities due to the amount of power they had over the prisoners (Prisonexp.org, 2014).
Deindividuation is said to of played an important role in terms of conformity. The social process of placing individuals into a group situation and giving them uniforms determines their behaviour. They lose a sense of identity and proceed to act in a way that the group deems acceptable. This may have caused ...
... middle of paper ...
...he group. Normative conformity is also linked to both studies. Even though members of the group may not agree with certain behaviour, they neglect to confront other members as they want to be liked and fear what may happen if they go against the social norms of the group (Hogg & Vaughan, n.d.).
Works Cited
Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W. & Jonas, K. (2012). An introduction to social psychology. Chichester, West Sussex: BPS Blackwell.
Hogg, M. A. & Vaughan, G. M. (n.d.). Social psychology.
Prisonexp.org. (2014). The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.prisonexp.org/ [Accessed: 9 Apr 2014].
Bbcprisonstudy.org. (2014). Welcome to the official site for the BBC Prison Study. Home - The BBC Prison Study. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.bbcprisonstudy.org/index.php [Accessed: 10 Apr 2014].
...of real-life prisons can encounter the same behavior, as the volunteers in just a Psychological study. Many may not know about the scars that were left upon the individuals in this study, but take a look at how a fake study can reenact such a real life experience for most.
In this study Zimbardo chose 21 participants from a pool of 75, all male college students, screened prior for mental illness, and paid $15 per day. He then gave roles. One being a prisoner and the other being a prison guard, there were 3 guards per 8 hour shift, and 9 total prisoners. Shortly after the prisoners were arrested from their homes they were taken to the local police station, booked, processed, given proper prison attire and issued numbers for identification. Before the study, Zimbardo concocted a prison setting in the basement of a Stanford building. It was as authentic as possible to the barred doors and plain white walls. The guards were also given proper guard attire minus guns. Shortly after starting the experiment the guards and prisoners starting naturally assuming their roles, Zimbardo had intended on the experiment lasting a fortnight. Within 36 hours one prisoner had to be released due to erratic behavior. This may have stemmed from the sadistic nature the guards had adopted rather quickly, dehumanizing the prisoners through verbal, physical, and mental abuse. The prisoners also assumed their own roles rather efficiently as well. They started to rat on the other prisoners, told stories to each other about the guards, and placated the orders from the guards. After deindividuaiton occurred from the prisoners it was not long the experiment completely broke down ethically. Zimbardo, who watched through cameras in an observation type room (warden), had to put an end to the experiment long before then he intended
Before commencing the study all participants were briefed on the roles pertaining to the experiment without actually being assigned roles. Once roles were determined and assigned each participant was given specific instruction to their roles whether it be the role of the Guard or Prisoner. The group assigned to the prisoner role were greater in number and were instructed to be available at a predetermined time, this was done to maintain the reality of the simulation. The prisoners were arrested and escorted by real-life law enforcement officials and processed as any detainee would be in a real situation. Upon completing the processing part of the experiment the students were then transferred to the simulated prison, which was housed in the basement of the university, and assigned identifying numbers, given demeaning clothing as uniform and placed in barren cells with no personalized
Zimbardo, P. (2014). A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment conducted at stanford university. Retrieved from http://www.prisonexp.org/
The ideas of social psychology mentioned above can be applied to the Stanford Prison Experiment; in which the environment, the participants, and construals brought about behaviors that may not have been how the participants actually would behave in real life.
To begin the experiment the Stanford Psychology department interviewed middle class, white males that were both physically and mentally healthy to pick 18 participants. It was decided who would play guards and who would be prisoners by the flip of a coin making nine guards and nine prisoners. The guards were taken in first to be told of what they could and could not do to the prisoners. The rules were guards weren’t allowed t o physically harm the prisoners and could only keep prisoners in “the hole” for a hour at a time. Given military like uniforms, whistles, and billy clubs the guards looked almost as if they worked in a real prison. As for the prisoners, real police surprised them at their homes and arrested them outside where others could see as if they were really criminals. They were then blindfolded and taken to the mock prison in the basement of a Stanford Psychology building that had been decorated to look like a prison where guards fingerprinted, deloused, and gave prisoners a number which they would be calle...
