Throughout this essay, Szegedy-Maszak attempts to answer the question: Are there particular conditions in Iraq that might shed light on why these soldiers committed these unconscionable acts? (Szegedy-Maszak p. 173). She begins by presenting two famous psychological experiments that explore the capacity for evil residing in normal people, (Szegedy-Maszak p. 174). The first experiment, conducted by Stanford psychologist Philip Zimbardo, attempted to mimic a real life prison scenario with students impersonating actual guards and prisoners. Surprisingly, the results were analogous to the actual events that took place at Abu Ghraib prison. The second experiment, created by Stanley Milgram, studied some peoples willingness to follow orders. The experiment began with an actor sitting in a chair supposedly wired with electricity. For every wrong answer this actor would give, volunteers were asked to deliver increasingly dangerous electric shocks to the actor in the chair. The results showed that two out of the three volunteers delivered potentially lethal electric shocks.…
The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment that Philip Zimbardo evented. He wanted to study the human response of captivity, of the prison life. Zimbardo randomly assigned roles to the prisoners and the guards. Each role was uniquely identified. For example, he gave the guards sticks and sunglasses and the prisoners were arrested by the police department and were forced into the basement of the jail which was converted into the psychology department that was converted into a makeshift jail. Zimbardo wanted the experiment to be as realistic as he possibly could have made it, therefore, he assigned each role to help do so. Testing each individual and then assigning them to roles would of gave inconclusive readings and therefore, it was…
In discussions of the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip G. Zimbardo in 1970, one controversial issue has been whether or not the experiment should have ever been attempted. On the one hand, Dr. Zimbardo and his colleagues argued that the experiment gave them a deeper understanding of human suffering and a greater empathy for their fellow man (Ratnesar 2011). On the other hand, one of the former guards contended that the experiment made him more hostile and less sympathetic during his time as a guard and that the circumstances significantly altered his perception of what was appropriate behavior. Others even maintain that the prison experiment degraded the prisoners so greatly, empowered the guards to such a great extent, and even affected Dr. Zimbardo’s behavior and mannerisms so dramatically that it thoroughly altered their sense of…
In 1971, psychologist Phillip Zimbardo set out to create an experiment that looked at the impact of becoming a prisoner or a prison guard. The experiment was to test human behavior when one's role had been altered into authoritative one. Still powerful after all these years the experiment was the most powerful and popular experiment of all time (O'Toole, K). Researches set up a mock prison in the basement of Stanford University building. There were the 24 students out of 70 volunteers chosen to play the roles of the prisoners or prison guards.…
Difference #1. A major difference between Zimbardo’s and Milgram’s studies is that, in the prison study, only one experimental manipulation was performed — being assigned to the role of prisoner or guard. This is a major limitation because we cannot know, as we did in the Milgram study, which factors in the situation were most important for the behaviors observed. There is no doubt that each participant’s self-definition as prisoner or guard was important, but it might have helped us to develop a deeper understanding of how such a self-definition can be maintained if Zimbardo and his colleagues had varied other factors in the situation. For example, would wearing normal clothes, which might have caused increased feelings of individuality, have resulted in decreased role-playing? Would a decrease in the reality of the simulation (perhaps by removing the bars on the doors, or having campus security “arrest” the prisoners) have done the same? It would have been very interesting, for example, if we had found that none of these factors were important — that, instead, it was simply the assigning of an arbitrary social role by an authority figure and the…
One of the infamous experiment in the history of psychology was the Stanford Prison Experiment. Its creator, Dr. Zimbardo, main objective was to see what effects would occur when a psychological experiment into human nature was performed. As I began to perform some research of my own, I noticed that my thoughts on the matter were similar to many; that as a scientific research project, Mr. Zimbardo’s experiment it was a complete failure. However, his findings did provide us with something that was much more important that is still being talked about today; insight into human psychology and social behavior.…
Phillip K. Zimbardo, who is a professor of psychology at Stanford University, directed the Stanford Prison Experiment, also known as the Zimbardo Experiment. The goal of the Zimbardo experiment was to research how willing human beings would imitate to the characters of correctional officers and inmates in an acting role that replicated life behind bars. But what really happens when you remove the freedoms of human beings and place them in subservient positions and place them in jail cell type settings? The answer is that the mind and physical well-being is drastically and forever changed for the worse, which Mr. Zimbardo’s tests proved.…
