Conformity to social roles eval

Question 1

Alternative explanation

Answer 1

Zimbardo argued that the participants in the Stanford prison study ‘naturally’ and easily conformed to their roles just because they were given them. He claimed that this inevitably led to brutal behaviour by the guards as they asserted the power of their roles over the powerlessness of the prisoners. Likewise, the prisoners inevitably became subdued and submissive, in conformity with their roles in the prison.

However, Reicher and Haslam (2006) pointed out that Zimbardo’s explanation does not account for the behaviour of most of the guards – two-thirds of them did not behave brutally (and one-third actively tried to support the prisoners). Social identity theory suggests that conformity to social roles does not necessarily come naturally and easily – it sometimes does not come at all. The two-thirds of guards did not actively identify with their roles as brutal prison guards.
Therefore, SIT is a better explanation – we can resist situational pressures to conform to a role as long as we do not identify with that role.

Question 2

Control

Answer 2

One strength of the SPE is that Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables.
The most obvious example of this was the selection of participants.
Emotionally-stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guard and prisoner. This was one way in which the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently, but were in those roles only by chance, then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself.
This degree of control over variables increased the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.

Question 3

Lack of realism

Answer 3

Ali Banuazizi and Siamak Movahedi (1975) argued the participants were merely play-acting rather than genuinely co forming to a role. Participants’ performances
were based on their stereotypes of tic prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from the film Cool Hand Luke. This would also explain why the prisoners rioted - they thought that was what real prisoners did.
This suggests that the findings of the SPE tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.

Question 4

Counterpoint However,

Answer 4

Counterpoint However, Mark McDermott (2019) argues that the participants did behave as if the prison was real to them. For example, 90% of the prisoners’ conversations were about prison life. Amongst themselves, they discussed how it was impossible to leave the SPE before their ‘sentences’ were over. ‘Prisoner 416’ later explained how he believed the prison was a real one, but run by psychologists rather than the government.
This suggests that the SPE did replicate the social roles of prisoners and guards in a real prison, giving the study a high degree of internal validity.

Question 5

Exaggerates the power of roles

Answer 5

Another limitation is that Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour (Fromm 1973).
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 (Zimbardo 2007). Most guards were able to resist situational pressures to conform to a brutal role.
This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors (e.g. personality).