Stanford Prison simulation experiment by Zimbardo
- Created by: whomshallIfear99
- Created on: 15-10-15 20:42
View mindmap
- Stanford Prison Stimulation Experiment
- Findings
- The study had to be discontinued after 6 days because the guards humiliated and harassed the guards to a great extent
- Prisoners rebelled against their guards after two days, the guards put an end to this using fire extinguishers
- Some prisoners became depressed and anxious
- 1 prisoner had to be released after one day, 2 more prisoners had to be released on the fourth day
- By day 6, the prisoners were submissive to the guards
- Conclusion
- The participants conformed to their social roles because of situational factors
- None of the participants who acted as guards showed sadistic tendencies before the experiment = the prison environment was an important factor in creating the guards' brutal behaviour
- The roles that people play shape their attitudes and behaviour
- People will readily conform to social roles especially if the roles are strongly stereotyped
- Weaknesses
- Savin (1973) criticised the study for the way the participants were humiliated. He does not believe the knowledge gained justified the means by which it was recquired
- Zimbardo should not have played a dual role as he got caught up in the business as a superintendent instead of a researcher
- Some argue that the deception was not necessary as it is unethical as it leaves them feeling foolish or humiliated
- Demand characteristics may have played a part as the volunteers may have tried to be good subjects and behaved in the ways they thought the researcher wanted
- The participants conformed to their social roles because of situational factors
- Strengths
- Zimbardo reports that follow ups over many years showed that there were no lasting negative effects, the participants were healthy and were able to go back to normal life
- And they learned that even the most intelligent and well-intentional people can be overwhelmed by social influences
- Deception was necessary because a what if experiment would not produce accurate results
- Zimbardo argues that this type of research should not be banned, but better research should be carried out
- Zimbardo reports that follow ups over many years showed that there were no lasting negative effects, the participants were healthy and were able to go back to normal life
- Findings
Comments
No comments have yet been made