This study is considered a classic when with regards to prison psychology. According to the American Psychological Association (2004) “Its messages have been carried in many textbooks in the social sciences, in classroom lectures across many nations, and in popular media renditions. Its web site has gotten over 15 million unique page views in the past four years, and more than a million a week in the weeks following the expose of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by American Military Police army reservists in Abu Ghraib Prison”. Zimbardo’s research has come to be known as one of the classical example of how circumstantial power has the ability to influence individuals in multiple domains. This experiment is historically one of the prime examples of how even the most “good” person when placed under specific situations can in turn transform into “evil”. It shows just how easily individuality can be stripped away and in turn how the environment can define and dictate ones…
Social scientists should not be allowed to undertake replications of Milgram’s obedience experiment and Zimbardo’s prison simulation at face value just as other instances in the same field (i.e. the tuskegee syphilis study, and the wichita jury study) because these experiments violated the fundamental principles in the ASA ethical standards especially in maintaining objectivity, respecting the subjects’ rights to privacy and dignity, and protecting subjects from harm which is clearly shown in Zimbardo’s prison simulation where the one conducting the study became so engrossed in his role in the experiment rather than his goal. To help discontinue these kinds of experiment that posed danger to the well-being of the participants in the future; the group decided that the current American Sociological Association (ASA) ethical standards should be altered in order to aid sociologists in conducting their experiments safely. Despite the fact that these experiments are deemed unethical, it is undeniable that we found results helpful in understanding how the society works. Therefore, experiments like these should be done with utmost caution. After all, the basic principles of ASA should uphold the real purpose of these experiments, which is to find answers to questions without the need to violate and harm a person’s welfare.…
Experiments have been done for many more years than humans can count on the two hands in which they possess. Two experiments, in particular, were written, “The Stanford Prison Experiment” by Philip G. Zimbardo and “The Perils of Obedience” by Stanley Milgram. These experiments can be controversial for many different reasons, but neither of these experiments were completed under conditions of normality. The information collected in these experiments isn’t exactly based off of real life situations, it becomes difficult not to question the relevance of these experiments.…
The students involved in the Zimbardo Prison Experiment were not cruel people, nor were they truly sadistic. When given the roles as prison guards and prisoners, their behaviors changed dramatically. As prison guards, normally friendly students acted as prison guards under the warden. Under the authority of the guards, the students with the roles of prisoners acted unnaturally and did as the guards told them. Similarly, the soldiers in Germany under Hitler's command did as they were told and acted as they did, not because they were bad people, but because of their positions in German society. They were soldiers and did as a German soldier under Hitler would do. Neither prison guard nor soldier acted aggressively because of their own personalities,…
This study was conducted by Professor Phillip Zimbardo at Stanford University in 1971. Zimbardo wanted to find out if a situation can control the person or can an individual’s beliefs, attitude and values would allow one to rise above their current situation. He wanted to look more in-depth in the behavioral and sociological consequences in the roles of the guard and prisoner. Also, he wanted to find out why and how social situations can overwhelm people. In order to find study subjects, Zimbardo advertised in the paper for healthy, male students and offered $15 a day for up to two weeks. His subjects were predominately white, middle class students with no history of drug use or a criminal record. The basement of Stanford’s psychology department…
How does ‘Lyndiee England at Abu Ghraib’ help us to understand why good people to bad things?…
When obeying authority one can often loose thought of morals and beliefs. In the experiments the men obey the authority figure by doing cruel things they would not usually do. These experiments turn mentally stable men into a person willing to inflict harsh punishments on innocent people while following orders. Night by Elie Wiesel, The Milgram Shock Experiment, and the stanford prison experiment shows how obedience to an authority can cause people to stray from their conscience.…
The Stanford County Prison experiment by Zimbardo (1971) supports Milgram’s study. Zimbardo (1973) experiment took place in a pretend prison house which was created in the basement of Stanford University. This was to investigate the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner/prison guard. Participants in both studies had a difficult time ending the experiment. The participants felt they did not want to appear inconsistent or leave the experiment. Participant’s behaviour was in control by social/professional forces and environmental contingences, rather than their own personality traits or character power.…