Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo

Key Question – Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1973)

What was the key question?

The key question was whether prison guards behave brutally because they have sadistic personalities or whether it is the social role and situation that creates such behaviour.

Procedure [AO1]

What was the procedure?

Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University.

How were participants recruited?

Male volunteers were recruited through a newspaper advertisement for a psychological study of prison life.

How were participants selected?

The volunteers were psychologically and physically screened, and the 24 most stable individuals were chosen.

How were roles assigned?

Participants were randomly allocated to the roles of either prisoner or prison guard.

What happened to the prisoners?

Prisoners were unexpectedly arrested at their homes, taken to the mock prison, given prison uniforms and assigned identification numbers.

What happened to the guards?

Guards were given uniforms, wooden clubs and reflective sunglasses to prevent eye contact.

What was Zimbardo’s role?

Zimbardo acted as the prison superintendent.

How long was the study meant to last?

The study was planned to last two weeks.

Findings [AO1]

What did the guards do?

The guards quickly took up their roles and began treating the prisoners harshly and abusively.

What did the prisoners do?

Within two days, the prisoners rebelled and the guards retaliated with increasing levels of aggression.

What kinds of behaviour were observed?

Guards humiliated prisoners, forced them to clean toilets with their bare hands and engaged in other degrading activities.

What happened to the prisoners psychologically?

Many prisoners became anxious, depressed and distressed.

What extreme outcomes occurred?

One prisoner was released after showing signs of psychological disturbance, two were released on the fourth day, and one went on hunger strike.

Why did the study end early?

Zimbardo terminated the study after six days because of the extreme and harmful behaviour being shown.

Conclusion [AO1]

What did Zimbardo conclude?

Zimbardo concluded that people conform strongly to social roles and that situational factors are more important than personality in explaining behaviour.

What does this suggest?

This suggests that ordinary people can behave in brutal and dehumanising ways when placed in positions of power.

Ethical Issues [AO3]

What was the main ethical problem?

The study caused significant psychological harm to participants, particularly the prisoners.

Why was informed consent an issue?

Although participants consented, they were not fully informed that they would be arrested at home and publicly humiliated.

What about the right to withdraw?

The right to withdraw was not clearly maintained, as some prisoners felt unable to leave.

What is the overall ethical conclusion?

The Stanford Prison Experiment is considered unethical by modern standards.

Can Explain Real-World Events – Abu Ghraib [AO3]

How does the study explain real-world behaviour?

Zimbardo argued that the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq can be explained by the same situational forces as in the SPE.

What similarities did he identify?

Both involved dehumanisation of prisoners, deindividuation of guards and lack of accountability.

What is a limitation of this comparison?

Abu Ghraib occurred in a war zone and guards were ordered to soften up prisoners, making it different from the SPE.

Conclusion

This weakens the claim that the SPE directly explains Abu Ghraib.

Internal Validity and Control [AO3]

Why did Zimbardo claim high internal validity?

Participants were carefully screened and randomly allocated, reducing participant variables.

What is the problem with this?

Participants showed demand characteristics and may have acted according to stereotypes.

Supporting evidence

One guard said he based his behaviour on a character from the film Cool Hand Luke.

Conclusion

This suggests the behaviour may not have been spontaneous, reducing internal validity.

Lack of Realism and Ecological Validity [AO3]

What is the realism problem?

The prison was artificial, the prisoners had not committed real crimes and the guards had no real authority.

Why is this an issue?

This reduces ecological validity, meaning the findings may not generalise to real prisons.

Conclusion

The study may not accurately reflect real-world prison behaviour.

Practical Applications – Prison Reform [AO3]

What practical value does the study have?

The study helped psychologists understand the psychological effects of prison roles.

What did it lead to?

It contributed to prison reforms, such as improved guard training and better treatment of prisoners.

Overall conclusion

Despite its flaws, the SPE has had important real-world applications in the criminal justice system.