Social Influences : Conformity to Social Roles

Question 1

What was the aim Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study? ( an example of identification )

Answer 1

• To test the dispositional versus the situational hypothesis. Are prison guards violent because they have violent personalities, or do their roles make them behave that way?
• To test the extent to which participants would adopt the role of prisoner or guard, even though the roles were determined randomly

Question 2

What is the procedure of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison?

Answer 2

• The study used a sample of 21 male student volunteers who were all rated as being psychologically stable
• Participants were randomly assigned to the role of either prisoner or guard. Zimbardo played the role of prison superintendent
• The study took place in the basement of Stanford University, which was converted into a mock prison. To add to the realism of the study, the prisoners were arrested at their homes by the local police, taken to the ‘prison’, stripped and deloused. They were dehumanised by wearing a loose fitting smock, a nylon stocking cap (to emulate a shaven head) and were referred to by number rather than name. Guards were deindividuated by wearing a uniform, reflective sunglasses and being referred to only as ‘Mr. Correctional Officer’
• The guards were told to keep the prisoners in line, but other than that, no specific instructions were given about how each group should behave. No physical violence was allowed. The study was scheduled to last for two weeks

Question 3

What is the findings of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison?

Answer 3

• Within a day the prisoners had rebelled and ripped off their numbers. The guards responded by locking them in their cells and taking away their blankets
• As the study progressed, the guards became increasingly sadistic. Prisoners were humiliated, deprived of sleep, made to carry out demeaning tasks (such as cleaning the toilets with their bare hands).
• The prisoners became depressed and submissive. Some showed signs of serious stress. One prisoner was released after 36 hours due to fits of crying and rage. Three more were released with similar symptoms during the next few days.
• The study was called to a halt after six days due to the unforeseen effects on the prisoners

Question 4

What is the conclusion of Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison?

Answer 4

• The study supports the situational hypothesis, rather than the dispositional hypothesis. This is because participants adopted the behaviour associated with the role they were assigned, even though those roles were randomly determined, and no psychological abnormality was found to be present in the participants before the study began
• Conforming to social roles leads people to behave differently to how they normally would

Question 5

1 Evaluation of Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles

Answer 5

P: Zimbardo’s research does not fully support the situational hypothesis
E: This is because it fails to explain why not all of the guards behaved equally aggressively towards the prisoners.
E: Some were reluctant to exercise their authority, whereas one guard in particular was seen as the ringleader. This suggests that individual differences play a part in the way someone responds to role expectations.
L: Therefore Zimbardo’s assertion that situations cause people to behaviour in a particular way cannot be regarded as a stand-alone explanation without taking into account additional contributory factors such as biological predisposition to aggression or past experience, which combined with the situation may trigger the aggressive behaviour

Question 6

2 Evaluation of Zimbardo’s research into conformity to social roles

Answer 6

• The research lacks reliability as others have failed to replicate Zimbardo’s original findings. Reicher & Haslam replicated Zimbardo’s study in 2002, and this replication was broadcast by the BBC. The findings were very different to Zimbardo’s.
• The guards were unwilling to impose authority over the prisoners, who rapidly took charge of the prison. Following the breakdown of authority in the prison, both groups attempted to establish a fair and equal social system. When this failed, a small group of prisoners took control and the study was called off. This could suggest that Zimbardo’s findings may have been a ‘one off’, and caused by flaws in the methodology of the original study.
• It could also suggest that Zimbardo’s study
  lacks temporal validity and that people are now less likely to conform to the demands of a role if it leads to a negative outcome for others. It may also be that social roles are less rigidly defined now than they were in the past.