L8: social roles, power, & tyranny

Discuss the contextual background for the Stanford Prison Experiment research.

Following the Second World War, researchers wanted to understand extreme behaviours (e.g., obedience in Milgram, 1963).

• Zimbardo et al. (2000) deciphered the aim as to investigate why good people can act in evil ways in the context of socially approved roles

• A shift from measuring individual behaviour, to group behaviours (resulted in ethical debates).

Discuss the environment and method of recording used in the Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in the basement of Stanford University Psychology Department, and behaviour was occasionally video-taped and observations were taken by research assistants.

Discuss the groups within the Stanford Prison Experiment

Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted with undergraduate students (24, split between prisoner and guard equally), conducted in Stanford University Psychology Department’s basement.

• Guards: suggested to control prisoners (without allowing physical force or torture), they should have their individuality taken away. Guards were in uniforms with sunglasses

• Prisoners: were arrested at home (not informed of this; blindfolded) and made to wear prison uniforms, were placed in cells and had limited freedom to exercise or interact. Informed that they must obey the guards

Discuss the role of the guards in the Stanford Prison Experiment

The Guards were tasked with keeping prisoners in line, and prevent anti-social behaviour.

• Guards had power over prisoners (control of resources, and control to give rewards or punishments)

Discuss how the behaviour in the Stanford Prison Experiment guards had changed.

As the Stanford Prison Experiment continued the Guards had began displaying cruelty towards prisoners.

• With demands become more random and unrestricted in nature (e.g., forcing to clean toilets, constantly being awoken)

• Locking prisoners in solitary confinement

• A ‘divide and rule’ tactic

• Prisoners were manhandled, handcuffed, dragged… (‘no violence’ was too vague)

Discuss how the simulation and reality line became blurred in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

The role Zimbardo was playing (both researcher and scientist, yet, neglecting his role as a human being due to delegating himself as Prison Administrator) and the role the Guards were playing began becoming too real.

• One of Zimbardo’s research assistants flagged the study for ethical concerns, her concerns were taken on board and the study was terminated early.

Discuss some issues which was arising during the Stanford Prison Experiment

• Unfair rights: Zimbardo had convinced one of the prisoners parents to not remove their son (who expressed illness) due to it being ‘crucial’ to the study.

• Brutality: Guards had became tyrannical and left prisoners in suffering conditions.

• Opposition for Assistants: Other research assistants were disgusted with the research, ones critique result in it being abandoned after just 6 days.

Discuss the use of psychological testing for participation in the Stanford Prison Experiment

Participants conducted psychological testing and showed that participants were not psychologically different from the general population norms.

• However, this research was conducted in the 1970s, when media had its own way of presenting prison life (more tyrannical)

Discuss one of the key take aways from the Stanford Prison Experiment

Deindividuation increases group behaviour, whether that behaviour is good or bad, situations which permit abusive conditions can result in dangerous behaviours being conducted.

• “the primary single lesson of the SPE is that situation matters”

Discuss the importance roles played in the Stanford Prison Experiment

• Roles emerged as a key factor (crucial in both prisoners, one prisoner returned to the experiment after wanting to leave for this reason, and guards).

• Agentic state, the role itself can bring reduced responsibility (Guards seeing it in media, arguing they aren’t that bad in reality).

• Everyday morality doesn’t influence role functioning (even Zimbardo lost some humanity in the experiment, whose shift to the role reduced his awareness of psychological harm in participants).

Discuss how deindividuation arose in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Deindividuation arose from the anonymity in the external situation. Guards were depersonalised (losing individuality).

• Tyranny was established as a key role in the psychology of powerful groups (people in power naturally enact allowed groups)

Discuss dehumanisation which occurred in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Dehumanisation occurred from how prisoners were treated as subhuman (abuse became more easily justified).

• By dehumanising the prisoner, you reduce the moral restraints on harming another human (results in destructive consequences).

• The Stanford Prison Experiment was used to explain the inhumane actions conducted by the US Military in the Abu Ghraib Prison (Iraq)

Discuss the SYSTEM in social role adoption, as demonstrated in the SPE.

The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) demonstrated a SYSTEM, for the importance of the situation in shaping behaviours (where situation is shaped by the system):

• Environments create and legitimise roles, these roles hold anonymity, and can result in dehumanisation

• The system requires validation through ideology or world views

• The behaviour is not a direct result of the system, but behaviour follows on from it.

Discuss ethical criticism of the Stanford Prison Experiment.

• Informed consent: participants did not consent to all aspects of the experiment, including being arrested at home, and the following abuse.

• Protection from psychological harm: participants mental wellbeing was not protected.

• Deception: deceived participants (weighed against potential for psychological harm), uninformed of all aspects

• Right to withdraw: participants were insisted on staying, they should have been able to withdraw without question.

Discuss criticisms from Reicher and Haslam (2006) regarding the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Research by Reicher and Haslam (2006) demonstrated:

• The SPE findings were difficult to verify (not all actions recorded, nor are all openly available)

• Data was observational (no control for measurement data)

• Unclear manipulations (was the behaviour from the social role, or the instructions to the guards to act)

• behavioural change not universal (prisoner resistance, and some guards were not acting tyrannically)

Discuss the criticism of anonymity leading to deindividuation

Zimbardo argued that anonymity always leads into deindividuation and tyranny.

