The final component that led to the disaster of the Stanford experiment was the situation. In the end of Zimbardo’s experiment “the situation won; humanity lost.” (revisiting the Stanford prison experiment) No matter what your upbringings were it seems that all the volunteers responded to the power they were given. As the prisoners rebelled the guards found punishments they felt were suitable.…
The experiments brought a form of awareness and could have been the first steps towards change” (61). It brought many human beings into realization. Were they really considered defiant or obedient; how would we really know? Obedience is the smarter way to go about life especially when being a part of such a brain powering…
However, this is a largely simplistic view of the results of the experiments. The participants did not simply obey the person of authority named the experimenter. As demonstrated in the extensive video footage of the experiments, many of them exhibited great distress and tension, attempted to refuse participation, and tried to reason with the experimenter (Milgram, 1962). While it can be argued that a reasonable person could simply exit the room to leave or to check on the other participant receiving the shocks, the situation prevented this action, not physically, but psychologically. In turn, it may be argued that rather than obedience to orders, the participants of this study succumbed to incessant…
Then I would fight back and lead the prisoners to the warden’s/superintendent’s office where we would then ask for a change of how the prison was being carried out. This again is because of the balance, if one respects the guards they will respect you and leave you alone most of the time. However, if there was a sadist in the group then the balance is upset and it si time for an uprising. If the experiment was made to measure just the psychological effects of becoming a guard or a prisoner, I would say the experiment was relatively successful. However, we never really get to see for sure if things would’ve stayed this way in the long run, or if things would change throughout a guard’s or prisoner’s…
How does having power corrupt people? Having power can corrupt people in manys, such as what happen in The Well by Ira Sher and what happen in The Stanford Prison Experiment by Saul McLeod. In the article The Stanford Prison Experiment, Philip Zimbardo had constructed an experiment to confirm what might cause a guard to have brutality against a prisoner and that’s just what Zimbardo had done. In the article it says, “Within hours of beginning the experiment some guards began to harass prisoners”.…
In 1971, an experiment took place in Stanford, California. It was named the Stanford Prison Experiment, lasting what was meant to be two weeks, but due to the brutality of the trial, lasted a mere 6 days. Its purpose was to conduct a study on humanity and show just how evil a human can get when given a position of power. To summarize the experiment, a random 18 men were chosen, all innocent, good people who’d never committed a crime. They were divided into two groups erratically: 9 being “prisoners” and 9 being “guards.”…
Verbal aggression fights, and suicides might have occurred if the experiment had continued for more than two days. Some of the students have turned into a small version of the Ku-Klux, Klan. The students at the end might be two gangs; the blue-eyed gang and the brown eyed gang, trying to destroy each other. Parents might have actively joined the fight and the community, might have ended completely shattered. Minorities might be isolated themselves or moved to a different community.…
Psychologist Stanley Milgram of Yale University is best recognized for his famous studies of obedience within psychology. Milgram formulated an experiment in which he studied the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. Milgram went on to examine justifications for acts of genocide for those who were accused at the World War II criminal trials. Those who were accused, based a defense solely off of obedience. They claimed they were just following orders from their superior leaders.…
What is the source or cause of evil in human behavior? It is the way one was raised/taught. A person cannot do evil if he doesn’t know what evil is. Good people can do bad things, depending on the environment they are in. An outside force is the cause of evil.…
Participants in the experiment were not aware of the true nature of the study. Participants were told that the study was based upon punishment in relation to learning, and not obedience in relation to an authority figure. According to the Video, Stanley Milgram deceived participants of the true objectives of the study with the goal of minimizing their bias in the experiment (Video). Stanley Milgram deceiving the participants can be completely justified. He knew that the study would turn out to be successful if the subjects knew less about the true intentions of the experiment.…
They wore a uniform that would give anyone the impression that it was not a good idea to cause trouble. Once the experiment began, they were given very little instruction as to what they should be doing, or how they should react towards the inmates. Their only rule was that there was to be no physical punishment. At first, everything was calm, almost too calm. Too calm in fact that the head of the project, Phil Zimbardo, was beginning to become frustrated with the calmed nature of the situation.…
Zimbardo on this experiment were indecisive on how they think the experiment should but ran. They obviously thought Dr. Zimbardo’s methods were becoming excessive yet they were hesitant to say so out of fear of challenging Zimbardo’s authority. The sociocultural perspective of this situation was that they refused to overstep their boundaries due to the societal understandings that we have towards authoritative figures. It is seen as a sign of disrespect in our society, especially during that time period, to challenge those who have power: parents, teachers, bosses, officers, etc. Virtually anyone who is seen to hold some level of authority over us.…
The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil is written by Philip Zimbardo, Ph.D and published in 2007. He is professionally known as a psychologist and a professor at Stanford University as well as the founder and president of the Heroic Imagination Project. He graduated summa cum laude from Brooklyn College with a triple major in psychology, sociology, and anthropology in 1954. Then he attended Yale University where he received his Master’s degree and Doctorate in psychology. He is married to Christina Maslach, who is most responsible for voicing her opposition to the Stanford Prison Experiment after she saw what was occurring in it.…
The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted in 1971 by researcher, Philip Zimbardo is one of the most eye-opening social studies done to this day. It’s purpose was to find out more about how the social principles of obedience and conformity can affect the behavior of a normal human being. Zimbardo wanted to discover how social customs and hierarchy affect the roles people play, in a prison setting (Lurgio, 2015, p.1866). Though their purpose seems praiseworthy, the experiment itself was not. It was filled with ethical violations and in just 6 days, spun out of control (Lurgio, 2015, p.1866).…
This experiment went wrong and led to mental problems. These problems became so extreme that the experiment was discontinued after 6 days instead of 2 weeks. The Stanford Prison Experiment called into question the idea of Good vs Evil. The experiment showed how situational journey can cause an individual to “compromise” their beliefs. This change in behavior lead to psychological conflict among the “guards” and “prisoners.”…