3. What did we learn from the Stanford Prison Experiment? Include issues of ethics and methodology? Can the findings be generalised beyond this experiment? Background + Introduction: What was the Stanford Prison experiment, give details as to what the experiment was: The Stanford Prison Experiment was conceived by Phillip Zimbardo with the aim of the Experiment being to observe and analyse the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or a prison guard. The experiment was funded by the United States Office of Naval Research who wanted to study anti-social behaviour (SPE website) 24 individuals were chosen for the experiment, all of them college age males. The individuals were assigned the role of prisoner or guard at random. With the aid …show more content…
However, the Stanford Prison Experiment, along with Milgram’s Conformity Experiment forced a change in the ethical procedures of the American Psychology Association. These changes included experiments having to be approved by an ethics board appointed by the APA. Ethical issues: Those involved in the experiment did not know the full extent of what the experiment entailed. None of the “prisoners” consented to being arrested at …show more content…
Zimbardo confessed that this dual role was detrimental to the experiment and subjected him to the conformity effect that Could the results of the experiment be applied meaningfully outside of the experiment? BBC prison experiment. The BBC prison experiment was conducted in response to Zimbardo’s experiment and set out to examine the consequences of dividing men into groups of prisoners and guards (BBCPrisonStudy.org.) The BBC experiment’s results were contrary to those of Zimbardo’s experiment. Zimbardo’s experiment believed that people would conform to an idea of what a group should be while in the BBC determined that a person’s willingness to adhere to a role when they make the role part of their social identity. The ability to reconcile a role with one’s social identity is determined by different factors. (BBCPrison Study.org) For the guards in this study, they were reluctant to identify with their roles as guards due to accountability. There was the possibility that they would face negative repercussions from their peers and from individuals outside the experiment if they adhered to their roles. (BBCPrisonStudy.org
The Milgram Experiment violates three of the five principles outlined in the Five General Principles of Ethics. Milgram wanted to see if there was a connection between “the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience” (McLeod, 2007). Milgram’s hypothesis that he based his experiment on was “How the German people could permit the extermination of the Jews?” (Dan Chalenor, 2012). The first one that Milgram’s experiment violated was “Principle A: Beneficence and Nonmaleficence” which is where “psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm” (Ethical principles, 2013, p. 3, para. 3). The second principle that was violated was “Principle B: Fidelity and Responsibility” which is where
The experimental study that I chose to write about is the Stanford Prison Experiment, which was run by Phillip Zimbardo. More than seventy applicants answered an ad looking for volunteers to participate in a study that tested the physiological effects of prison life. The volunteers were all given interviews and personality tests. The study was left with twenty-four male college students. For the experiment, eighteen volunteers took part, with the other volunteers being on call. The volunteers were then divided into two groups, guards and prisoners, randomly assigned by coin flips. The experiment began on August 14th, 1971 in the basement of Stanford’s psychology building. To create the prison cells for the prisoners, the doors were taken
Interestingly enough, participants became so taken into the ordeal that they seem to forget who they were and that they were involved in an experiment as prisoner participants had internalized their roles. This is based on the fact that some had stated that they would accept parole even under the condition of giving up all of their participation pay. However, when their parole applications were denied, none of
Stanford Prison Experiment: In this experiment it took a group of people and made half of them guards and half of them prisoners. The guards were given sunglasses to make them feel more powerful and have a mask to hide behind and the prisoners had chains put on their legs so they can feel a loss of freedom. In the experiment they were not given any rules to how there supposed to treat the prisoners, because these were fake prisoners they challenged the fake guards power. Since the guard’s were not given
In 1971, psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues created the experiment known as the Stanford Prison Experiment. Zimbardo wanted to investigate further into human behavior, so he created this experiment that looked at the impact of taking the role of a prisoner or prison guard. These researchers examined how the participants would react when placed in an institutionalized prison environment. They set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University’s psychology building. Twenty four undergraduate students were selected to play the roles of both prisoners and guards. These students were chosen because they were emotional, physically, and mentally stable. Though the experiment was expected to last two weeks, it only lasted six days after the researchers and participants became aware of the harm that was being done.
The year was 1971 and no one was ready for the results that the study, known as the Stanford Prison Experiment would conduct (Whitbourne). A test subject’s fate was determined by the flip of a coin, twelve prison guards and twelve prisoners (Zimbardo). Now that Zimbardo knew he had test subjects, he assembled a team to begin construction of the “Stanford County Jail.” With the help of a former imprisoned convict, the prison was built to be as realistic as possible. Zimbardo said, “The Prison was constructed by boarding up each end of a corridor in the basement of Stanford’s psychology department building (Zimbardo). That corridor was the ‘yard’ and was the only outside place where prisoners would
The Stanford prison experiment was unique because they wanted to watch and learn the behaviors of a prisoner and a prison guard, observing the effects they found some pretty disturbing things among the students. Dr. Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues at Stanford University stayed true to what they believed, and they did what they felt they needed to do to find a set of results for their simulation. Unfortunately they where swallowed into the experiment, when they became the roles, just as the students where. So from their point of view I want to say that what they where doing was ethical, and being that the prison experiment was stopped before its half way mark showed that they realized that it was time to call it quits. Dr. Zimbardo noticed
As dozens of participants seen and experience some of the abuse and its effects and said nothing as Zimbardo stated (Zimbardo, p. 130). If one of his colleagues hadn’t been dropped by and saw what was happening the experiment would have continued and many people would have lost their mind (Zimbardo, p. 131). The experiments consist of 24 participants, the volunteers were randomly delegated to play the role of prisoner or guard in a setting made to take a sense of the psychology of imprisonment. Zimbardo infused dramatic realism in the study. The “prisoners” were given identity numbers, stripped naked and saturated. While the guards had to wear that looks similar to a prison guard. (Zimbardo, p. 129). Ethics committees at universities have put an end to these types of an experiment for the reason of potential danger to participants (Zimbardo, p.
