1. SOCIAL INFLUENCE (Conformity to social roles as investigated by Zimbardo) Flashcards
What are social roles?
Social roles are the ‘parts’ people play as members of different social groups, such as parent, child, or nurse. These roles come with expectations of appropriate behaviour, and conforming to them is often influenced by how individuals perceive the role.
How do social roles affect behaviour?
Social roles can change behaviour because individuals identify with their roles and act according to the expectations associated with those roles. Conformity to social roles involves both public and private acceptance of the behaviours and attitudes associated with the role.
What is de-individuation?
De-individuation is a state where individuals experience lower self-awareness and a weaker sense of personal responsibility, often caused by anonymity (e.g., wearing uniforms), which can lead to higher conformity to social roles.
What was the aim of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment?
The aim was to investigate how people would conform to the roles of guards and prisoners in a simulated prison environment.
Describe the method of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment.
Zimbardo set up a mock prison and randomly assigned 24 male volunteers to the roles of guards or prisoners. Participants were given uniforms and instructed to conform to their roles. The study was conducted in a controlled, overt observational manner.
How did Zimbardo use uniforms in the experiment?
Prisoners were given smocks and caps with numbers, while guards wore uniforms with mirrored sunglasses and carried clubs. This de-individuated the participants, making them more likely to conform to their social roles.
What were the key results of Zimbardo’s experiment?
The guards became increasingly abusive, using harassment and punishments. The prisoners became submissive, some even going on hunger strikes. The experiment ended early after six days, as the behaviours became extreme.
What conclusions can be drawn from Zimbardo’s experiment?
Social roles have a strong influence on behaviour. Participants easily adopted their roles, and even external observers (e.g., the ‘prison chaplain’) behaved as if the setting was a real prison.
What is a strength of Zimbardo’s study?
One strength is its high control over key variables, such as the random assignment of participants, which reduced individual differences and increased the internal validity of the study.
What is a limitation of Zimbardo’s study in terms of ecological validity?
Zimbardo’s study has low ecological validity because the simulated prison environment did not fully reflect real prison life. Some argue that participants were simply acting based on stereotypes of guards and prisoners.
How does McDermott (2019) support the realism of Zimbardo’s study?
McDermott argues that the participants behaved as if the prison was real. For example, 90% of private conversations were about prison life, and prisoners even referred to themselves by their numbers instead of names.
What is a limitation related to population validity in Zimbardo’s study?
The study had low population validity as it only involved male students from the U.S., meaning the results may not apply to females or people from different cultural or social backgrounds.
What are the ethical issues in Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment?
Ethical issues include lack of informed consent (as prisoners were unaware of being arrested) and protection of participants (with some experiencing significant psychological stress). These issues conflict with modern ethical guidelines for psychological research.
How did Zimbardo justify some ethical issues in the study?
Zimbardo argued that some stress was necessary to replicate a real prison environment and that deception was needed to ensure natural behaviour and avoid demand characteristics.
What did Haslam and Reicher (2012) argue about Zimbardo’s conclusions?
They argued that guards did not automatically conform to their roles. Some acted kindly or tried to help the prisoners, suggesting that behaviour was influenced by identification with the role rather than blind conformity.
