1. Stanford Prison Experiment

2. Background
Landmark psychological study of the human response to captivity.
Conducted in 1971
Led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University.
Volunteers played the roles of the guards and prisoners.

3. Funded by the U.S Navy to explain conflicts in its and the Marine Corps’ prison systems

4. Hypothesis
Prison guards and convicts were self –selecting that would naturally lead to poor conditions in that situation.

5. Participants Recruited via a newspaper ad Offered $15 a day
Participate in a mock prison simulation for 2 weeks
24 were chosen based on a series of tests that proved they were the most psychologically stable and healthy.
White, middle class, young males.

6. Roles Divided in half into equal groups of prisoners and guards.
Coin toss

7. Prison Mock jail Basement of Stanford Psych. Dept
Research Assistant was the “Warden”
Zimbardo was the “Superintendent”

8. Goals
Depersonalization
Deindividualization
Disorientation

9. Guards Wooden Batons, military style uniforms and mirrored sunglasses.
Work in shifts and return home during off hours.
Given no formal guidelines except that they were not allowed to touch the prisoners.

11. Prisoners ill fitting smocks (no underwear) Sandals
Assigned #’s –no names
Nylon pantyhose caps
Small chain around ankles

13. The Beginning
Participants were charged with armed robbery by real police officers.
Fingerprinting, mug shots, strip searched and deloused.

14. Results Prisoners suffered sadistic and humiliating treatment.
Developed severe emotional disturbances (crying and disorganized thinking).
Riots
Strenuous punishments were imposed. (i.e. push-ups)
Prison became unsanitary and bathroom rights became privileges.

16. Results (cont) Clean toilets with bare hands.
Sleep on concrete floor naked.
Denied food.
Guards became more and more sadistic.

18. The End
After only 6 days the experiment was shut down!!

19. Conclusions
Argued to demonstrate obedience of people and power of authority.
Situation caused the behavior not inherent personalities.
Compared to Miligram experiment.

20. Criticisms Unethical Results cannot be reproduced or replicated
Zimbardo was not a neutral observer
Not like an actual prison
Sample size was too small
People who were drawn to the ad in the newspaper, may be predisposition for violent behavior.

21. Questions
Was it right to trade suffering experienced by the participants for the knowledge gained by the research? Why or why not?
If you were an experimenter in charge, would you have done this study? How could you have made the study more ethical?