Critical review 1

Critical Review Priscilla A/P Andrus Kumar (B0901138) Center of SNHU Studies PSY 257 Mr. Kumareshan

Critical review 2 Critical Review The three experiments that will be critically reviewed are the Stanfords prison experiment, Milgrams obedience experiment, and Aschs conformity experiment. These three experiments were well-known experiments which greatly influenced the face of psychology (Cherry, 2010). For instance, Stanfords prison experiment functioned to shed light on how one can be transformed by his or her environment (Mcleod, 2008b), Milgrams obedience experiment functioned to shed light on the influence of an authority figure on a persons actions (Cherry, 2011), and Aschs conformity experiment functioned to shed light on how individuals are susceptible to social pressures for conformity (Neto, 1995, p.217). However, these studies were not excluded from criticism for the way they were conducted; in fact each study was criticized for different areas (Cherry, 2011; Mcleod, 2008a, 2008b). Therefore, each of the study mentioned above would be critically reviewed in the latter parts of this paper by taking into account its proposed theories, methodology and findings. Stanfords Prison Experiment The Stanford prison experiment is an interesting study because it played a role in showing how one could simulate a role and fit into it within a short period (McDermott, 2011). This study was a brainchild of Philip Zimbardo and was carried out in the year 1971 (Sleek, 1996). His partners in this study were Christine Maslach and Craig Haney (Sleek, 1996). Together they orchestrated what was said to be a study gone haywire (Sleek, 1996). The aim of this study is to investigate how readily people would conform to the roles of guard and prisoner in a role-playing exercise that simulated prison life (Mcleod, 2008b, para.1). Zimbardos curiosity was provoked when he wanted to know whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards or had more to do with the prison environment (McLeod, 2008b, para. 2).

Critical review 3 This study was conducted by using 24 male students to assume the randomly assigned roles of guards and prisoners (McDermott, 2011; McLeod, 2008b). These students were picked out of 75 volunteers, where only the ones who are normal cognitively and emotionally were selected (McDermott, 2011). The psychology building of the Stanford University was utilized by Zimbardo to create a real life prison where the students would stay for two weeks (McLeod, 2008b). The first task of the now guards and prisoners were to assume their role (McLeod, 2008b). The guards were given clothing and other things that guards would possess such as a khaki uniform, together with whistles, handcuffs and dark glasses (McLeod, 2008b, para.5), whereas the prisoners were arrested at their own homes, without warning, and taken to the local police station (McLeod, 2008b). Zimbardo, who assumed the role of the warden (McDermott, 2011), observed the behavior of the prisoners and guards (McLeod, 2008b, para.5). Just within 24 hours, it was observed that the guards were already planning out unique types of ways to abuse the prisoners because they were forbidden to physically harm the prisoners (McDermott, 2011). They also established a set of rules concerning the prisoners which included night drills and public humiliation (McDermott, 2011, p.645). Before long, rebellion arose from the prisoners in the form of resistance and hunger strike (McDermott, 2011). There were also other unpleasant outcomes during this mock prison experience. Prisoners started having mental challenges where they started showing signs of emotional disorder that could have had lasting consequences (McLeod, 2008b, para.16). For example, one prisoner had to be released after 36 hours because of uncontrollable bursts of screaming, crying and anger (McLeod, 2008b, para.22). At that time, due to all these problems, Zimbardo was forced to stop the study at its sixth day, which fell short from the original duration planned after he was convinced by Maslach (McDermott, 2011).

Critical review 4 After a tumultuous study, Zimbardo analyzed his findings and found that people will readily conform to the social roles they are expected to play, especially if the roles are as strongly stereotyped as those of the prison guards (McLeod, 2008b, para.18). Other than that, he also found that the prison environment was an important factor in creating the guards brutal behavior (none of the participants who acted as guards showed sadistic tendencies before the study) (McLeod, 2008b, para.18). Therefore, it was concluded that roles that people play can shape their behavior and attitudes (McLeod, 2008b, para.18). When critically reviewed, this study was a very risky study yet it was so beneficial to the knowledge of psychology and of society. This study was not without its criticism (McLeod, 2008b), yet it served as a fundamental knowledge to the field of psychology. The negative points of this study is that emotional and mental aspects of the prisoners were not taken into account when Zimbardo planned to imprison these prisoners who had no idea whatsoever about living an isolated life. Although, in defense of Zimbardo, it was stated that, Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment (it was unpredictable) (McLeod, 2008b, para. 22), it should be of common knowledge as to how one would have to endure emotional isolation when they are put away from the people that they are used to for few weeks. Therefore, it is not a good argument when it is stated that Zimbardo did not know what was coming because normal human responses to isolation of any kind would never be positive and would be detrimental to ones mental health. This can be easily observed in normal people who get homesick. These people actually face changes in their emotional state just because they do not have the company of the people that they know well. If these people face these kinds of challenges and changes, how much more the student prisoners would feel when they are isolated from people that they know and are placed in a place which has bars of iron? Therefore, it is of my opinion that Zimbardo failed to weigh the consequences that would

