Conformity To Social Roles (Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment Flashcards
Aim of Zimbardo’s study
To investigate how easily people conform to social roles, particularly the roles of guard and prisoner, in a simulated prison environment.
Procedure of Zimbardo’s experiment
-Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University and recruited 21 emotionally stable male volunteers, who were randomly assigned to the role of either guard or prisoner. -Prisoners were arrested at home by real police, taken to the mock prison, and given uniforms, numbers instead of names, and were subjected to strict routines.
-Guards were given uniforms, sunglasses to prevent eye contact, and batons, and were told to maintain order without using physical violence.
- The experiment was designed to run for two weeks, but was stopped after six days due to the extreme and harmful behaviour that quickly developed as participants conformed to their assigned social roles.
Findings of Zimbardo’s study
-The participants quickly adopted their roles.
-Guards became increasingly abusive, using psychological tactics, punishments, and humiliation.
-Prisoners became passive, anxious, and depressed.
- A rebellion broke out on the second day but was quickly crushed, and the guards’ behaviour became even more brutal. (E.G Harassed prisoners- reminder of their powerless role and used fire extinguishers)
-3 prisoners had to be released early due to emotional distress.
-One prisoner went on hunger strike-the guards attempted to force feed him and punished him by putting him in ‘the hole’ ( a tiny dark closet)
-The study, intended to last two weeks, was ended after just six days due to the extreme psychological effects and ethical concerns.
Conclusion of Zimbardo’s experiment
-Zimbardo concluded that people conform readily to social roles, especially when those roles are strongly stereotyped and supported by a realistic setting.
-The behaviour observed in the study suggested that situational factors — such as the environment and assigned roles — had a powerful influence on behaviour, often overriding personal morals or personality.
-The findings demonstrated how ordinary people can behave in cruel or submissive ways when placed in a structured, authoritative system.
Evaluation of Zimbardo’s study
-Real world Applications (E.G Abu Gharib Prison)
-High internal validity
-Ethical issues
-Lacks realism
-Lack generalisability
Why does Zimbardo’s experiment have a high internal validity
The study was highly controlled:
-Participants were randomly assigned to the role of either prisoner or prison guard- reduces the influence of individual personal differences on the results.
-The participants were screened beforehand and only those deemed emotionally stable were selected, which helped to control for individual personality differences.
-This means that the differences in behaviour between the two groups are more likely to have been caused by the social roles and the simulated prison environment, rather than by pre-existing traits. As a result, the study provides strong evidence that situational factors, rather than individual personality, can have a powerful influence on behaviour.
What real world relevance does Zimbardo’s study have
-The study has been used to help explain real-life events such as the abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison during the Iraq War.
-In this situation, ordinary individuals committed extreme and abusive acts, which can be better understood through Zimbardo’s findings about the power of situational factors and assigned social roles.
-This supports the idea that people may conform to brutal behaviour not because they are inherently cruel, but because the environment and role expectations strongly influence their actions.
Why was Zimbardo’s study unethical
-Participants experienced significant psychological harm, with some showing signs of extreme stress and emotional distress during the study. E.G one prisoner went on a hunger strike and 3 were released early due to the harm they were subjected to.
-Lack of fully informed consent, as participants were told the study was about the psychological effects of prison life, but they were not made fully aware of the potential distress involved.
-Right to withdraw was not clearly communicated or supported, with some participants feeling they could not leave the study even when they wanted to.
-This shows that the study did not have the correct measures in place to protect it from ethical issues, compromising its credibility.
Ethical issues in the study
-Protection from harm
-Informed consent
-Right to Withdraw
However, what was done to solve some ethics issues (counter point of limitation)
-However, the study was approved and participants were debriefed after.
Why does the SPE have issues with its generalisability (populational validity)
-The sample was made up of 21 American male college students, most of whom were white and from middle-class backgrounds.
-This makes it difficult to generalise the findings to other groups, such as women, individuals from different age groups, or those from diverse cultural or socio-economic backgrounds.
-As a result, the behaviours observed in the study may not reflect how people from other populations would respond in similar situations, which limits the overall applicability of the findings.
Why does the study lack realism (eternal validity)
-Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975), argued that participants were not responding to the actual power of the situation, but rather were simply acting in ways they thought were expected of them based on stereotypes of prison roles.
-This suggests that the participants may have exaggerated their behaviour to fit the roles of guards and prisoners, rather than behaving naturally.
-As a result, the study’s ecological validity is questioned, as the behaviour observed may not reflect how individuals would act in a real prison environment.
