Zimbardo Flashcards
(7 cards)
Findings
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 retaliated 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 role. For example they conducted frequent headcounts, sometimes at night, when the prisoners would stand in line and call out their numbers. 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 because he showed symptoms of psychological disturbance. Two more were released on the fourth day. One prisoner went on a hunger strike. The guards tried to force-feed him and then punished him by putting him in ‘the hole, a tiny dark closet.
The guards identified more and more closely with their role. Their behaviour became increasingly brutal and aggressive, with some of them appearing to enjoy the power they had over the prisoners. Zimbardo ended the study after six days instead of the intended 14.
Conclusions
Social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals behaviour. Most found they were behaving like they would in a prison and not an experiment.
eg prison chaplain came in and started behaving as if were prison rather than psychological study
Evaluation- strength-control
Zimbardo and his colleagues had control over key variables. E.g. selection of participants. Emotionally stable participants chosen and randomly assigned. Therefore individual personality differences were ruled out.Could be sure that if guards and prisoners behaved differently, but were in roles only by chance, then behaviour must be due to role. Increased internal validity.
Limitation-lack of realism
Didn’t have realism of true prison. Argued participants were play acting rather than conforming, based on stereotypes. E.g. one of guards said they had based role off a character cool hand Luke. Suggests why prisoners rioted, they thought that’s what they do.Therefore tells us little about conformity
-counterpoint- 90% of prisoners conversations were about real prison life. Prisoner 416 later explained how he thought it was a real prison but run by psychologists.Also amongst themselves they discussed how it was impossible to leave the SPE before their sentences were over. Suggests experiment did replicate social roles of prisoners and guards, giving high internal validity
Limitation- exaggerates power of roles
Zimbardo may have exaggerated power of social roles to influence behaviour. Only 1/3 of guards behaved in a brutal manner. Another third tried to apply rules fairly. Rest tried to support prisoners by offering cigarettes and reinstated privileges. Most guards were able to resist to situational pressures to conform to a brutal role. This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE participants were confirming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositional factors.
Limitation-dual role
Ethical issues- psychological distress.
Zimbardo dual role- student wanted to leave- spoke to Zimbardo in his role as a supervisor. Zimbardo responded to him as a supervisor worried about the running of his prison rather than researcher. Couldn’t protect participants from harm.
procedure
Zimbardo et al. (1973) set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford University. They selected 21 men (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 (their names were never used). 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-individuation), and meant they would be more likely to conform to the perceived social role.
Instructions about behaviour The prisoners were further encouraged to identify with their role by several procedures. For example rather than leaving the study early, prisoners could ‘apply for parole. The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded that they had complete power over the prisoners.
