Once transferred to the mock prison, they were given numbers to replace their names. The prisoners at Attica had one chief complaint, and that was a request to be treated in a way that was humane. They were enjoying their role of power. Most agreed and were denied parole. The participants were recruited through a newspaper ad and underwent tests to ensure that they were physically and psychologically sound before being admitted to the experiment. I think a big reason is what the prison study shows--they fall into the role their society has made for them.
After converting the basement of the Stanford Psychology Department into a mock jail, it was decided that guards would wear uniforms derived from a military surplus store and prisoners would wear poorly-fitting muslin smocks and rubber sandals. Certain portions of the experiment were filmed and excerpts of footage are publicly available. As a purely venture, the experiment was a failure, but it generated some results that give an insight into human psychology and social behavior. No prompt for this action was given by Zimbardo; the guards used their own initiative to formulate the plan. What the students knew going into the experiment Within the 6 torturous and stressful days of the simulated prison environment, the prisoners and the guards willingly conformed to the roles that they were given and expected to play. He had an inclination that the guards were starting to abuse prisoners and should have supervised their behavior better.
The experiment could not be replicated by researchers today because it fails to meet the standards established by numerous ethical codes, including the Ethics Code of the. To the surprise of many, the prisoners accepted the physical and psychological abuse and, at the request of the guards, readily harassed other prisoners who attempted to prevent it. The participants were not given all the facts about what exactly they were signing and consent forms were not properly completed. But is the study really that unethical, or are the results just so shocking that we want to find a way to disregard the research? One of the biggest criticisms of the Stanford Prison Experiment is the length of time it took Zimbardo to halt the experiment, despite overwhelming evidence showing that even by the second day conditions inside the replica prison had begun to seriously unravel. Two of the most famous social psychology experiments that have gone past being ethical have been the Milgram obedience study and the Zimbardo prison experiment. Next, the experiment proved that prisoners and guards alike succumbed to the situational attributes of behavior. This means that confidentiality was maintained.
The guards had become so brutal to the prisoners that two prisoners had some form of nervous breakdown, one developed a nervous rash all over his body and one went on a hunger strike. E: For example, in one instance a prisoner asked to leave the study but Zimbardo replied as a superintendent and did not consider the participants safeguarding. In addition, it would be very difficult for anybody to replicate the experiment conditions. In order to further understand the Stanford Prison experiment I learned how the experiment was conducted, thought about the ethical quality of this experiment, and why I think it panned out how it did. Some of the people who chose to be prisoners thought it would be easier as they thought it would only involve being in a cell and those who chose to be guards thought it would be fun to play that part. This subject should have been dismissed from the project immediately, but was instead bribed to continue his participation in the experiment.
Issues can arise when deception is used. Why are they coming to school unprepared? Possibly the gravest mistake he made was not pre-testing the participants, and the way that the advert was worded may have garnered responses from people more inclined towards masochistic and controlling behavior. The first concerns the consent form that the participants signed before joining. To Zimbardo's suprise, the participants took to their roles entirely serious, as the guards enforced measures and ultimately subjected some of the prisoners to psychological and physical. This is consistent with a Senate investigation which reported that military psychologists were recruited to assist develop more aggressive interrogation methods. The guards were angry and distressed.
Unexpectedly, the prisoners were arrested by the actual Palo Alto Police Department, booked and jailed. The Stanford Prison Experiment was designed in 1971 to test the hypothesis that prisoners and guards are self-selecting; this means that the individuals have certain characteristics that 1 determine the group to which they belong; and, 2 encourage undesirable behavior in the group members. Right from the start of the Stanford Prison Experiment there were ethical issues at stake. The study was stopped because of the abuse of the prisoners, so perhaps abuse was the dependent variable? Four prisoners had to be released as early as the second day due to extreme emotional reactions, and one developed a psychosomatic rash soon later which also required that he be released. A parole board was convened, and participants were given the opportunity to leave as long as they were willing to give up the participation fee. To make a correction, the participants, both prisoners and guards were debriefed.
The results of the experiment have been used in many high profile court cases over the years, to try and show that a prison must have clear instructions and guidelines from higher level authorities, or prisoner abuse may occur. Protection from harm- Researchers must eliminate potential risks to maintain physical and psychological well-being of the participants. Next, the prisoners were made to wear uncomfortable clothing and were denied underwear, further dehumanizing them and ensuring that their prison stay would be uncomfortable on the most basic level. 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. Deception is an acceptable activity in many research experiments, but I feel the deception practiced in this experiment was much more harmful. In the aftermath of the study, many of the guards and prisoners indicated that they were only acting out roles that they thought were expected of them, so there is no consensus on whether the study really portrayed human nature or not. The Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment.
The Stanford Prison… 1150 Words 5 Pages ethical or could it be said that ones true colors would show? What are the Zimbardo Prison Experiment Ethical Issues and Would the Same Experiment be Allowed to Take Place Today? Parents of the subjects were lied to in a effort to make them think that their child was not being physically or emotionally abused. Participating in the Stanford Prison Experiment is something I can use and share with students. Deception in research is one area where balancing the needs for statistical accuracy and against ethics is always a very difficult process. I am not sure if I agree with you since I think that if the Stanford study was ethical or not is not even a question. The study recently garnered attention after reports of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses in Iraq became known.
I would be fairly certain that there were lasting, harmful effects left on the subjects of this experiment. Situations are indeed powerful--but the results of this experiment were not so conclusive as they are usually presented. I don't feel the insight gained into the conditions experienced to prisoners and guards was worth the process for several different reason. Better safeguards should have been put in place to protect the participants from potential risks. The simulation revealed the power of the situation to influence people's behaviour. This was one week of my life when I was a teenager and yet here it is, 40 years later, and it's still something that had enough of an impact on society that people are still interested in it. If an inmate decided not to eat, they would be put in solitary confinement and locked up.
Depicted in movies, television, and of course all introductory psych textbooks, the true story is rarely told of what really happened in that famous and controversial experiment. It was a simulation experiment that was carried out at Stanford University, Stanford, Calif. He admitted being more concerned with a potential escape plan than focusing on his experiment. While the guards were giving their orders, the prisoners became apathetic. And I have all that from Dr.