Essay On Abu Ghraib Prison Experiment

In 1971, in the basement of the psychology department of Stanford University, Northern California a mock prison was created. Psychologist Philip Zimbardo placed an advert in the Palo Alto Times newspaper, asking for volunteers to study the psychological effects of prison life (Zimbardo, 1971). Only seeking male college students, over 70 volunteers applied. All of which went through strict screening tests to eliminate volunteers with psychological problems, physical and mental illnesses, also a history of crime or drug abuse. After all screening, they was left with 24 males. Zimbardo explained that prisoners and guard’s roles were picked by a simple “toss of the coin”. Each volunteer, regardless of role was paid $15 per day.
The experiment initially
Although this experiment is over 30 years old, it strikingly resembles the events that occurred in Abu Ghraib prison, Iraq in 2003. It was there, where detainees were humiliated, abused, and degraded by American Soldiers. Images of abuse soon appeared online, and spread viral across the world. Almost immediately the United States military defensively stated that “it’s just a few bad apples” (Levin, 2008)
When individuals are doing bad things, we assume that they’re bad people and often ignore how external factors in the environment may contribute to that behaviour. The question being addressed in this essay is does the situation outside of one’s social environment contribute to their ability to control their behaviour? Or, do internal factors such as; attitude, behaviour, morals and values allow individuals to rise above a negative environment? Evidence from the Stanford Prison Experiment will be used to support my arguments I make, as well other evidence from the wider
(Gross, 2010) In social situations, we perceive one person or group as having the legitimate authority to influence our behaviour (Sears, 2005). Through research, Robert Cialdini noted that they are six tendencies of human behaviour in response trying to influence another’s attitudes or actions. These are: reciprocity (reciprocation), liking, consistency, social validation, authority, and scarcity. (Cialdini, 2004)
By analysing reports of the Stanford prison experiment, it was noted that not all guards was actively involved in the wide spread of abuse and humiliation of prisoners. Zimbardo theories himself that during the Stanford experiment, there was three types of guards; tough, yet fair. Whom also followed prison rules. There was also the ‘good guys’ who didn’t punish prisoners, and often did favours for them. However, about a third of guards was hostile, and enjoyed inflicting humiliating abuse towards prisoners. They also appeared to enjoy the power given to them. (Zimbardo,