conformity zimbardos research

Question 1

procedure

Answer 1

a mock prison inte basement of stanford university
advertised for emotionally stable for participants , volunteer
randomly assigned role of guard or prisoner
prisoners were arrested from their homes by police
blindfolded stripped searched then given uniform and number

prisoners daily routine heavily regulated
16 rules they had to follow enforced by guards
names never used only number

guards had reflective sunglasses , wooden club , uniform and handcuffs

Question 2

findings

Answer 2

stopped after 6 days instead of 14 for the safety of prisoners
after 2 days prisoners rebelled against guards shouted swore etc
guards used divide and rule tactics
called random headcounts in the middle of the night
prison rebellion put down prisoners became subdued and depressed
3 prisoners left by day 4 due to psychological disturbance

Question 3

conclusion

Answer 3

guards prisoners and researchers all conformed to their role
situation = influence behaviour

Question 4

control
strength

Answer 4

zimbardo controlled the selection of participants , the individuals were randomly assigned to their roles , the way the guards behaved as it was only chance of them getting that role must be solely down to the pressures of the situation
overall increasing the internal validty of the study , more confidence in conclusions

Question 5

lack of realism
weakness

Answer 5

banuazizi and mohavedi 1975
argued that participants were play acting rather than geunley conforming , performance was based on stereotypes . a guard claimed he based his role of “cool hand Luke”

zimbardo counters this as quantitate data collected during the experiment showed that 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life .
prisoner 416 believed it was a prison ran by physcologists not the government

Question 6

dispositional influences
weakness

Answer 6

fromm 1973
accused zimbardo of exaggerating the power of the situation to influence behaviour and minimising the role of personality/dispositional factors
eg . only a minority not guards behaved in a brutal manner , a third were keen on applying the rules fair and the rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners offering them ciggerattes etc.
zimabrdos conclusion over exxagerrates conformity to social role and dispositional factors have a role

Question 7

lack of research support
weakness

Answer 7

reicher and haslams 2006
partial replication of the Stanford prison experiment was broadcast on bbc tv . their finish were different to those of zimabrdo , them prisoners eventually took control of the prison and subject the guards to harassment and disobedience .
used the social identity theory 1981 to explain the outcome , arguing he guards failed to develop a shared social identity as a cohesive group but the prisoners did .
refused as a groupnto accept the role of prisoners

Question 8

abu ghraib
strength

Answer 8

2003-4 usa military police personnel committed serious human right violations abasing Iraq prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad . the prisoners were tortured physically and sexually abused routinely humiliated and some were murdered . zimbardo noticed some remarkable similarities between the behaviour of the personnel at Abu Ghraib and the guards in the Stanford pardon study