Summary Of The Lucifer Effect By Zimbardo

In selecting and reviewing the article by Zimbardo Revisiting Stanford Prison Experiment, by the 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups; they showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false (Zimbardo 2007). Given the Stanford Prison Experiment had some ethical issues and concerns. The research question identified in this study review; Zimbardo wanted to know who wins good people or an evil situation when they were brought into direct confrontation (Zimbardo 2007). In fact, considering the experiment the Ethical Guidelines changed. According to Zimbardo (2007), in retrospect, I believe that the main reason I did not end the study sooner resulted from the conflict created in me by my dual roles as principal investigator, and thus guardian of the research ethics of the experiment, and as the prison superintendent,
eager to maintain the stability of my prison at all costs. Although they were informed about the type of experiment and participants I do not believe they were fully informed about what could take place. According to Cozby and Bates (2012), informed consent is when potential participants in a research project should be provided with all information that might influence their decision of whether to participate. In review of the article and study, the distress the participants went through varied. One went on a hunger strike, and this caused harm. The ethical challenge, is that the participants in the experiment should have the right to withdraw. In the experiment prisoner 8612 requested to leave but was asked to stay as an informant of some sort, prisoner 819 was the other prisoner asked to leave and was led to feel guilty before finally leaving the experiment. According to Zimbardo (2007), missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. The researchers should have provided specific boundaries and guidelines for all participants, allowed the participants under stress to withdraw from the experiment at first request. According to Cozby and Bates (2012), when stress is possible, the researcher must ask whether all safeguards have been taken to help participants deal with the stress. The more recent study that was selected by this researcher The Lucifer Effect; the author Hong, moves to answer the research question and clearly explains at the outset that his intent is to "understand the processes of transformation at work when good or ordinary people do bad or evil things in accordance with Zimbardo’s study (Hong 2012).
This study highlights a military Sergeant Russell, who was found guilty and convicted of five shootings. The question asked what were the determining factors provoking the shootings. There were mental health issues that were later identified, such as past suicidal and mental conditions. So how could such a person who had been in the military for over twenty years commit such a heinous act; and did he act out on his latent sadistic impulses, or were there other environmental forces at work? (Hong 2012). According to Hong (2012), The Lucifer Effect, authored by Philip Zimbardo, may provide an explanation as to how a seemingly ordinary man could commit such a crime of extraordinary moral
magnitude. Where this study differs, in that it was written after the implementation of the ethical guidelines. In addition, it provides some discussion regarding what Zimbardo was attempting to identify. According to Hong (2012), Zimbardo attempts to answer this question by providing the results of prior psychological tests and historical accounts of atrocities committed by ordinary people while framing these accounts in the context of sociological and psychological principles. In conclusion, both studies are a review of Zimbardo’s original research the Stanford Prison Experiment. These studies ask what causes individuals to behave in such inhumane and unethical fashions that cause harm to others. Regardless to the external factors or impact of power, why and when does one make the decisions in social situations that would lead to evil intentional actions. The time this experiment was conducted in 1the early 1970’s it was conducted without any ethical guidelines or standards. In that, there were no ethical guidelines and principles in place it put the student participants at an even greater risk. As it relates to the ethics of research today it would have gone before the Institutional Review Board. In that, any research at greater than minimal risk is that research involving physical stress, psychological stress, invasion of privacy, measures of sensitive information where participants may be identified (Cozby and Bates 2012).

References
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Cozby, P.C and Bates S.C. (2012). Methods of Behavioral Research. 11th edition. McGraw-Hill
Hong, J. K. (2012). The Lucifer Effect. Army Lawyer, 55-58.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of situation. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(30), B6-B7.