Stanford Prison Experiment Essay

When put into the position of complete authority over others people will show their true colors. I think that most people would like to think that they would be fair, ethical superiors. I know I would, but learning about the Stanford Prison Experiment has made me question what would really happen if I was there. Would I be the submissive prisoner, the sadistic guard, or would I stay true to myself? As Phillip Zimbardo gave the guards their whistles and billy clubs they drastically changed without even realizing it. In order to further understand the Stanford Prison experiment I learned how the experiment was conducted, thought about the ethical quality of this experiment, and why I think it panned out how it did.

Throughout both Marquez’s “One of These Days” and the Stanford Prison Experiment, there were a couple of similarities, as well as differences. In both stories, there was the theme of reality. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, were the prison guards taking the role too seriously as actors, or realistically doing so? Is there a really big difference between the middle/lower class, and government officials? These questions and others are ones to compare between the theme of reality in both of these stories.

I just sat there thinking about what to tell the news reporter since he had traveled all the way from Colorado to interview from the paper. He wasn’t the only reporter to come see me, and I’m not the only one he could ask these questions. I wasn’t the only one in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

2. The Concept The Stanford Prison Experiment was created as a way to investigate whether people would change to conform to roles assigned to them in a simulated environment. Dr Philip Zimbardo was interested to find out whether prison brutality was due to people having underlying sadistic tendencies or whether people’s personalities are altered by the prison environment itself (McLeod, 2008). This research concept was supported by the American Office of Naval Research (Haney, Banks & Zimbardo 1973)

The purpose of the Stanford Prison Experiment was to understand the effects that the norms in a prison environment have on those in it. To give an idea of the type of individuals selected for this experiment, the official website for the experiment mentions, “Our study of prison life began, then, with an average group of healthy, intelligent, middle-class males. Half were randomly assigned to be guards, the other to be prisoners”(prisonexp.org). The individuals were of the same social class in the same conditions of health and intelligence, therefore, they were very similar. This means that whatever resulted from the experiment, such as changes in behavior or health, was not caused by other than the conditions in the prison. The man who conducted

In the Stanford prison experiment, I believe that there are three reasons why the guards and prisoners behaved the way they did. The first reason is that the researchers provided them with costumes, that made the guards look superior and the prisoners look like prisoners. The guards wore khaki shirts and pants, they also had reflected sun glasses and had wooden sticks. The prisoners wore smocks, stocking caps and chains. The costumes that they wore made them feel, as though they really were guards and prisoners. The second reason is that the guards wore reflected sunglasses, that made it hard to see the prisoners’ eyes. The guards could not see the pain and suffering in the prisoners’ eyes and that made it easier for the guards to be inhumane.

Stanford Prison Experiment According to our text book, an experiment is a “carefully designed situation in which the researcher studies the impact of certain variables on a subjects’ attitude or behavior” (Kendall, 2012:55). An experiment can be tested by using a theory and research cycle. The theory and research cycle is a tool used to determine all aspects of social living. The cycle can be filtered into two different categories: a deductive or inductive science.

In my grade eleven year of english we studied Lord of the Flies, my teacher had pointed out the psychology behind the story and it sparked my interest in this area of study. He gave our class information about different experiments and studies relating to psychology. One experiment that I was very keen on investigating and looking into in more depth was the Stanford Prison Experiment. This experiment was done to prove that when someone is given power they tend to abuse it. This experiment was really interesting to read about, it was very intriguing to see how people could abuse power even though they were deemed “normal”. I was very interested in learning how the human brain works in this situation and what they thought during it. This led

I reviewed the YouTube Video titled Stanford Prison Experiment; this experiment was very daunting to me since I worked as a Correctional Officer for over 3 years at James T. Vaughn Correctional Center.

In “The Stanford Prison Experiment” by Philip G. Zimbardo, Zimbardo conducts an experiment to test the human ability to resist authority and the control of social pressures. In order to do this, Zimbardo sets up an experiment that tests the relationship between prisoners and guards within a prison and then relates his results to authoritative relationships in everyday lives outside of prisons. Zimbardo is showing how when humans in the real world are exposed to authoritative power like the guards in this situation, it consumes them as they will do whatever it takes to keep that power and remain in control. He also shows that when humans follow authority figures like the prisoners out of fear they are allowing themselves to become trapped in a metaphorical prison that will hold them back from having their own thoughts and actions until they are able to go against authority and break out of their “prison”. Throughout his article, Zimbardo implies that authoritative relationships trap all humans from forming their own thoughts and opinions, as well as give humans on the other side of the relationship an unhealthy amount of power that leads to out of character behavior. Zimbardo's implication leads us to see that not only are authoritative relationships bad but the same results that occurred inside the prison experiment can also happen in the outside world.

Conformity is when social pressure is indirect or direct, compliance is the behavior that comes with being socially pressured, obedience is when a person commands to other people.

The psychology wing at Stanford University has a stigma attached to it, of which every psychologist has learned at some point in their career. We all see prisons as an everyday thing: people do bad things, they get thrown in, they stay there for a length of time. However, in 1971, there were some at Stanford who believed there was something deeper to be studied there, so they took on the experiment that would unexpectedly propel their psychology program to infamy and change the lives of those who participated forever.

Not everything goes according to plan. At Stanford University, an experiment was conducted by a psychology professor, infamously known as the Stanford prison experiment. The research was based and held in a prison setting with 24 recruited individuals who were then appointed as either inmates or guards, the operation was planned for two-weeks as well as rules that were meant to be followed. What would be the fundamental purpose of experimenting with this, why did the head researcher want to conduct this experiment, how did the use affect the outcome?

Because my career path will ultimately lead me to a position in corrections, the video I choose is the Stanford Prison Experiment. In the summer of 1971 a Stanford Professor, Philip Zimbardo, set-up a simulation of a prison in the basement of the university. He solicited volunteers to be participants in his research into the psychological effects of perceived power. The US Office of Naval Research commissioned the research. The Navy was investigating the cause of difficulties between guards and prisoners in the Navy and Marine Corps setting. In forming his hypotheses, Zimbardo asked, “What happens when you put good people in an evil place, does evil triumph over humanity?” The basis of his hypotheses was that situational dynamics can promote deindividualization and dehumanization and lead to immoral acts. Specifically, his hypotheses stated, “inherent personality traits of prisoners and guards are the chief cause of abusive behavior in prison” (Zimbardo, 2017). Upon the conclusion of the Stanford Prison Experiment Zimbardo was unpleasantly surprised at the outcome and indicated his self-disdain for his lack of action to deter the evil that manifested from the experiment. Zimbrado identified a set of dynamic psychological processes that can induce good people to do evil, among them deindividuation, obedience to authority, passivity in the face of threats, self-justification, and rationalization (Zimbardo, Foley, & Tantor Media, 2011, p. 2).

During the Stanford prison experiment video I did notice a few similarities of a particular experience I had when I was in the Marines, that experience was just how putting on a certain uniform can alter the way a person. A uniform of authority can shift the way a person acts or even behaves oppose to not wearing a uniform of authority. when you’re not covering your identity with some article of clothing you hold an image that you want to try and protect and an image that is relatively consistent to your normal behavior, however when you shield that self-image and put let’s say a mask over which conceals your identity that can completely change everything about you including the way you conduct yourself.