Title of the experiment: Stanford prison experiment

Name of the main experiment: Philip G. Zimbardo

How many subjects: 75 responses, the 24 male subjects judged to be most mentally and emotionally
stable were selected. Mainly middle class and white, they were divided into two groups randomly, of 12
prisoners and 12 guards.

What is the sampling method/technique used: The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) was a social
psychology experiment that attempted to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power,
focusing on the struggle between prisoners and prison officers. conducted an extremely controversial
study on conformity to social roles, called the Stanford Prison Experiment. His aim was to
examine whether people would conform to the social roles of a prison guard or prisoner, when
placed in a mock prison environment.
Enumerate and explain the ethical guidelines that have been violated by the experiment:
1. Right to Withdraw– A fundamental tenet of ethical research is not soliciting participation under
coercion. Although the participants were initially informed of their right to withdraw their
participation in the study, it was subsequently revoked. Whilst Zimbardo argues that they chose to
stay in the study the right to withdraw was compromised as “the prisoners reinforced a sense of
imprisonment by telling each other that there was no way out” (Zimbardo, P., p. 2).

2. Deception/Informed consent– Whilst Zimbardo argues that participants were informed of the
conditions they would experience, there were other conditions in the experiment, such as being
arrested by a real policeman at their home and the level of degradation to be experienced over
the course of the experiment had not been outlined in sufficient detail. Deception was evident
throughout the study and as such was unethical.

3. Debriefing– The study also failed to debrief participants until several years later, at which point it
was difficult to assess what level of psychological harm had occurred as a result of participation in
the experiment. A post-experimental debriefing is now considered an important ethical
consideration in the design of a study and may serve to protect participants from further
psychological harm and rehabilitate those affected by participation.

4. Protection from Harm– Not all risks that arose from the study were anticipated however, the study
was not immediately shut down when they did arise. Participants playing the role of prisoners
were not protected from psychological or physical harm, experiencing significant incidents of
physical abuse, humiliation and psychological distress. “For example, one prisoner had to be
released after 36 hours because of uncontrolled bursts of screaming, crying, and
anger”(McCleod, S, p. 4). Ethical guidelines for the protection of participants from physical and
psychological harm were developed as a result of the Stanford Prison experiment.

The SPE’s core message is not that a psychological simulation of prison life is the same as the real thing,
or that prisoners and guards always or even usually behave the way that they did in the SPE. Rather, the
SPE serves as a cautionary tale of what might happen to any of us if we underestimate the extent to
which the power of social roles and external pressures can influence our actions. I also found it
revealing. With my eyes glued to the screen in rapt attention, heart racing, I became obsessed with
understanding what really was going on, and the lessons we can glean from such an experiment gone so
horribly wrong. I think a really important point here is that power amplifies the person. It gives already
existing personality dispositions and tendencies a louder voice, and increases the chances that these
tendencies will be given fuller expression. Thus, we must consider interactions between the person and the
situation. As Galinsky and colleagues point out, "the situation loses its suffocating hold over the thoughts
and behavior of the powerful... and they are left with their own opinions, beliefs, attitudes, and
personalities to drive their behavior."

Zimbardo and his colleagues (1973) were interested in finding out whether the
brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic
personalities of the guards (i.e., dispositional) or had more to do with the prison
environment (i.e., situational).
For example, prisoner and guards may have personalities which make conflict inevitable, with prisoners lacking
respect for law and order and guards being domineering and aggressive.
Alternatively, prisoners and guards may behave in a hostile manner due to the rigid power structure of the
social environment in prisons. Zimbardo predicted the situation made people act the way they do rather than
their disposition (personality).

Stanford Prison Experiment was a study that was conducted to determine the psychology of imprisonment. It was
a simulation experiment that was carried out at Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. Stanford Prison Experiment, a
social psychology study in which college students became prisoners or guards in a
simulated prison environment.This has been dubbed as the classical psychological experiment regarding prisoners
and even explains the prisoner abuse that was meted to the poor Muslim prisoners at Abu Ghraib Prison in Cuba.
The research questions were to know whether evil prevailed over humanity or whether humanity was suppressed
by the evil? A further question was to determine the consequence of putting normal people in an evil place such as
a prison. The simulated experiment of prison life was conducted in Stanford University by the students in the
Summer term of 1971. Over the years there have been some controversial psychology experiments over many
decades. psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison

Essays, UK. (November 2018). Stanford Prison Experiment.

Retrieved from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/sociology/an-examination-of-the-stanford-prison-

experiment-sociology-essay.php?vref=1