Critical review 5 come as a result of classifying and isolating students in a role that requires them to be submissive. However, it was necessary for Zimbardo to classify students into two groups. If that was not done, it would not have been clear just how much people fit into their roles and tend to align every aspect of themselves to their roles, such as emotionally and mentally. But, on the other hand, Zimbardo could have been more cautious by being more sensitive to human emotions before proceeding to the execution of the experiment by monitoring his own emotional and mental reaction if he was the guard or the prisoner. In that way, the risk of permanently damaging ones mental and emotional health would not be so high to the extent that the study would be considered as gone haywire (Sleek, 1996). In this study, the controls are the mental and emotional state of each of the participant of the study. It was made sure that each participant was stable mentally and emotionally (McDermott, 2011), so that any changes in the behavior of the participants would be significant so study. Other than that, the results that were obtained in this study were convincing enough. The results were basically derived from the observation of Zimbardo throughout the six days and also from the interview he conducted with some of the participants of the study (McLeod, 2008b). The results showed how much of an influence an environment can have on a persons attitude and behavior and dramatic changes can also be witnessed as a result of the environment. This is supported by the confession of students who were assigned as guards who said that they found it difficult to believe that they had behaved in the brutalising ways that they had. Many said they hadnt known this side of them existed or that they were capable of such things (McLeod, 2008b, para.20). Other than that, students who were assigned to be prisoners claimed that they couldnt believe that they had responded in the

Critical review 6 submissive, cowering, dependent way they had. Several claimed to be assertive types normally (McLeod, 2008b, para.20). All these confession by students just goes on to suggest that the results obtained by Zimbardo was convincing. Despite, the obvious contribution of the Stanford prison experiment, there is one question which remains unanswered. How would females react if they were put in the same situation? As stated earlier, there was rebellion which arose from the prisoners and the guards acted brutally. The question of doubt is, would the same scenario have occurred if females were put in such a situation? Females are usually known for their submissive nature and probably the issue of rebellion would not have risen and the female participants would have been observed to be more affected emotionally and mentally. However, no facets of this study has been allocated to study the gender differences, therefore this area remains unanswered. Milgrams Obedience Experiment Milgrams obedience experiment was a study which helped to explain the incident of the Holocaust (McLeod, 2007). The Holocaust provoked Milgram to develop his research question, which was could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?" (Milgram, 1974, as cited in Mcleod, 2007, para.3). Adolph Eichmann, during his World War II trial, defended his actions of ordering millions of Jews to be killed by saying that he only obeyed instructions (Cherry, 2011). His defense of himself provoked an interest in Milgram to find out the influence of an authority figure (Cherry, 2011).Therefore, the aim of Milgrams experiment was to find out how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person (McLeod, 2007, para 7). Other than that, he was interested in how easily ordinary people could be influenced into committing atrocities for example, Germans in WWII (McLeod, 2007, para 7).

Critical review 7

Milgram started conducting his experiment in the year 1961 and had 40 men to participate in the experiment by putting on advertisements in the newspaper (Cherry, 2011). When this study begun, each of these 49 men were introduced and paired with another so-called participant who was actually a confederate (McLeod, 2007). The participant and the confederate then would draw lots which states which role they would play, but unknowingly to the participant, the lots were already determined in a way that the confederate would always be the student (McLeod, 2007). The confederate, who plays the role of a student, is strapped to a chair in another room with electrodes (McLeod, 2007, para.9). The confederate is then given a list of word-pairs to learn and after he has learned a list of word pairs given him to learn, the "teacher" tests him by naming a word and asking the learner to recall its partner/pair from a list of four possible choices (McLeod,2007, para.9). Later on, the teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake, increasing the level of shock each time (McLeod,2007, para.10). In order to administer the fake shocks to the students, Milgram constructed an intimidating shock generator (Cherry, 2011, para. 4).In the shock generator, theshock levels were labeled from 15 to 450 volts (Encina, 2003, para.4).In order to test the willingness of the teachers to obey the authority figure and administer electric shocks, students gave most of their answers wrongly and teachers have to administer electric shocks (McLeod, 2007). When the teachers found it difficult to continue in administering shocks to the students, they were encouraged by being told that they are required to continue with the experiment because they were required to, it is important for them to continue and they do not have any choice but to continue in administering those shocks (McLeod, 2007).

