Conformity on social roles Zimbardo's research Flashcards
Why did Zimbardo conduct his study?
Zimbardo and his colleagues conducted a study. There were many prison riots in America and Zimbardo wanted to know why social prison guards behave brutally
Explain the aim of the Stanford prison experiment?
Zimbardo et al set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford University. They selected 21 male student volunteers who tested as ‘emotionally stable’’ The students were randomly assigned to play the role of prison guard or prisoner. Prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to social roles both through the uniforms they wore and also instructions about their behaviour.
Uniforms- The prisoners were given a loose smock to wear and a cap to cover their hair, and they were identified by number. The guards had their own uniform reflecting the status of their role, with wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades. These uniforms created a loss of personal identity called de-individualisation and meant they would be more likely to conform to the perceived social roles.
Instructions about behaviour- The prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures. For example rather than leaving by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners.
What are the findings related to social roles?
The guards took up their roles with enthusiasm, treating the prisoners harshly. Within two days the prisoners rebelled. They ripped their uniforms and shouted and swore at the guards, who retailed with fire extinguishers. The guards used divide and rule tactics by playing the prisoners off against each other. They harassed the prisoners constantly to remind them of the powerlessness of their roles. For example they conducted frequent headcounts and sometimes at night, when the prisoners would not stand in a line and call out their names. The guards highlighted the differences in social roles by creating opportunities to enforce the rules and administer punishments.
After their rebellion was put down, the prisoners became subdued, depressed and anxious. One was released on the fourth day. One prisoner went on a hunger strike. Their behaviour is increasingly brutal and aggressive with some of them appearing to enjoy the power they had over the prisoners. Zimbardo ended the study 6 days instead of the intended 14.
What are the conclusions related to social roles?
Social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals behaviour. The guards became brutal and the prisoners became submissive.
Such roles were very easily taken on by all participants. Even volunteers who came in to perform specific functions found themselves behaving as if they were in a prison rather in a psychological study.
Why is control a strength of control?
One strength of the SPE is that Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables.
The most obvious example of this was the selection of participants. Emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guards and prisoners. This was one way in which the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings. If guards and prisoners behaved very differently but were in those roles only by chance then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. This degree of control over variables increased the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influences of roles on conformity.
Why is a lack of realism a limitation?
One limitation of SPE is that it did not have the realism of a true prison. Psychologists argued the participants were merely play acting rather than genuinely conforming to the role. Participants performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from the film Cool Hand Luke. This would explain why the prisoners rioted- they thought that was what real prisoners did. This suggests that the findings of the SPE tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
Why is exaggerates the power of roles a limitation?
Another limitation is that Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour. For example only one third of the guards actually behaved in a brutal manner. Another third tried to apply the rules fairly. The rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners. They sympathised, offered cigarettes and reinstated privileges. Most guards were able to resit situational pressures to conform to a brutal role. This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors.
