Conformity to social roles as investigated by Zimbardo

Question 1

What is a social role?

Answer 1

The parts individuals play as members of a social group. With each social role you adopt, behaviour changes to fit the expectations you and others have of that role in that situation. Each social role carries expected behaviours called norms.

Question 2

what are example of social roles

Answer 2

Student
Teacher
Customer
Son/daughter

Question 3

what are social roles important for?

Answer 3

Individuals learn how to behave by looking at the social roles other people play in social situations and then conforming to them.
These learned social roles become like internal mental scripts (schema), allowing individuals to behave appropriately in different settings.

Question 4

what does conformity to social roles involve

Answer 4

identification (stronger than compliance), involving both public and private acceptance of the behaviour and attitudes exhibited.

Question 5

what is conformity not as strong as

Answer 5

But, conformity to social roles isn’t as strong as internalisation, as individuals adopt different social roles for different situations.

Question 6

what does Zimbardo’s (1973) prison study illustrate

Answer 6

the role of social roles in conformity.

Question 7

what did Zimbardo’s study attempt to do

Answer 7

to understand the brutal and dehumanising behaviour found in American prisons.

Question 8

What two different explanations were explored

Answer 8

The Dispositional Hypothesis
The Situational Hypothesis

Question 9

What is the situational Hypothese

Answer 9

Saw violence and degradation as a product of the prison environment.

Question 10

What is a dispositional hypothesis

Answer 10

Proposed that the violence and degradation of prisons was due to the ‘nature’ of the people found within the prison system i.e. that both guards and prisoners had sadistic and aggressive characteristics.

Question 11

what kind of behaviour would support the dispositional hypothesis

Answer 11

If no brutality occurred, this supports the dispositional hypothesis, because the individuals had no record of violence/criminal behaviour.

Question 12

what kind of behaviour would support the situational hypothesis

Answer 12

if brutality was observed in the participants, this would support the situational hypothesis, because it would suggest that situational factors were driving normal, law-abiding people to such behaviour.

Question 13

how did Zimbardo investigate this

Answer 13

To investigate this, Zimbardo built a mock prison and used ‘average’ people with no record of violence or criminality to play prisoners or guards.

Question 14

what were the two aims of the study

Answer 14

1)To investigate the extent to which people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing simulation of prison life.

2)To test the dispositional (i.e. prison violence due to sadistic personalities of guards) vs. situational (prison violence as due to the brutal conditions of the prison environment) hypotheses.

Question 15

what was the procedure for the participants of Zimbardo’s study

Answer 15

75 male university students responded to a newspaper advertisement asking for volunteers for a study of prison life paying $15 a day.

21 students rated as the most physically and mentally stable, mature and free from anti-social and criminal tendencies were used.

Individuals were randomly chosen to play the role of guard or prisoner (10 guards; 11 prisoners).

Zimbardo played the role of prison superintendent.

Question 16

what was the procedure of Zimbardo’s study

Answer 16

The basement of the Psychology department at Stanford University was converted into a mock prison.
The study was planned to run for 2 weeks.
To make the simulation as similar to a prison as possible, prisoners were placed 3 to a cell. A regular routine of shifts, meal times etc. was established, as well as visiting times, a parole and disciplinary board, and a prison chaplain

Question 17

what does dehumanising mean

Answer 17

degrading people by removing their individual identity.

Question 18

how were the participants dehumanised

Answer 18

Prisoners were arrested by (real) local police and then fingerprinted, stripped and deloused.

Prisoners wore numbered smocks, nylon stocking caps and a chain around one ankle.

Guards wore khaki uniforms, reflective sunglasses and were issued with handcuff, keys and a truncheon.

Question 19

what was the first finding of Zimbardo’s study

Answer 19

Guards and prisoners settled quickly into their social roles.
Guards became increasingly sadistic and abusive (especially after an initial prisoner ‘rebellion’ was crushed), taunting the prisoners and giving them meaningless, boring tasks to do:
e.g. they woke prisoners in the night and forced them to clean the toilets with their bare hands and made them carry out other degrading activities.
The prisoners became submissive and unquestioning of the guards’ behaviour, although some prisoners sided with the guards against any prisoners who dared to protest.

