Conformity to social roles

Question 1

The Stanford Prison Experiment - procedure

Answer 1

took place in a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University. 21 male undergrad volunteers who all went through thorough physical and psychological assessments were randomly assigned to role of prisoner or guard.

Encouraged to conform to social roles through uniform and instructions about behaviour.
Uniforms- Prisoners wore loose smock and referred to by number. Guards wore uniform and had mirror shades. All done to create loss of personal identity (deindividuation) so more likely to conform to perceived social role.

Question 2

The Stanford Prison Experiment - findings

Answer 2

Guards took role with enthusiasm and after 2 days rebellion from prisoners occurred. guards tried to control it by solitary confinement, making prisoners clean toilets with bare hands. Prisoners began to think it was real and they would never leave. Ended on day 6 instead of day 14 as got too out of hand.

Question 3

The Stanford Prison Experiment - conclusion

Answer 3

We conform to a role given to us. Due to situational explanation and shows people become evil due to role they are given in life.

Question 4

Evaluation of Stanford Prison Experiment (brief)

Answer 4

weakness - unethical, however couldn’t of predicted it
strength - control over key variables
weakness - exaggerated power of social roles

Question 5

strengths of Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 5

Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables. Emotionally stable participants were selected and randomly assigned to role of prisoner or guard. This was one way the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of these findings. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently, then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. This degree of control over the variables increased the internal validity of the study. Therefore we can be more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.

Question 6

weaknesses of Stanford Prison Experiment

Answer 6

People have criticised Zimbardo’s study due to the ethics of the experiment. Many of the participants experienced physical and psychological harm, for example the prisoners were shackled. They also did not have the right to withdraw from the study available and did not have 100% informed consent before entering the study. All of which is unethical. However, Zimbardo could not predict any of the horrific things the guards were going to do and he finished the study early to protect participants from further harm.

Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour. For example, only one third of the guards actually behaved in a brutal manner. Another third tried to apply the rules fairly. The rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners. They sympathised, offered cigarettes and reinstated privileges. Most guards were able to resist situational pressures to conform to a brutal role. Therefore, this suggests Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors (e.g. personality).