The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted by a research group led by Dr. Philip Zimbardo using Stanford students during August 14 through the 20th of 1971. Dr. Zimbardo wanted to see how people reacted when they are either put in captivity or in charge of others. The study was funded by the US Office of Naval Research and grew interest to both the US Navy and the Marine Corps for an investigation to the purpose of conflict among military guards and prisoners. In the study, 24 male students were selected out of 75 applicants to take on randomly assigned roles. One of the surprises of the study was how participants quickly adapted to roles well beyond expectations. After the first eight hours, the experiment turned to be a joke and nobody was taking it seriously but then prisoners
The reporter stated Ms. Rich’s urine tested positive for Opiates and marijuana at the delivery of her baby girl; it’s unknown if the child tested positive but the meconium test are pending. The reporter stated Ms. Rich did not receive any prenatal care but told administration she received care in Galveston, TX. Ms. Rich told the reporter the doctor passed and she’s unable to get records of the prenatal care. The reporter stated the child did not have any complications or side effects during delivery. When confronted with the positive test, Ms. Rich denied using marijuana but that she was around people smoking it. Ms. Rich also admitted taking Lora tab and another unknown drug for pain that was not prescribed to her.
In 1971 Philip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) in the basement of Stanford University as a mock prison. Zimbardo’s aim was to examine the effect of roles, to see what happens when you put good people in an evil place and to see how this effects tyranny. He needed participants to be either ‘prisoners’ or ‘guards’ and recruited them through an advertisement, 75 male college students responded and 24 healthy males were chosen and were randomly allocated roles. Zimbardo wanted to encourage deindividuation by giving participants different uniforms and different living conditions (the guards had luxuries and the prisoners were living as real prisoners). The guards quickly began acting authoritarian, being aggressive towards the prisoners and giving them punishments causing physical and emotional breakdowns. Zimbardo’s intention was for his study to last for 2 weeks, however, it
This report on the Stanford Prison Experiment will define the ethical issues related to prisoner treatment and prison culture in a mock scenario created 1971. The findings of this study define the inclination towards corruption and riotous behavior within the overarching relationship between guard and the prisoners. In a short period of time,. The prisoners became hostile and sought to start a riot in order to free themselves from abuses of the prison guards. In some instances, the issue of role-playing limited to reality of the event, but the ethical issues related to issue of prison corruption became evident in the study. The Stanford Prison Experiment provided some important aspects on how good people can became violent lawbreakers within the orison system. In essence, the ethical and experimental conditions of the Stanford Prison experiment define the corrupting culture of prisons in American society during the early 1970s.
The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was study organized by Philip George Zimbardo who was a professor at Stanford University. Basically, SPE was a study of psychological effect. He studied about how personality and environment of a person effect his behaviour. Experiment he performed was based on prison and life of guards. He wants to find out whether personality get innovated in person according to given environment (situational) or due to their vicious personalities that is violent behaviour (dispositional). The place where the whole experiment was set up Philip Zimbardo and his team was Stanford University on August 14Th to August 20th in the year 1971 (Wikipedia).
During the changing of world economy, it is increasingly common to hear the term ‘emerging markets’ and from news and report. In the mid-1980s, the term ‘emerging markets’ was created by the World Bank, and has significant influence on the global business world nowadays (Gwynne, Klak and Shaw 2003). To raise investor’s attention to those developing countries, there are numerous characteristics springing up which are given by researches and economists. However, some of those characteristics are contradictory and it is difficult to give a real definition. This essay discusses the main characteristics of ‘emerging markets’ as defined by the World Bank and economists.
Data collection is a crucial part project design and an important research tool. Data is what investigative research or study is seeking for and which are exposed to exploration, statistical procedures, as well as interpretation so that implications, generalisations, or principles are drawn. Data likewise discloses unsatisfactory conditions that require improvement. The use of newly discovered principles and facts to remedy unsatisfactory conditions serve as the foundation of human progress and the enhancement of the quality of human life. This paper reflects on the Data Collection Project titled “The Role of Adults in the Students’ Learning.” This topic was particularly chosen because it is the view of the author that this topic has not yet been fully explored and studied. Research questions were formulated based on this topic.