Zimbardo Vs Haslam and Reicher

Created by: lizzy.nilanujah
Created on: 08-10-14 11:05


	Zimbardo Vs Haslam and Reicher
	Similarities The studies took place in a stimulated prison - mundane realism was used to make the situation seem more real Both were experimental case studies Volunteer samples used (newspaper ad) Volunteers were screened to eliminate psychological problems, medical disabilities or history of crime/drugs Prisoners had to wear uniform	Differences IVs of Zimbardo's experiment were the assignments of the roles (guard or prisoner) whereas IVs of H&R's experiment were permeability, legitimacy and cognitive alternative Saliva tests were taken in H&R's study to measure levels of stress H&R's study was filmed and on television, therefore participants may not have appeared as their true selves compared to Zimbardo's study, where participants felt that the experiment was real In Zimbardo's study, participants took on their role as guards more effectively than they did in H&R's study
	Overall comparison Overall, Zimbardo's experiment may have been higher in ecological validity due to the lack of demand characteristics which may have been present in H&R's study due to the fact that participants knew that were being filmed for television. Nevertheless, it could be argued that H&R's study is higher in ecological validity than Zimbardo's study as it took place in 2006 and therefore is more similar to our society today. Today, Zimbardo's study could be seen as unethical due to the orders prisoners had to follow, such as humiliating them by not allowing them to wear any under clothes. H&R's study involved an independence ethics community that ensured that the experiment was stopped if anything unethical were to take place in order to protect the participants.

Zimbardo Vs Haslam and Reicher

Similarities

The studies took place in a stimulated prison - mundane realism was used to make the situation seem more real
Both were experimental case studies
Volunteer samples used (newspaper ad)
Volunteers were screened to eliminate psychological problems, medical disabilities or history of crime/drugs
Prisoners had to wear uniform

Differences

IVs of Zimbardo's experiment were the assignments of the roles (guard or prisoner) whereas IVs of H&R's experiment were permeability, legitimacy and cognitive alternative
Saliva tests were taken in H&R's study to measure levels of stress
H&R's study was filmed and on television, therefore participants may not have appeared as their true selves compared to Zimbardo's study, where participants felt that the experiment was real
In Zimbardo's study, participants took on their role as guards more effectively than they did in H&R's study

Overall comparison

Overall, Zimbardo's experiment may have been higher in ecological validity due to the lack of demand characteristics which may have been present in H&R's study due to the fact that participants knew that were being filmed for television. Nevertheless, it could be argued that H&R's study is higher in ecological validity than Zimbardo's study as it took place in 2006 and therefore is more similar to our society today. Today, Zimbardo's study could be seen as unethical due to the orders prisoners had to follow, such as humiliating them by not allowing them to wear any under clothes. H&R's study involved an independence ethics community that ensured that the experiment was stopped if anything unethical were to take place in order to protect the participants.

Get Revising

Zimbardo Vs Haslam and Reicher