Question 20

what is deindividuation

Answer 20

Deindividuation was observed - the prisoners referred to each other and themselves by their prison numbers instead of their names.

Question 21

what were the other three findings in the study

Answer 21

2) After 36 hours, one prisoner was released because of fits of crying and rage.
3 more prisoners developed similar symptoms and were released on successive days.
A fifth prisoner developed a severe rash when his parole was denied.

3) The study was stopped after 6 days when Zimbardo realised the extent of the harm that was occurring and the increasingly aggressive nature of the guards’ behaviour.

4)In later interviews, both guards and prisoners said they were surprised at the uncharacteristic behaviours they had shown.

Question 22

what were the conclusions of Zimbardo’s study

Answer 22

Zimbardo felt that the situational hypothesis provided a better explanation than the dispositional hypothesis as none of the ppts had ever shown such character traits or behaviour before the study.
Therefore, it was the environment of the mock prison and the social roles that the ppts had to play that led to their uncharacteristic behaviour.

Question 23

what did the findings suggest

Answer 23

This research suggests that individuals conform readily to the social roles demanded of a situation, even when such roles override an individual’s moral beliefs about their personal behaviour.
It was suggested that the participants had gained knowledge about these social roles from media sources (e.g. prison films), and learned models of social power (parent-child; teacher-student).

Question 24

:(P: Zimbardo played a ‘dual-role’ (prison superintendent and principal investigator), which led to a conflict of roles and a major ethical issue.

Answer 24

E:…Arguably, he lost sight of the psychological and physical harm being caused to participants and neglected his responsibilities as principal investigator to protect the volunteers from harm. It was Zimbardo’s leadership role and the guard orientation which laid the ground work for abuse.
C: Therefore, Zimbardo’s own behaviour affected the way in which events unfolded and the validity of the findings could be questioned.

Question 25

:(P: Serious ethical issues were raised (a criticism of the procedure)….

Answer 25

E: Psychological harm: Some prisoners displayed uncontrolled fits of screaming, crying and rage, with one prisoner developing a severe rash as the guards became increasingly aggressive. In some cases this harm may have been long-term.
Lack of fully informed consent: The level of degradation to be experienced over the course of the experiment was not outlined in sufficient detail to participants. Also, the prisoners did not consent to being ‘arrested’ at home.
Right to withdraw: Although participants were initially informed of their right to withdraw their participation in the study, it was subsequently revoked.

Question 26

:(P: Furthermore, there were individual differences…

Answer 26

E: …in that not all of the guards behaved brutally, only a minority (about a third) did. For example, some were hard, but fair; others rarely showed dominant behaviour towards the prisoners, instead actively trying to help and support them e.g. reinstating privileges, sympathising and offering cigarettes. The behaviour of the prisoners also varied.
C: This suggests that participants did not all conform to social roles in the same way and implies that dispositional factors play a part in determining behaviour, as well as situational factors. Therefore, Zimbardo’s conclusion – that ppts were conforming to social roles – may have been over-stated.

Question 27

:(P: Participants may have been responding to powerful demand characteristics in the experimental situation (cues present in an experiment which suggest the purpose of the study and the expectations of the experimenter).

Answer 27

E: Participants were given a description of the study at the outset, which included the following question: ‘‘Will our simulating ‘prisoners’ and ‘guards’ come to behave in a relatively short time in a manner similar to prisoners and guards in real life prisons?’’. They could have simply been playing what they believed was the role expected of them.
Dave Eshelman (a guard) later explained: ‘I arrived independently at the conclusion that this experiment must have been put together to prove a point about prisons being a cruel and inhumane place… and therefore I would do my part to help those results come about.’ Most of the guards later claimed they were acting. Their performance may have been based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to act.
C: Therefore, we cannot be sure to what extent the behaviour of participants was natural, casting doubt on the extent to which we can explain conformity to social roles in everyday life (ecological validity).

Question 28

P: Sample bias (a criticism of the procedure)

Answer 28

E: Zimbardo sampled male American college students.
C: The findings therefore lack population validity, due to gender and culture bias, making it difficult to apply the study’s findings to female prisons or those within other countries (e.g. collectivist cultures – Asian countries).