Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Study

Question 1

Zimbardo A03: Ethical concerns

Answer 1

• criticised not accurately assessing potential impact on his participants, failing to call halt to procedure. Became clear that some taking part were experiencing psychological harm.
• due to Zimbardo taking on role of
  prison superintendent, X creating
  enough distance from the procedure to be able to maintain professionalism in his role as psychologist.
• Zimbardo failed in his duty to protect
  the welfare of his participants.

Question 2

Zimbardo A03: Lack of reliability

Answer 2

• failed to replicate Zimbardo’s original findings.
• Reicher & Haslam replicated Zimbardo’s study. The findings were very different to Zimbardo’s.
• guards unwilling to impose authority over the prisoners ( rapidly took charge of the prison).
• breakdown of authority in prison, both groups attempted to establish a fair/equal social system
• small group of prisoners took control and the study was called off.
• suggest that Zimbardo’s findings may have been a ‘one off’, caused by flaws in the methodology
• suggest that Zimbardo’s study
  lacks temporal validity = social roles are less rigidly defined now than they were in the past.

Question 3

Zimbardo A03: Not fully support situational hypothesis (aim).

Answer 3

• fails to explain why not all of guards behaved equally aggressively towards the prisoners.
• Some reluctant to exercise their authority, where one guard was seen as the ringleader.
• suggests individual differences play a part in the way someone responds to role expectations.
  -Zimbardo’s assertion that situations cause people to behaviour in a particular way
• can’t be regarded as a stand-alone explanation w/out taking into account + contributory factors
  -biological predisposition may trigger the aggressive behaviour