Philip Zimbardo’s Prison Study Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was supposed to be a small two week study to view individual’s responses to being held captive, being dehumanized, and the overall effects of being in a situation portrayed as either a prisoner or guard. The study took place in 1971 and only lasted six days due to the effects it had on its participants. This experiment was highly controversial and inflicted mental pain to its participants. So where did it all go wrong? Why did the participants so quickly act against their typical self? Was this experiment ethical? Let’s find out.
Zimbardo posted a flyer at the college seeking volunteer students to play the roles of both guards and prisoners for a fifteen dollars a day. …show more content…
They were also given cop like sunglasses to prevent eye contact with the prisoners. This was to create a sense of authority and unity. Unlike the prisoners, the guards were able to leave after their “shifts” added to the reality of the role. So many of the guards later volunteered to stay for longer shifts and extra duty without pay. This was because they wanted to stay in this role of being superior and acting differently than they do outside the experiment. They were told the first day of the experiment that it was “their responsibility to run the prison, and they could do so in any way they wished” and they did just that.
Once the study started the first day was for the most part uneventful. Each participants was feeling out how they should and could act. But on the second day things became more interesting. On day two cell one barricaded their cell door with the beds in their cell and refused to follow the guard’s orders and instructions. The guards were obviously not too happy about this little rebellion and ultimately attacked the prisoners with fire extinguishers to allow the guards to break down the …show more content…
Prisoner 416 tried to express his concerns of the hostile environment the guards were making it. The guards took no care in his concerns and punished everyone with more abuse. Prisoner 416 then went on a hunger strike and refused to eat his sausages at meal time, so the guards put him into solitary confinement which was a small dark closet. And for further punishment the guards then made the other prisoners loudly bang on the door while shouting at him. The guards said they would be released him from the tiny closet if all the other prisoners gave up their blankets and slept on their bare mattresses, which all but one refused to do.
Over fifty people watched as the experiment unfolded and never questioned its integrity or morality. But finally when Christina Maslach observed the condition of the prison and the actions of the participants, she objected and told Zimbardo this was wrong and that he needed to put an end to this. So that’s what he did, he discontinued the experiment on day six of a supposed fourteen day
The Stanford Prison Experiment was supposed to be a small two week study to view individual’s responses to being held captive, being dehumanized, and the overall effects of being in a situation portrayed as either a prisoner or guard. The study took place in 1971 and only lasted six days due to the effects it had on its participants. This experiment was highly controversial and inflicted mental pain to its participants. So where did it all go wrong? Why did the participants so quickly act against their typical self? Was this experiment ethical? Let’s find out.
Zimbardo posted a flyer at the college seeking volunteer students to play the roles of both guards and prisoners for a fifteen dollars a day. …show more content…
They were also given cop like sunglasses to prevent eye contact with the prisoners. This was to create a sense of authority and unity. Unlike the prisoners, the guards were able to leave after their “shifts” added to the reality of the role. So many of the guards later volunteered to stay for longer shifts and extra duty without pay. This was because they wanted to stay in this role of being superior and acting differently than they do outside the experiment. They were told the first day of the experiment that it was “their responsibility to run the prison, and they could do so in any way they wished” and they did just that.
Once the study started the first day was for the most part uneventful. Each participants was feeling out how they should and could act. But on the second day things became more interesting. On day two cell one barricaded their cell door with the beds in their cell and refused to follow the guard’s orders and instructions. The guards were obviously not too happy about this little rebellion and ultimately attacked the prisoners with fire extinguishers to allow the guards to break down the …show more content…
Prisoner 416 tried to express his concerns of the hostile environment the guards were making it. The guards took no care in his concerns and punished everyone with more abuse. Prisoner 416 then went on a hunger strike and refused to eat his sausages at meal time, so the guards put him into solitary confinement which was a small dark closet. And for further punishment the guards then made the other prisoners loudly bang on the door while shouting at him. The guards said they would be released him from the tiny closet if all the other prisoners gave up their blankets and slept on their bare mattresses, which all but one refused to do.
Over fifty people watched as the experiment unfolded and never questioned its integrity or morality. But finally when Christina Maslach observed the condition of the prison and the actions of the participants, she objected and told Zimbardo this was wrong and that he needed to put an end to this. So that’s what he did, he discontinued the experiment on day six of a supposed fourteen day