The Stanford Prison Experiment
In August of 1971, American psychologist, Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment at Stanford University studying the behavioral and psychological consequences of becoming a prisoner or a prison guard. He wanted to observe how situational forces impacted human behavior. Zimbardo, along with prison experts, a film crew, and a former prison convict dramatically simulated a prison environment both physically and mentally in order to accurately observe the effects of the institution on its participants. This experiment later became known as the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment.
Zimbardo wanted to answer questions like, what happens when you put good people in an evil place? Does humanity win over evil,
…show more content…
That is when their process of humiliation, dehumanization, and degradation began. These arrest occurred like any other arrest, by actual police, handcuffs, and they were even told their Miranda Rights and fingerprinted. The blindfolded inmates were taken to the Stanford mock prison, stripped naked, disinfected, and put into humiliating dress-like smocks and rubber shower shoes with one chain on their leg “used in order to remind prisoners of the oppressiveness of their environment. Even when prisoners were asleep, they could not escape the atmosphere of oppression” (Zimbardo …show more content…
They obeyed every command given to them. According to Zimbardo and his team, “the prisoners sense of reality had shifted, and they no longer perceived their imprisonment as an experiment” (Zimbardo 32). The prisoners coped with their humiliation by either rebelling or breaking down emotionally. The effects of the Stanford Prison Experiment had more negative effects on it’s prisoners than anyone else. Evil seemed to prevail over the guards. Although they had only obtained a powerful role for a short time, they all went through extreme measures to enforce their power. The prisoners were demeaned, humiliated, dehumanized and lost their sense of control and power over their own
The Implications of the Stanford Prison Experiment In 1971 Dr Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment in the basement of Stanford University. This involved imprisoning nine volunteers in a mock up of Stanford prison, which was policed by nine guards (more volunteers). These guards had complete control over the prisoners. They could do anything to the prisoners, but use physical violence.
Every participant came from a relatively good background, with a college education, a clean legal record, and strong community ties because Zimbardo hypothesized that a good person could perform evil acts if they were given the opportunity. In the Stanford Prison experiment, Zimbardo’s hypothesis was reflected very clearly. The guards did absolutely terrible things to the prisoners, but in the end, the guards were good people, the situation stimulated bad ideas and evil
On August 14, 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment had begun. The volunteers who had replied to the ad in the newspaper just weeks before were arrested for the claims of Armed Robbery and Burglary. The volunteers were unaware of the process of the experiment, let alone what they were getting themselves into. They were in shock about what was happening to them. Once taken into the facility, the experimenters had set up as their own private jail system; the twenty-four volunteered individuals were split up into two different groups (Stanford Prison Experiment).
People will do some of the craziest things when any level of force is placed upon them. People will succumb to the pressure of doing things they had never imagined they could do. Just recently people can look at the events of the revolts in Northern Africa and the extremes the people did to over throw their governments, events at Abu Ghraib, and the recent riots in Missouri. When mass hysteria or force from others is involved people will succumb to the situation and may do things they would normally deem immoral.
In the Stanford Prison Experiment many of the prisoners obeyed the guards even though they were in such extreme discomfort mentally to not have to face the harsher treatments of not obeying them. However, not all of them followed their order and kept protesting their inhuman orders, even knowing with the harsh treatment that came afterwards. Like the Milligram Experiment, the teachers understood the harsh pain they were enlisting into the students, they continued the orders of the experiment to increase the shocks after every wrong answer. Then again, like the Stanford Experiment, not all of them followed the order of guards as did a few of the teachers in the Milligram experiment. Two prisoners left the Stanford experiment and presumably the same could be said for the Milligram
In the Stanford Prison Experiment, a study done with the participation of a group of college students with similar backgrounds and good health standing who were subjected to a simulated prison environment. The participants were exposed completely to the harsh environment of a real prison in a controlled environment with specific roles of authority and subordinates assigned to each individual. The study was formulated based on reports from Russian novelist Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky had spent four years in a Siberian prison and his view on how a man is able to withstand anything after experiencing the horrors of prison prompted Dr. Philip Zimbardo a Professor of Psychology at Stanford and his
Zimbardo wanted the answer the question if whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards or had more to do with the prison environment.
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. The experiment was a landmark study of the human response to captivity, in particular, to the real world circumstances of prison life. In social psychology, this idea is known as “mundane realism”. Mundane realism refers to the ability to mirror the real world as much as possible, which is just what this study did. Twenty-four subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of "prisoner" or "guard" and they were made to conform to these roles.
When put into the position of complete authority over others people will show their true colors. I think that most people would like to think that they would be fair, ethical superiors. I know I would, but learning about the Stanford Prison Experiment has made me question what would really happen if I was there. Would I be the submissive prisoner, the sadistic guard, or would I stay true to myself? As Phillip Zimbardo gave the guards their whistles and billy clubs they drastically changed without even realizing it. In order to further understand the Stanford Prison experiment I learned how the experiment was conducted, thought about the ethical quality of this experiment, and why I think it panned out how it did.
Zimbardo acts like an eye in the sky knowing what happens to everyone and the outside voice is neutral. Zimbardo does not have limit on what he saying, so this makes him the expert. The voice is more like to fill in the blanks and therefore it reverts the attention to Zimbardo as the voice of knowledge. The guard and the prisoner seem to have a lot to say but in reality they do not, Zimbardo does most of the speaking. They are both included for the emotional aspect of the experiment and make it seem more interesting. Zimbardo also expresses emotions but a lot less than the two emotional appeals and tries to keep a curiosity tone towards the part he explains how he should have not been playing a role in the prison. That’s where we have another logos attempt. He “should have of had a collage looking overseeing the experiment”. Someone who could have ended the experiment or if he was main researcher he should not have had role in
In August of 1971, Philip G. Zimbardo placed a simple advertisement in the local city paper requesting for: “Male college students needed for psychological study of prison life: $15 per day for one-to-two weeks. Beginning A...
These strict guidelines along with over 10 others helped shape the prison. The guards at the beginning of the experiment formed these guidelines. Their authority, from the start, was absolute. They did not allow prisoners to speak, eat or even use the restroom without permission. Sometimes, unimaginably, the inmates were not granted permission. Day one of the experiment was full of confusion and learning for everyone involved. The events
In short, the experience was negative. As time went on, prisoners tended to be more hostile. And the guards interactions with the prisoners, which could be positive or negative, tended to be extremely dehumanizing and aggressive. Verbal aggression was the most common interaction between prisoners and guards, as it was made clear that physical violence were not allowed. Despite this being only a mock experiment, it had quickly internalized on both subjects.
Yale psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971 decided to take these experiments one step further, to put a normal person into a position of power to see how they would treat another human. In 1973 Zimbardo created the Yale Prison experiment which in present day would be referenced in major prison cases in the United States. To study the roles in prison life Zimbardo converted the basement of Stanford into a prison.
Subjects became so entranced in these roles that the guards started to behave as if they really were the guards of a true prison. Zimbardo had told them to think of themselves in this way and it led to the guards mentally abusing the prisoners with their cruel and degrading ro...