Summary: Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment centered around the theory of Social Roles & Authority, and he essentially wanted to test the impact of social situations on perceived social roles and behavior in a simulated-prison context.

Implications: In this study, Zimbardo sought to understand whether the brutality reported among prison guards in the US was the result of individual personalities or social situations; thus, he selected 24 men, judged to be mentally and physically well, to be evenly split into “prisoners” and “guards.” Within the first day of the study, guards were already harassing the prisoners; prisoners also began exhibiting behavior akin to real prisoners (i.e. discussing prison life). Physical abuse was banned in the study, but common forms of punishment involved push-ups where guards would step on prisoners’ backs. By the second day, a rebellion had broken out, but it was swiftly put down, leaving the prisoners in a state of “helplessness.” One prisoner even began exhibiting symptoms of a psychotic break. The study only lasted six days when it was originally scheduled for two weeks.

Limitations: The Stanford Prison Experiment is infamous for not only its unethical practices—deception, lack of consent, and undue risk of psychological harm—but also the amount of misinformation that has been spread about the study. Many of the Zimbardo’s findings are incredibly nuanced, but they should be taken with a grain of salt. And once again, the influence of social roles does not relieve an individual of guilt.

YOUR NEXT MOVIE NIGHT:

Sources

Mcleod, Saul. “The Stanford Prison Experiment.” Stanford Prison Experiment | Simply Psychology, 2020, https://www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html.

“The Stanford Prison Experiment: 40 Years Later.” Stanford Libraries, https://library.stanford.edu/spc/current-exhibits/past-exhibits/stanford-prison-experiment-40-years-later#:~:text=Carried%20out%20August%2015%2D21,using%20a%20local%20newspaper%20ad.