Conformity to social roles

Question 1

What are social roles?

Answer 1

• the ‘parts’ people play in various social groups
• expectations of what we and others think is acceptable behaviour for these social roles

Question 2

Zimbardos research

Answer 2

• 1970
• wanted to know why prison guards behaved brutally
• sadistic personality or social roles

Question 3

The stanford prison experiment (SPE) (1973): basics

Answer 3

• set up mock prison in basement of psychology department of stanford university
• found 21 men who were ‘emotionally stable’
• randomly assigned prisoner or guard
• encouraged to conform to their social roles

Question 4

The stanford prison experiment (SPE): uniform

Answer 4

• prisoners were given a loose mock and cap to cover their hair
• identifiable by their numbers
• guards had a wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades
• created loss of individual identity (deindividuation) more likely to conform

Question 5

The stanford prison experiment (SPE): instructions about behaviour

Answer 5

• encouraged to identify by several procedures
• rather than leaving the study early pp could ‘apply for parole’
• guards were reminded that they had complete control over prisoners

Question 6

Findings related to social roles: guards

Answer 6

• took up roles with enthusiasm, treating prisoners harshly
• 2 days= prisoners rebelled: shouted and swore at guards and ripped their uniforms
• used ‘divide and rule tactics’ against the prisoners
• harassed them and reminded them they were powerless
• identified more closely with their social roles
• looked to enjoy it

Question 7

conclusions related to social roles

Answer 7

• social roles have strong influence over conformity
• guards= brutal, prisoners= submissive
• roles easily taken on by all pp
• volunteers who were there to play certain functions started acting as if they were in a prison rather than study

Question 8

Findings related to social roles: prisoners

Answer 8

• when rebellion finished prisoners= subdued depressed and anxious
• one released because showed symptoms of psychological disturbance
• 2+ released on 4th day
• 1 went on hunger strike, force fed him and punished him by putting him in the ‘hole’
• ended study in 6 days rather than 14

Question 9

Evaluation strength: control

Answer 9

• control over key variables
• selecting emotionally stable pp= ruled out individual personality differences
• this increased the internal validity of the study
• more confident drawing conclusions

Question 10

Evaluation limitation: Lack of realism

Answer 10

• Banuazizi and Movahedi argued pp were play acting
• performances were based off stereotypes of the social roles
• one of the guard claimed he based his roles off Cool Hand Luke
• explain why prisoners rioted

Question 11

Evaluation COUNTER: Lack of Realism

Answer 11

• McDermott argues they did act as if the prison was real to them
• 90% of pp convos were on prison life
• talked about how it was impossible to leave until their sentences were over
• ‘prisoner 416’ said they thought prison was a real one ran by psychologists rather than the gov
• SPE did replicate the roles which gave the study a high degree of internal validity

Question 12

Evaluation limitation: Exaggerates the power of the roles

Answer 12

• 1/3 of guards acc performed in a brutal manner
• 1/3 tried apply the rules fairly
• the rest tried to help and support the prisoners
  -most guards able to resist social pressures to conform to a brutal roles
• overstated pp conforming to social roles, minimized influence of individual factors