The debate over prison systems in the United States has been a long controversy. The question as to; if stuffing a facility full with convicted criminals to be guarded by a flock of civilian employees will foster progress. But a main factor that contributes, is the line between guard and civilian. A guard, while trained, is not a military personal. The power given to them over the lives of others when they are simply a citizen is not normal for everyday citizens. This is one of the things Dr. Phillip Zimbardo wanted to test in his prison experiment at Stanford University, working on staff. Zimbardo created a mock prison in the basement, drawing psychologically fit young gentlemen to see what would happen. In a short
Retrieved December 7, 2013. Gilovich, T., & Gilovich, T. (2013). Chapter 12 / Groups /. Social psychology in the United States. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
The most basic concept in social psychology is conformity. Conformity is the idea that behaviour or a belief is changed in order to follow, or conform, to what is considered the “norm.” One of the oldest experiments to support this notion was conducted in 1935 by Muzafer Sherif (Song, Ma, Wu, Li, 2012 p. 1366). There are two different types of
The ideas of social psychology mentioned above can be applied to the Stanford Prison Experiment; in which the environment, the participants, and construals brought about behaviors that may not have been how the participants actually would behave in real life.
Lessing’s essay helps set the context for understanding the experiments that social psychologists Solomon Asch, Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo conducted to explain conformity and obedience. Solomon Asch’s experiment in “Opinions and Social Pressure” studied a subject’s ability to yield to social pressure when placed within a group of strangers. His research helped illustrate how groups encourage conformity. During a typical experiment, members of the group were asked by the experimenter to claim two obvious mismatched lines were identical. The single individual who was not privy to this information was the focal point of the experiment.
As stated above, conformity changes an individual 's belief and behaviour to match the groups, and while obedience often requires punishment and reward other studies suggest that "an individual...confronted with an authority recognized as legitimate, will behave in the direction of the expectations of this authority" (Pascual et al., 2013) without long-term effect on behaviour or beliefs. Sherif (as cited by Myers, 2014) found in his studies on norm formation that the group norm lasted even a year after the initial experiments, while Milgram (as cited by Myers, 2014) found physical proximity of the authority figure was a predictor of obedience in that obedience went down the further the authority figure physically was. Though conformity and obedience are not completely different, conformity obedience can be interchangeable when the hierarchy is seen as a group with which individuals can identify. Reicher, Haslam and Smith (2012) argue that Milgram 's (1965, 1974) famous obedience experiment isn 't simply blind obedience but individuals identifying with the figure of authority and conforming to expected norms. In some cases when individuals felt the authority figure 's beliefs were dissimilar to their own they immediately withdrew from
Crisp, R, J. Turner, R, N. (2007). Essential Social Psychology. Sage Publications Limited. London. (UK). First Edition.
The Prison Simulation, studied by Haney, Banks & Zimbardo is quite impressive as to how extensive the study actually is. Due to lack of length in this paper the synopsis dealing with this study will be brief. The experiment consisted of 24 voluntary men who were divided into two groups: Guards and Inmates. Both groups were given uniforms to encourage their roles in the prison scenario. The subjects immediately began to take on rolls as to how they thought they should act. The prison had a much greater impact on all persons than could have been anticipated. The study was supposed to last 14 days, but due to extreme emotional depression the study ended after 6 days. In the spring of 1998, my Law a...
Groups influence our everyday lives in ways that we don’t even realize. Most of what is learned from groups are societal norms that are being reinforced on a micro level in everyday life. Group influence on individuals is a clear tangible proof of societal norms by institutions. The groups we become a part of therefore can have a greater influence on our individual actions then we are aware of. As an individual we like to believe we have agency over our actions and what we decide but a lot of our own actions is more a part of a group mentality. Also, individual’s go along with a group’s influence so they feel better about themselves because then they won’t be ostracized. This paper will analyze different aspects of individual behavior and