Conformity to social roles- Zimbardo

Question 1

The Stanford Prison Experiment

AMRC

Answer 1

• Zimbardo (1973) set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department in Stanford Uni
• Selected 21 ‘emotionally stable’ male student volunteers who were randomly assigned to the role of prisoner or guard
• Prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to their social roles both through the uniforms they were given and instructions about their behaviour
• uniforms:
  1. Prisoners were given a loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair, indentified by number not name
  2. guards- had their own uniform reflecting their status with wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades
  3. Uniforms created loss of personal indentity
• Instructions about their behaviour:
  1. The prisoners were further encourgaed to identofy with their role for example having to apply for parole instead of leaving the study early
  2. the guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners

Question 2

Findings related to social roles

Answer 2

• Guards took up their rokes with enthusiasm, treating the prisoners harshly.
• Within 2 days, the prisoners rebelled- ripped their uniforms, shouted and swore at the guards
• Guards harassed the prisoners constantly to remind them of the lack of power they had- e.g. conducting frequent headcounts at night and created opportunities to reinforce ytheir power using punishment
• After the rebellion was put down, the prisoners became depressed and anxious- one was released because he showes symptoms of psychologicl disturbance
• 2 more prisoners released on the fourth day, one went on hunger strike who was force fed and then put in the hole (a dark closet)
• experiment was stopped after 6 days

Question 3

Conclusions relating to social roles

Answer 3

• social roles appear to have a strong influence on an individuals behaviour- guards became brutal and prisoners became submissive
• such roles were very easily taken on by all participants even volunteers

Question 4

control

strength

Answer 4

• control over key variables e.g. selection of participants
• Emotionally stable indviduals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guards and prisoners
• one way in which the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings
• increases the internal validity of the study, we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions from the study

Question 5

lack of realism

limitation

Answer 5

• Did not have the realism of a true prison
• Participants were merely play acting rather than genuinely conforming to a role
• Participants performances were based on stereotypes on how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave
• e.g. one guard based his brutality off a guard from the film cool hand luke
• findings tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons

Question 6

Exagerates the power of roles

limitation

Answer 6

• Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour
• 1/3 of the guards only behaved brutally, another thirs tried to apply the rules fairly and the rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners
• sympathised, offered cigarettes and reinstated priveleges (zimbardo 2007)- most guards were able to resist situational pressures
• suggests Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors e.g. personality