Zimbardo Research Flashcards
When was The Stanford Prison study conducted?
1974 by Zimbardo et al
What is the aim of the Stanford Prison study?
To see whether people will conform to new social roles
What is procedure
- They recuited 24 male partipcants that are ‘emotionally stable’ students that are at the prestigious Stanford University in California
- They volunterred to take part and randomly allocated two groups of prisoners and guards
- Prisoners were to spend two weeksl in locked ‘cells’ in wing of university
- Prison guards were there to look after prisoners and keep them under control
PROCEDURE
How to increase realism of prisoners?
Prisoners were arrested in their home (unexpectedley) and delivered to ‘prison’ blindfolded, strip-searched,deloused and issued a uniform and a number
PROCEDURE
How to increase realism for the prison guards?
They were given uniform, including sticks and mirroed sunglasses. They worked shifts and went home at their end of their shift
What is the results of the study?
The experiment was called off after only 6 days
The gyards had become so brutal to the prisoners that two prisoners had some nervous breakdown, one developed a nervous rash over body and one went on hunger strike
While guards were giving orders, prisoners became apthetic
They did not stand up to guards and simply did as they told even though it caused distress
What is the conclusion of the Stanford Prison Study?
- One explanation for why the particpant’s reactions were so extreme is this study could be conformed to social roles. A role is a part you plau during your lofe
- Each role requires different behaviour - e.g new role/job change behaviour in suit
- Zimbardo study given students new role as prisoner or guard
- Simply conformed to behaviour of these roles
Conclusion
Deindividualiation
Deindvidualiation may also explain the behaviour of particpants especially the guards
This state when you become so immersed in norms of group that you lose your sense of identity and personal responsbility
Guards been so sadistic because they did not feel what happened was down to them personally - was a group norm
A strength:
Researchers had some control over variables
- Emotionally stable particpants were recuited and randomly assigned the roles of guard or prisoner
- Guard and prisoners had those roles only by chance, So their behaviour was due to the pressure of situation and not their personalities
- Control increases the study’s internal validity. We can be more confident in drawing conclusions about the influences of social roles on behaviour
Limitation:
Lack of realism
- Banuazizi and Mohavedi (1975) suggest particpants were play-acting. Their performances reflected sterityoes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave
- One guard based his role on a character from a film Cool Hand Luke. Prisoners rioted because they thought that is what real prisoners do
- But Zimbardo’s data showed 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life. The simulation seemed reak ti them, increasing study’s internal validity
Limitation:
Major ethical issues
- One issue arose because Zimbardo was both lead researcher and prisoner superintendent
- A student who wanted to leave spoke to Zimbardo who responsed as a superintendent worried about him running of his prison rather than a researcher
- Limited Zimbardo ability to protect this particpants from harm because of his superintendent role conflficted with his lead researcher role
Lacks research support and contradicted by subsequent research
- Reicher and Haslam (2006) partially replicated SPE with different findings. Prisoners eventually took control.
- Tajfel’s (1981) social identity theory explains this. Guards in replication failed to develop shared social identity as a group but prisoners did and refused to accept limits of assigned roles
- Brutality of the guards in original SPE due to shared social identity as a cohesive group rather than conformity to social roles
What is Zimbardo’s research?
Conformity into social roles