• Yet, research (Gergen, 1973; Johnson & Downing, 1973) suggests its dependent on social cues

• Behavioural change expressed as a change from personal to social-identity (expressing the role-consistent behaviour in the group, with not all groups support tyranny)

Discuss criticisms for the SPE suggested by Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975)

Research by Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) questioned the ecological validity of the research (questioning the environment’s realism).

• SPE is different from a real prison (participants are aware they conducted no crime and can leave anytime), although, false imprisonment can happen around the world.

• Prison walls remind prisoners they are different from good people, participants in this study know they are good but taking part in research.

Discuss the research conducted after the SPE to study the reliability of its tyranny claims.

The research by Reicher and Haslam (2006) for the BBC Prison Study.

• Given ethical approval by both the University of Exeter ethics committee, and the ethics committee of the British Psychological Society.

Discuss the psychology of tyranny.

Psychology of tyranny results in a shift away from individual characteristics towards group process explanations for behaviours.

• group-level psychology of tyranny = unequal social system with one group using oppressive power over others (e.g., natural reaction of SPE guards).

• theoretically, researchers need to consider conditions where people do and do not conform to roles (role account), and the balance between tyranny and resistance

Discuss role account in relation to the psychology of tyranny.

Role account is where people act automatically in terms of group membership (or roles) which are assigned.

• Although, this depends on whether the membership is internalised in the self-concept (Turner, 1982)

• Therefore, social identification forms the basis of group behaviour and norm acceptance.

Discuss the dependencies of collective action in subordinate groups

• Permeability of category boundaries: the belief about ones ability to advance through the social systems hierarchy, in despite of the group they are membered too.

• Security of intergroup relations: the perceived fairness (or legitimacy) and stability of the inequality between groups, and the availability of cognitive alternatives to this status quo.

Discuss the study aims of Reicher and Haslam (2006) research.

• Open data: unlike with the SPE, provide comprehension and systematic data to sufficiently show interactions between groups of differing power.

• Multifaceted analysis: analysing conditions under which people (define themselves as group members, act in line with these identities, and accept or challenge inequality)

• Examining different factors: examining the social, organisational and clinical factors which arose in the research

• Develop protocols: which form a practical and ethical framework of the research.

Discuss participant selection and sources of data used in the BBC Prison Study.

• Participants were selected from psychometric tests with fifteen men (initially over 300), sample was more diverse.

  • 5 guards, and 10 prisoners (final prisoner was a trade unionist added on the 5th day)

  • Ethical considerations strongly considered

• Data was collected through daily psychometric and physiological tests (e.g., cortisol level tests and constant recording)

Discuss the set up of the guard and prisoner role.

• Guards were given limited guidance (different from SPE), drawn up own rules to not be violent and given basic rights. They were given more resources.

• Prisoners were given a uniform with a number, had their hair shaved on arrival (gave informed consent for), and list of their rights on the cell wall.

Discuss the planned interventions in the methodology of research by Reicher and Haslam (2006).

• Permeability: guards informed they were selected on the basis of reliability, trustworthiness and initiative, yet some prisoners were ‘falsely assigned’, there were provisions for prisoner promotes on Day 3.

• Legitimacy: 3 days after promotion participants informed of no difference in groups (reduces the legitimacy of group division)

• Cognitive alternatives: the 10th prisoner is introduced on Day 5, an experienced trade union official (offering compromise)

Discuss the social identification phase of the BBC Prison Experiment

Social identification (phase 1)

• Prisoners were initially individually displaying their qualities for promotion, with no deindividuation. Although, after promotion social identity conformity started to begin

  • a shift from individual action to identification and compliance to conflict with guards

• Guards were wary to exert authority with no development of identity and consensus on the rules.

Discuss the security of inter-group relations phase of the BBC Prison Experiment.

Security of inter-group relations (phase 1)

• Prisoners: after promotion normative consensus had let to effective organisation and mutual social support with the emergence of cognitive alternatives.

• Guards: unable to agree on norms (they could not trust each other, forming an ineffective group); undermining perceived legitimacy of the group.

Discuss the acceptance and compliance phase of the research by Reicher and Haslam (2006)

Acceptance and compliance (phase 1)

• Prisoners: shared social identity (opposition of the guards), started to work against the regime (minor resistance movement), yet became more compliant to rules following promotion.

• Guards: their compliance to rules did not vary over time, nor did their willingness to engage in citizenship behaviours (behaviours which support the guards regime)

Discuss the final phase of the BBC Prison Experiment.

Embracing inequality (phase 2) most participants decided to continue with the research, yet as a self-governing commune (both prisoners and guards).

• Operations were drawn up and were highly effective, former groups were combined into one, working to a higher effort when grouped together (some did feel marginalised)

The commune did not develop dissidence procedures, an emergent crisis arose which resulted in authoritarianism and aggression, resulting in the study being terminated early on Day 7.

Discuss the wider findings of the BBC Prison Experiment.

The BBC Prison experiment (Reicher & Haslam, 2006).

• demonstrated imposed inequality system

• initially almost all rejected this, but in the order a tyrannical social order was nearly implemented

• research suggests groups are the basis for collective self-realisation (social order based on shared norms).

Discuss the conclusions of the BBC Prison Experiment, and where these don’t support the SPE findings.

• Contrary to SPE, people do not automatically assume social roles in group contexts

• Consistent with social identity approach, impermeable boundaries lead to social identification, insecure relations to other groups leads to collective action

• However, Social Identity Approach cannot explain why guards had positive status in prison context but feared negative evaluation from future audiences.