Stanford Prison Experiment Zimbardo
Stanford Prison Experiment
The aim of the Stanford Prison Experiment was to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life. Zimbardo was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities or had to do with the environment of prison itself.
This two week experiment was abruptly ended after nine days due to the disturbing behaviour the guards were afflicting onto the prisoners. There were many faults with the experiment which breached ethical boundaries. It should be questioned why the experiment was allowed to continue for so long when the participants were psychologically traumatized and physically beaten? By the third day the participants were showing immense psychological and physical trauma, falling under unethical treatment of human rights. There is no proof of confidentiality breach as it was told the …show more content…
This could have added to the guards abusing the power they were given as they felt more powerful when the prisoners were outnumbered. It is possible that if roles were reversed, the prisoners would have rioted before the nine days. Withdrawal rights were eventually breached as instead of letting the participants go they were treated like they would be in prison and were asked to be an inside ear or ‘snitch’. This led to one participant trying multiple techniques to get released such as hunger strikes, acting insane and many others. However, they were informed of their positions and what they were being involved in. It is difficult to say that the Stanford Prison Experiment was deceptive. The participants did not know the outcome or the conditions they would be put in. However, they did know the cause and that they were in an experiment. Therefore there is not enough evidence and ethical breaching for deception to be an
The aim of the Stanford Prison Experiment was to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life. Zimbardo was interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities or had to do with the environment of prison itself.
This two week experiment was abruptly ended after nine days due to the disturbing behaviour the guards were afflicting onto the prisoners. There were many faults with the experiment which breached ethical boundaries. It should be questioned why the experiment was allowed to continue for so long when the participants were psychologically traumatized and physically beaten? By the third day the participants were showing immense psychological and physical trauma, falling under unethical treatment of human rights. There is no proof of confidentiality breach as it was told the …show more content…
This could have added to the guards abusing the power they were given as they felt more powerful when the prisoners were outnumbered. It is possible that if roles were reversed, the prisoners would have rioted before the nine days. Withdrawal rights were eventually breached as instead of letting the participants go they were treated like they would be in prison and were asked to be an inside ear or ‘snitch’. This led to one participant trying multiple techniques to get released such as hunger strikes, acting insane and many others. However, they were informed of their positions and what they were being involved in. It is difficult to say that the Stanford Prison Experiment was deceptive. The participants did not know the outcome or the conditions they would be put in. However, they did know the cause and that they were in an experiment. Therefore there is not enough evidence and ethical breaching for deception to be an