The Stanford Prison Experiment is one of the most infamous and controversial psychological experiments to ever take place to this day. In 1971, Phillip Zimbardo created an experiment that tested the changes one endures when they have to adapt in a prison environment and provided an explanation for the dehumanizing effects of the penile system. 24, college-aged, men were chosen to participate in the 2 week long experiment by flipping a coin to decide whether they’re given the role of prisoner or guard. After their roles were determined, they were given uniforms, cells, identification numbers, etc. Little did he know that the results of this experiment would give some of the most ethically challenged results of time.
Zimbardo made it very apparent
…show more content…
Although they weren’t capable of causing physical harm to the inmates, the guards abused their power simply because the inmates had none. Soon, embarrassing and degrading the prisoners turned into serious emotional abuse. Instances in which they were depriving the inmates from sleep, putting bags over their heads to do simple things such as using the bathroom, and even making them repeat their inmate numbers over and over for hours on end are just a few examples of how the guards treated their prisoners.
Being a prisoner was a completely different story. Having their bedding removed or even being put in solitary confinement for miniscule instances of insubordination were slowly causing them to lose their sanity. As well as their clothing being a short smock with no underwear, causing them to be borderline exposed at all times was extremely embarrassing for them. This caused the inmates to fall into the submissive role. Contradicting this, Zimbardo actually
3
expected them to do more regarding defending themselves. He treated the inmates as if they were nothing, even making them sign a contract that essentially said they were owned by
…show more content…
Zimbardo ensured that the experiment was more dramatic than an actual prison. In real prisons, guards were encouraged to not cause any conflict in the prison, but Zimbardo encouraged conflict to start. Hosing down, sexually humiliating, and essentially dissociating the prisoners from themselves are a few examples of the now unethical things that took place. Court cases in which guards were charged with abusing the prisoners and even protests took place after the experiment. Arguably, the most controversial part of the entire experiment was the contract. Making the prisoners sign a contract saying they were borderline slaves to the experiment and a portion of their human rights were taken away is deemed pretty ridiculous nowadays. Not setting up safe words that enabled the prisoners to withdraw from the experiment is questionable as well. In order to get out of the contract and be removed from the ‘prison’, you had to have a mental breakdown that was deemed realistic enough for them to let you go.
Several movies have been released about the Stanford Prison Experiment that
In Kyle Patrick Alvarez’s The Stanford Prison Experiment, 20 college aged boys are selected to play different roles in a simulated prison located within Stanford. This experiment was thought of and carried out by Philip Zimbardo, a professor of psychology. The boys, who were also students at Stanford, were randomly selected to be a guard or a prisoner. The prisoners were taken by real police officers to the Stanford jail. When the experiment started, most of the prisoners thought of the situation as it was intended to be, an experiment.
them binary through the authority implied by the direct guard inmate relationship. In quiet rage, the purpose of the experiment was to show what an increase in power and status can do to a person. Essentially Zimbardo's power and authority (being the phycologist) led him to overlooking horrible situations and allowing them to take place. In fact, his own experiment even tricked him. Look at all the police brutality and all the violence in the prisons.
The participants in the trial were in such severe psychological discomfort that the experiment, which was supposed to last two weeks, was stopped after only six days. The results demonstrated how the establishment of jail brutality and violence was influenced by the established roles and power dynamics within the simulated prison environment.
The guards kept the inmates in line by using evil looks and intimidating tactics. As the experiment progressed , the guards became extremely hostile, degrading the inmates and humiliating and tormenting them using psychologically . Even Zimbardo himself got irritated at one point during the experiment.
In the experiment, Zimbardo converted a basement of the Stanford University psychology building into a mock prison and asked 75 applicants to participate. 24 men were chosen to participate and were paid $15 per day. Prisoners were arrested at their own homes, blindfolded, and driven to Stanford University's psychology department, where the deindividuation process began. Within no time the guards and the prisoners began to change. In the video
In 1971 Professor Phillip Zimbardo was interested in finding out what would happen if you put a good person in an evil place. Would the institution control their behavior or would a person attitude, values, morality raise about the negative environment? First, Zimbardo converted a basement of Stanford University into a mock prison, Next, Zimbardo recruiter 24 male college students who were paid $15 per day to take part in the experiment. Finally, the recruiters were randomly assigned to either prisoner or guard with Zimbardo being the make shift prison warden. I believe the prison study was unethical, clearly young men suffered physically, mentally.
The significance of the events that occurred at the Abu Ghraib Prison is evident as Zimbardo goes on to mention his realization that the happenings are directly parallel to the results found during the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE). He points out that just like the unprepared US Military personnel in Abu Ghraib, the students chosen to play the roles of guards in the SPE were forced to operate the
Some of the prisoners were changed into being obedient to the power against them as a result of the assigned guards' abuse of their position of authority by tormenting the captives. Following the study, Zimbardo was subject to widespread criticism for the lack of safety and regulation. Despite being labeled a failure experiment, the Stanford prison experiment has : broadened our
In summary, the purpose of the Stanford Prison Experiment was supposed to demonstrate that powerful situational forces, much like Abu Ghraib, could over-ride individual dispositions and choices, leading good people to do bad things simply because of the role they found themselves
The guards were instructed to maintain order anyway they wanted without using physical violence. Zimbardo wanted the guards to seem intimidating while the prisoners were made to look inferior and were to be referred to with their ID number only. After the prisoners were assigned their roles and the guards took their post was the effect of the experiment finally setting in. On the morning of the second day the prisoners began to rebel against the guards by ripping off their ID numbers and barring the doors while taunting the guards. This event was the first step down the slippery slope that would follow.
Some guards are more forceful than others and place prisoners in the Hole or revoke privileges to demand attention and respect. Some prisoners started to protest these demeaning actions that were unnecessary from the guards. Guards retaliated with their various forms of indirect of abuse. This was when the first signs of distress occurred among the prisoners. The prisoners started to barricade themselves in their cells as a way to protest against the guards and in response, a guard blew a fire extinguisher onto the inmates of Cell 2 (Zimbardo, 2007).
These series of events seemed to bring out the worst in both prisoners and guards. Prisoners were losing all sense of personal identity after being referred to as numbers and not personal names this made them feel less important and they successfully believed it to be true. After six intense days of Phillip Zimbardo’s conforming to social roles experiment a graduate student who was only there to take notes and interview was so shocked by what she saw she demanded the experiment end straight away as it was degrading to watch and degrading for all who took part as Phillip Zimbardo and his team watched the situation descend into chaos she was only the voice that spoke up about how bad the experiment truly
The public could have visited the location as if they were relatives to the prisoners, imposing limitations on authoritarian power. Additionally, the prisoners could have defied the prison wardens' orders and used violence as a reminder that the experiment was just an
Zimbardo’s method of conducting The Stanford Prison Experiment is unethical for a plethora of reasons. First, the selection of guards, none of them have any prior training in correctional duties. Consequently, you can see the guards using Nazi strategies to enforce their version of prions standards. Second, the chain that is constantly attached to the inmate’s ankle to reinforce that there is no escape. Now, in real prisons guards are only allowed to connect items such as full body restraints, spit guards, mouth guards, wrist restraints, and ankle restraints to aid in the safety of the prisoner, surrounding prisoners, and guards.
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.