Critical review 8 Through this study which was conducted, Milgram found that ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being (McLeod, 2007, para. 14). This was supported by the fact that 65% of the participants in Milgrams study delivered the maximum shocks (Cherry, 2011, para.8) despite the fact that it was predicted that no more than 3 out of 100 participants would deliver the maximum shock (Cherry, 2011, para.8). One of the major criticisms of this study was its methodology. The methodology of this study was heavily centered on the use of deception, which at the time when it was conducted was not acceptable and it was not common (Kimmel, 2011). However, after the critical review of this study, it was found necessary for the use of deception by Milgram although it was considered as unethical at that time (Kimmel, 2011). The use of deception allowed the proper analysis of ones actions because one might not exhibit his or her normal or original reaction if they knew that they are being monitored or watched. Other than that, the use of deception allowed the disproving of the earlier prediction made which stated that only a few people would administer fatal electric shocks. This disproving of the prediction brought about a valuable discovery of how great the influence of an authority figure has on a person (Cherry, 2011). Other than that, this study also opened up new doors for deception where some benefit of its utilization was finally noticed and accepted (Kimmel, 2011). If it had not been for Milgram and this study, many studies would not have had the opportunity to utilize deception and therefore many valuable discoveries would not have been made. The results that have been obtained from this study are of utmost importance because it could explain some of the doubts that many have concerning the killing of many Jews, which was a cruel and despicable act. Many would have wondered as to how normal human beings

Critical review 9 could commit such a cruel act, given the fact that they are not psychopaths. Milgram, in my opinion, succeeded in providing a legitimate reason as to how cruel acts could be committed ever so readily by people. He established the influence of the role of an authority figure that is powerful enough to make people harm others just for the sake of instructions received. This discovery has led many to believe that cruel acts are indeed possible in the presence of a figure that is intimidating and fearful. Despite the great contributions that have been made by this study, there is still a question that has been left unanswered. It is regarding the role of women if they were participants of this study. Perhaps, the findings of the study would have been different had it been women who were participants. This is because women express their emotions more readily than men and are sometimes more affected emotionally than men. Therefore, the true nature of human beings could not have been observed because the emotions of women would have taken center stage at that time. Other than that, it would have been interesting to know that if women also did administer fatal shocks to the students. It would have been a great discovery where gender roles and stereotypes are not considered which could have resulted in the establishment on a common characteristic that all human being would possess regardless of whether they are male or female. Aschs Conformity Experiment In 1951, Asch devised what is now regarded as a classic experiment in social psychology, whereby there was an obvious answer to a line judgment task (McLeod, 2008a, para.8). He wanted to find out the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform (McLeod, 2008a, para. 9). The experiment that Asch carried out consisted of few steps where one participant were put in the same room as seven other confederates gave wrong answers when they were asked to estimate the length of the lines given in a line

Critical review 10 judgment task (McLeod,2008a). At the end of the experiment, Asch found that about 75% of participants conformed at least once (McLeod, 2008a, para. 11). When this study was critically reviewed, it was found that its methodology was appropriate as the use of deception was present. The use of deception allowed the full observation of how one would conform to pressures from the surrounding. This also prevented one from hiding the effect of conformity because there are high chances for one not to show how much conformity affects them when they know that they are being monitored. The results that were obtained from this study were very convincing in the sense that how one could conform to others so easily despite what they think is right. These results suggested why unpleasant things are being committed although one knows it is not right; it is all due to conformity. By knowing this important human tendency to conform to others, one can manipulate this knowledge in order to promote better practices that could be beneficial. Conclusion Shortly, the three studies reviewed above were indeed studies like none other which brought about fresh changes to the field of social psychology. As long as there are curious people like the researchers mentioned above, there will always be new discoveries that would benefit the field of social psychology.

Critical review 11 Reference Cherry, K. (2010). 6 famous psychology experiments. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/b/2010/07/20/6-famous-psychology-experiments.htm Cherry, K. (2011). The Milgram obedience experiment. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/historyofpsychology/a/milgram.htm Encina, G.B. (2003). Milgrams experiment on obedience to authority. Retrieved from http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7article/article35.htm Kimmel, A.J. (2011). Deception in psychological research- a necessary evil? British Psychological Society, 24(8), 580- 585. McDermott, R. (2011). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. Political Psychology. McLeod, S. (2007). Milgram experiment. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html McLeod, S. (2008a). Asch experiment. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/asch-conformity.html McLeod, S. (2008b). Zimbardo Stanford prison experiment. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html Neto, F. (1995). Conformity and independence revisited. Social Behavior and Personality, 23(3), 217-222. Sleek, S. (1996, October). Bittersweet Memories of Study Gone Haywire. Monitor.