Stanford Prison Experiment In 1971, Philip Zimbardo, funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research, conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment to pursue an enhanced comprehension of the tension and conflict between military prisoners and their guards (“Stanford Prison Experiment,” 2015). In this infamous psychology experiment, participants were arbitrarily allocated to the role of prisoner or guard: prisoners stayed in the cells of a Stanford University basement while the guards worked eight-hour shifts. The guards developed authoritarian and draconian manners; the prisoners were cruelly treated and pitted against each other. This experiment raises questions concerning reality, identity, and ethics.
Reality in a Prison Setting The basement of …show more content…
Humans are social beings so our identity is dependent on how society defines or how we define ourselves through the lens of others. The self-concept is the sum total believes one has about oneself (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). Charles Horton Cooley maintains that people serve as a mirror in which we view ourselves (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). We have a core identity, but a major part of our identity is acquired when we compare ourselves to others. The Social Comparison Theory contends that people evaluate their opinions and abilities in comparison to others (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). The Social Comparison Theory and Looking-Glass Self assist in explaining the changed identity of the subjects in the experiment. The guards built their identity of being in authority in comparison to the identity of others in their position and those who were prisoners. This influenced their behavior and identity of being superior to the prisoners. In the same way, the prisoners, knowing they did nothing to acquire their degraded prisoner status, acted like prisoners. This behaviors that occur in a genuine prison were extreme in intensity and effect (Haney, 2007). The guards gained and maintained power after the initial prisoner …show more content…
Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment in the early 1960s where participants experienced extreme anxiety and stress. Like this study, Zimbardo’s study can be examined to analyze if it was ethical to be performed. If the study were to be conducted in modern times, the American Psychological Association would say it is not ethical. A good rule of thumb to check if a study is ethical is to ask “is the welfare of participants adequately protected?” (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). The Institutional Review Boards review proposed experiments to ensure that the welfare of the participants are protected and the APA codes of ethics mandates psychologists to secure informed consent from research participants (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). In this study, the prisoners and guards were not informed or kept accountable for their responsibilities in the study. Due to the harm, lack of consequences for inhumane behavior, and the eventual long term effects on all the participants, this experiment, and others like it, would never be allowed to be repeated.
Conclusion
The Stanford Prison Experiment conveyed oppression as well as the abuse of power, but also offered a glimpse of how members of low-status groups develop a shared identity. The participants involved scored greater on examines that measure aggressiveness, authoritarianism, and narcissism, than on those that measure empathy and altruism. Many psychologist
Reality in a Prison Setting The basement of …show more content…
Humans are social beings so our identity is dependent on how society defines or how we define ourselves through the lens of others. The self-concept is the sum total believes one has about oneself (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). Charles Horton Cooley maintains that people serve as a mirror in which we view ourselves (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). We have a core identity, but a major part of our identity is acquired when we compare ourselves to others. The Social Comparison Theory contends that people evaluate their opinions and abilities in comparison to others (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). The Social Comparison Theory and Looking-Glass Self assist in explaining the changed identity of the subjects in the experiment. The guards built their identity of being in authority in comparison to the identity of others in their position and those who were prisoners. This influenced their behavior and identity of being superior to the prisoners. In the same way, the prisoners, knowing they did nothing to acquire their degraded prisoner status, acted like prisoners. This behaviors that occur in a genuine prison were extreme in intensity and effect (Haney, 2007). The guards gained and maintained power after the initial prisoner …show more content…
Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment in the early 1960s where participants experienced extreme anxiety and stress. Like this study, Zimbardo’s study can be examined to analyze if it was ethical to be performed. If the study were to be conducted in modern times, the American Psychological Association would say it is not ethical. A good rule of thumb to check if a study is ethical is to ask “is the welfare of participants adequately protected?” (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). The Institutional Review Boards review proposed experiments to ensure that the welfare of the participants are protected and the APA codes of ethics mandates psychologists to secure informed consent from research participants (Kassin, Fein, & Markus, 2013). In this study, the prisoners and guards were not informed or kept accountable for their responsibilities in the study. Due to the harm, lack of consequences for inhumane behavior, and the eventual long term effects on all the participants, this experiment, and others like it, would never be allowed to be repeated.
Conclusion
The Stanford Prison Experiment conveyed oppression as well as the abuse of power, but also offered a glimpse of how members of low-status groups develop a shared identity. The participants involved scored greater on examines that measure aggressiveness, authoritarianism, and narcissism, than on those that measure empathy and altruism. Many psychologist