|
Advantages
- Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over some variables within the study, e.g. the selection of PPs. Emotionally stable volunteers were assigned either prisoner or guard, meaning that the researchers attempted to eliminate individual personality as a result of the findings. The guards and prisoners behaved very differently, but they were in their roles by chance, so it must have been the pressure of the situation that affected their behaviour.
- Study has high internal validity because of the control over the variables, meaning we can be confident in drawing conclusions about behaviour from the study
- Quantitative data collected during the experiment revealed that 90% of the prisoners' conversations were about prison life. Prisoner 416 expressed the belief that the prison was real, but run by psychologists instead of the government. It seems that the prison seemed real to the prisoners, increasing the internal validity.
|
Disadvantages
- Lack of mundane realism. Other psychologists have argued that the participants were merely play acting rather than genuinely conforming to their roles. Their behaviour was based purely on stereotypes that they have seen on how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. One guard said that he based his behaviour off of a guard he saw in the movie 'Cold Hand Luke'. This also explains the prisoners' riot as that is what they expected prisoners to do
- Lack of research support. In the BBC prison study creating a similar simulation to Zimbardo's study, the prisoners ended up taking over the prison and humiliating the guards.
- Ethical issues. By acting as both researcher and prison superintendent, Zimbardo created a major ethical issue as he made it difficult for the participants to leave. When a prisoner asked to leave, Zimbardo responded as a prison superintendent concerned about his prison instead of as a psychologist worried about his participant's mental state.
|
Comments
Report