Social Influence- Stanford Prison Experiment

Question 1

Social influence
Stanford prison exp
Procedure

Answer 1

Mock prison,basement psycology department,Stanford uni,male student volunteers,physically,psychologically screened, 24most stable,randomly assigned roles.loose smock,cap to cover hair,identified by N.o,Arrested in home,by police,guards wore wooden club handcuff ,shades,mirrored,

Question 2

Social ingluence stanford prison exp
Findings

Answer 2

Uniform =deindivination, loss identity,zimbardo=superintendent,guards abusive in few days,headcounts (at night also-stand in line call out number ) harrased prisoner =subdued ,angry,anxious.forgot just was study,ended after 6 days,not 14,

Question 3

Social influence stanford prison exp
Conclusion

Answer 3

Social roles have a high influence on individuals behaviour

Question 4

Social influence stangord prison exp
Low ecological

Answer 4

Do not reflect mundane life realism,cus it was 2 weeks long,lack abuse ,racism,participant could withdrawl,banuazizi(1975) ppl play acting,performance based on stereotypes of what they think prison life is,difficult to generalise

Question 5

Social influence stanford prison exp
Comterpoint to low eco

Answer 5

McDermott 2019
90% comvo on prison life,when prisoners talk to priest they introduced themselves as prison N.o,some asked priest for lawyer

Question 6

Social ingluence stanford prison exp
Ethics

Answer 6

Issues despite following Stanford uni commitee
Prisoners=physical /psychological harm,deception,not told about arrested at home,no informed,not BPS ethical guidlines,

Question 7

Social influence stangord prion exp
Counterpoint to ethics

Answer 7

Reflected mundane realism,nessacary deception,demand characteristics limited,valid

Question 8

Social influence
Stafford prison exp
Real life application

Answer 8

Abu Ghrab
Guards misuse of power in both events (ppl being dragged across floor with a rope)
Shows need for training,accountability to higher authority needed