Haney&Zimbardo: Stanford Prison Experiment (Imprisonment)

Question 1

Method?

Answer 1

Quasi experiment

Question 2

Sample?

Answer 2

• 24 male college students out of 70 applicants
• paid $15 a day
• randomly assigned either prisoner or guard
• (1 dropped out, 2 reserves) 10P+11G

Question 3

Roles?

Answer 3

• guards= worked in sets of 3, wore uniform+glasses

* prisoners= 3 to a room, given uniform+ID number

Question 4

Procedure?

Answer 4

• prisoners arrested at own home without warning+taken to police station
• prisoners fingerprinted, photographed+blindfolded
• ^de individualisation

Question 5

Findings?

Answer 5

• within hours they confirmed to roles: guards became sadistic+prisoners obeyed tasks
• 2nd day prisoners revolted by pushing beds against doors; guards reacted by fire extinguishing
• prisoner #8612 had to be released after 36 hours due to uncontrollable screaming (3 more pronounced unstable)
• stopped after 6 days as too unethical

Question 6

Conclusions?

Answer 6

People will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play, especially strongly stereotyped roles like guard and prisoner

Question 7

Strengths?

Answer 7

• use of artificial prison= more likely Hawthorne effect irl prisons
• ecological validity= prisoners felt imprisoned
• can observe development of behaviour

Question 8

Weaknesses?

Answer 8

• reductionist= “John Wayne” may have encouraged other guards as previously watched aggressive prison film
• researcher bias= Z encouraged tyranny
• ethnocentric+androcentric (California)
• low population validity= all white college students
• unethical

Question 9

Aim?

Answer 9

To investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard+prisoner in a role-playing exercise that stimulated prison life.