Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Report On The Standford Prison Experiment

    Uploaded by

    anaya amir

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Report On The Standford Prison Experiment

    Uploaded by

    anaya amir
    8 views3 pages

    Original Title

    Report on the Standford Prison Experiment

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    8 views3 pages

    Report On The Standford Prison Experiment

    Uploaded by

    anaya amir

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    REPORT ON THE STANDFORD

    PRISON EXPERIMENT
    Anaya Amir 4-d
    REPORT ON THE STANDFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT

    Assignment

    One of the most well-known psychological experiments was the Stanford Prison Experiment,
    carried out in 1971 by Stanford University professor Dr. Philip Zimbardo. The purpose of the
    experiment was to investigate the psychological impacts of authority and power in a prison
    simulation.

    Overview
    24 male college students in good physical and mental health were recruited for the
    experiment, and they were split into two groups at random: guards and convicts in a mock
    prison. The study was carried out at the Stanford psychology building's basement, which was
    fully converted into a mock jail complete with uniforms, prison cells, and security cameras.
    With all details matching to an actual prison cell to improve or upkeep internal validity of the
    experiment.

    The guards received sunglasses and outfits to conceal their identities, while the prisoners
    received prison uniforms and were robbed of their personal possessions to strip them of their
    identity. The participants gave their all to their assigned roles. The study was supposed to last
    for two weeks, but because of the subjects' severe psychological suffering, it was called off
    after just six days.

    Major Findings

    1. Both guards and inmates rapidly adapted to their new positions, with guards acting in
    an authoritative manner and inmates expressing indications of psychological suffering
    and disobedience just like inmates of an actual prison would.

    2. The guards mistreated the supposedly detained prisoners physically and


    psychologically because of their perceived authority. Over time, this behaviour
    worsened, which negatively impacted and effected the inmates' mental health.

    3. The participants lost their individualism and moral bounds as their identities were
    consumed by their responsibilities and their prison badge number. Prisoners were
    further dehumanised and mistreated because of guards starting to view them as
    inferiors rather than fellow participants very early on in the experiment.
    Ethical Considerations

    Informed Consent: The participants were not sufficiently informed about the potential risks
    and psychological harm associated with the study. Participants' right to withdraw from
    the study and their autonomy were compromised by the lack of informed consent.
    Deception: Participants were misled about the true nature of the experiment, resulting in
    psychological distress and trauma. This deception undermined the trust between researchers
    and participants and went against ethical principles of honesty and transparency.
    Psychological Harm: The extreme psychological stress experienced by participants,
    especially prisoners, raised ethical concerns about the potential long-term consequences of
    the study. Many participants reported suffering emotional trauma, underscoring the ethical
    imperative to prioritize participants' well-being over research goals.
    Lack of Intervention: Despite the increasing abuse and unethical behaviour, the senior
    experimenter and his team did not intervene in time to protect the participants from
    harm. The lack of interventions compromised the ethical responsibility of researchers to
    prioritize the well-being of participants over the pursuit of knowledge.

    Conclusion

    The Stanford Prison Experiment remains a controversial and ethically fraught study that
    continues to generate debate in the psychological community. Although it has provided
    valuable insights into the dynamics of power and authority in social contexts, its ethical
    shortcomings underscore the importance of conducting research while respecting the well-
    being and ethical principles of participants. The legacy of SPE is a cautionary tale for
    researchers and underscores the need for strict ethical oversight in psychological research.

    You might also like