Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
capitalism vs communism
the critique of the stanford prison experiment
compare capitalism and communism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: capitalism vs communism
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. The subjects were all students applying for summer jobs to get some money. To make it a fair test, the subjects were made to take psychological tests to make sure they were mentally fit. On the first day, the prisoner subjects were picked up by a panda car and arrested on a mass crackdown on violations of penal codes. They were arrested like normal suspects are arrested, given their legal rights and searched. They were then taken away in the panda car as many of their neighbours thought that they had actually done something wrong. Then he was given his rights at the station and was fingerprinted. He was then taken to a holding cell to think about what he had done On the second day the guards' behaviour began to degenerate so by the sixth day the experiment was cancelled. Two prisoners were removed from the experiment in this time. The experiment obviously had a serious flaw; this is thought to be Dr Zimbardo's involvement (he acted as the superintendent). This was clear when a prisoner 8612 began to show signs of mental harm Zimdardo believed the prisoner was faking this to try to be released. If Zimbardo had not been involved he would have released him sooner. Another minor problem with the experiment is the definitions of a "good" pers... ... middle of paper ... ...ggests women do not posses this illness. It may be useful to repeat the experiment with female subjects. It would also be interesting to discover how people treat others of the opposite sex; will men restrain from exacting violence on women? (How long will our chauvinistic society last?). A reason for why the environment was so evil was that the prisoners were treated unfairly and the guards were given superiority over the prisoners for no reason. The prisoners and guards were not treated as equals. This would suggest a "good" environment would be one of complete equality, communism. Unfortunately communism only works in theory, as in practice there has always been a Stalin figure, which means there is not equality. If a system of complete equality can be established, it could bring an end to all evil created by man.
The men who played the role of prisoner, like the guards, were selected at random. The harassment they endured, while all voluntary, was by any means less than humane. They were treated with very little respect, and denied basic rights, such as use of the restroom, and were forced to sleep on cold concrete floors for many nights as a form of punishment. When they arrived to the prison, they were stripped down, and given a change of clothes, but the “change of clothes”, was anything but what they expected to receive. They were actually dresses. The dresses were meant to emasculate the men even more than what they had been already. Rendered powerless, with lack of control of their environment, what other choice did they have than to accept what
A local newspaper ad reached out for volunteers to participate in a Psychological study, created by Philip G. Zimbardo and his research team, which sounded interesting for many individuals. Was it the best option to follow through with it? Volunteers were given a promise of being paid fifteen dollars a day of the study. Multiple members probably considered this a once in a life time event that could result in quick, easy money. Many may have heard about the Stanford Prison Experiment, but may not have been aware of the scars that it left upon the participants. Taking a deeper look into the study and the impacted outcomes on individuals will be elaborated on (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.
Phillip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford experiment where 24 physiologically and physically healthy males were randomly selected where half would be prisoners and the other half prisoner guards. To make the experiments as real as possible, they had the prisoner participants arrested at their homes. The experiment took place in the basement of the Stanford University into a temporary made prison.
Zimbard's Stanford prison experiment revealed how social roles can influence our behavior. There are many ways that people can influence our behavior, but perhaps one of the most important is that the presence of others seems to set up expectations. We do not expect people to behave randomly but to behave in certain ways in particular situations. Each social situation entails its own particular set of expectations about the proper way to behave. Such expectations can vary from group to group. One way in which these expectations become apparent is when we look at the roles that people play in society. Social roles are the part people play as members of a social group. With each social role we adopt, our behavior changes to fit the expectations
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. The purpose of 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.
The experimental study that I chose to write about is the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was run by Phillip Zimbardo. More than seventy applicants answered an ad looking for volunteers to participate in a study that tested the physiological effects of prison life. The volunteers were all given interviews and personality tests. The study was left with twenty-four male college students. For the experiment, eighteen volunteers took part, with the other volunteers being on call. The volunteers were then divided into two groups, guards and prisoners, randomly assigned by coin flips. The experiment began on August 14th, 1971 in the basement of Stanford’s psychology building. To create the prison cells for the prisoners, the doors were taken off of laboratory rooms and replaced with bars and cell numbers. There was a room especially made for solitary confinement referred to as “the hole”. There was a camera at the end of the hall to record everything that happened as well as intercom devices in the cells in order to listen in on what the prisoners were saying and make announcements to the prisoners.
Social psychology is an empirical science that studies how people think about, influence, and relate to one another. This field focuses on how individuals view and affect each other. Social psychology also produces the idea of construals which represent how a person perceives, comprehends or interprets the environment. Construals introduce the idea that people want to make themselves look good to others and they want to be seen as right. It is also said that the social setting in which people interact impacts behavior, which brings up the idea of behaviorism. Behaviorism is the idea that behavior is a function of the person and the environment.
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.
Would you go into prison to get paid? Do you believe that you will come out the same or become different? Do not answer that. The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment that was conduct in 1971 by a team of researchers led by psychology professor Philip Zimbardo. Seventy applicants answered the ad and were narrowed down to 24 college students, which half were assigned either to be guards or prisoners by random selection. Those 24 college students were picked out from the of 70 applicants by taking personality tests and given diagnostic interviews to remove any candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse. The experiment lasted six days but it was supposed to last two weeks, it was so traumatizing that it was cut short. Zimbardo was the lead researcher and also had a role in pretend prison. Zimbardo’s experiment was based on looking
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.
Gandhi once said “Our thoughts become our words, our words become our actions, our actions become our character, our character becomes our destiny.” That very quote was proven in the 1973 Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo. Zimbardo placed an ad in the newspaper asking for young males to par take in his experiment with in return getting paid $15 a day. Out of 75 volunteers 24 were chosen as participants. Zimbardo randomly selected the males to be either the prisoners or the guards. The prison stimulation was kept as close to real life as possible, Zimbardo converted a basement of the Stanford University psychology building into a mock prison. The Stanford Prison experiment was to test if people would fall into the roles that they were told to be. The results that followed were astounding, neither Zimbardo or his colleges expected the outcome.
Prisoners must always address the guards as "Mr. Correctional Officer," and the warden as "Mr. Chief Correctional Officer."
There are five main ethical guidelines used by the IRB when determining if an experiment is ethically correct; respect for persons, fidelity and responsibility, justice, beneficence/nonmaleficence, and integrity (Hackathorn 2014).
When put into an authoritative position over others, is it possible to claim that with this new power individual(s) would be fair and ethical or could it be said that ones true colors would show? A group of researchers, headed by Stanford University psychologist Philip G. Zimbardo, designed and executed an unusual experiment that used a mock prison setting, with college students role-playing either as prisoners or guards to test the power of the social situation to determine psychological effects and behavior (1971). The experiment simulated a real life scenario of William Golding’s novel, “Lord of the Flies” showing a decay and failure of traditional rules and morals; distracting exactly how people should behave toward one another. This research, known more commonly now as the Stanford prison experiment, has become a classic demonstration of situational power to influence individualistic perspectives, ethics, and behavior. Later it is discovered that the results presented from the research became so extreme, instantaneous and unanticipated were the transformations of character in many of the subjects that this study, planned originally to last two-weeks, had to be discontinued by the sixth day. The results of this experiment were far more cataclysmic and startling than anyone involved could have imagined. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the discoveries from Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment and of Burrhus Frederic “B.F.” Skinner’s study regarding the importance of environment.