in New York City Nationality : American Spouse: Christina Maslach Early Years: Brooklyn College in 1954, triple majoring in psychology, sociology and anthropology. Yale University where he received his M.A. in 1955 and his Ph.D. in 1959. Early Years Taught at Yale from 1959 to 1960. Became a professor of psychology at New York University, From 1960 to 1967. Taught at Columbia University from 1967 to 1968. Joined the faculty at Stanford University in 1968. Known For: Stanford prison experiment, The Time paradox The Lucifer Effect Abu Ghraib Analysis Time Perspective Therapy Social Intensity Syndrome Stanford Prison Experiment The purpose of this study was to observe what happens when you put good people in an evil place.
This study has become a classic
example of the power of social situations. It analyzes the psychology of evil and the controls of human feelings. Procedure Conducted at basement of Jordan Hall (Stanford's psychology building) on August 14–20, 1971. Funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research. Participants: 24 normal, healthy middle class students were put in a mock prison. Some were made "guards" and others "prisoners". Procedure
The group was intentionally selected to
exclude those with criminal background, psychological impairments or medical problems. They all agreed to participate in a 7–14-day period and received $15 per day (equivalent to $87 in 2015). Procedure: Debriefing The researchers held an orientation session for guards the day before the experiment, during which they instructed them not to physically harm the prisoners. In the footage of the study, Zimbardo can be seen talking to the guards: "You can create in the prisoners feelings of boredom, a sense of fear to some degree, you can create a notion of arbitrariness that their life is totally controlled by us, by the system, you, me, and they'll have no privacy ... We're going to take away their individuality in various ways. In general what all this leads to is a sense of powerlessness. That is, in this situation we'll have all the power and they'll have none." Mock Prison Hold 3 prisoners each Small space for the prison yard, solitary confinement, and a bigger room across from the prisoners for the guards and warden. were to stay in their cells all day and night until the end of the study guards worked in teams of three for eight-hour shifts. The guards did not have to stay on site after their shift. Participants Guards: wooden batons to establish their status. clothing similar to that of an actual prison guard. mirrored sunglasses to prevent eye contact. instructed to call prisoners by their assigned numbers, sewn on their uniforms, instead of by name. Participants Prisoners uncomfortable ill- fitting smocks stocking caps chain around one ankle Procedure The prisoners were "arrested" at their homes and "charged" with armed robbery. The local Palo Alto police department assisted Zimbardo with the arrests and conducted full booking procedures on the prisoners, which included fingerprinting and taking mug shots. They were transported to the mock prison from the police station, where they were strip searched and given their new identities. First Night Zimbardo started off with nine guards and nine prisoners. the volunteer prisoners were awakened at 2:30 AM by the guards blowing their whistles. The prisoners mocked the guards, trying to regain their individuality. The prisoners soon realized that the attitude of the guards was very serious and that they demanded obedience. The guards used physical punishment and exercises, such as pushups, in order to show their authority to the prisoners. Second Day Morning: a rebellion broke out among the volunteer prisoners. They ripped off their uniforms and locked themselves in their cells by pushing their beds up against the door. Guards who were not on duty were called in and the guards who were assigned to only the night shift stayed with the guards who came in all the way through their shift the next morning. The tactic the guards came up with was to fight back in order to discipline the unruly prisoners and make them obey. In response to the prisoners barricading themselves in their cells, the guards used fire extinguishers on them to get them away from the entrances. stripped the inmates naked, tore apart the beds and the cell, and put the prisoners who had started the rebellion in solitary confinement. As all nine guards could not be on duty at once, they began rewarding the prisoners for good behavior. Use of Positive and Negative Reinforcement The prisoners who had not been involved in starting the riot were allowed to lie in their beds, wash themselves and brush their teeth and eat while those who had started the riot were not allowed to. In the case of one prisoner, who was a smoker, the guards were able to control his behavior because they decided when and if he was allowed to smoke. First to withdraw Less than two full days into the experiment, one inmate began suffering from depression, uncontrolled rage, crying and other mental dysfunctions. The prisoner was eventually released after screaming and acting unstable in front of the other inmates. This prisoner was replaced with one of the alternates Third Day allowed visiting hours for friends and family. The visitation was closely monitored and timed with many rules and restrictions. "drama" was a rumored escape plan that the prisoners were planning on carrying out directly after visiting hours. The “Drama” The prisoner was going to have some of his friends round up, break into the prison and free all of the prisoners. After one of the guards overheard this plan, an informant was placed in among the prisoners and the escape never happened. The prisoners who had been thought to have organized the escape were disciplined and harassed with more pushups and toilet cleaning. At some point, even the prisoners who were thought of as role models, those who obeyed all of the guards' commands were being punished. Going to the bathroom was considered a privilege rather than a necessity, and those who acted out against the guards were made to urinate and defecate in a bucket in their cell. Results By the end of the experiment, there was no unification among prisoners as well as guards.
Guards also had won complete control over all of
their prisoners and were using their authority to its greatest extent. One prisoner had even gone as far as to go on a hunger strike. When he refused to eat, the guards put him into solitary confinement for three hours (even though their own rules stated the limit that a prisoner could be in solitary confinement was only one hour). Instead of the other prisoners looking at this inmate as a hero and following along in his strike, they chanted together that he was a bad prisoner and a troublemaker. Contributions 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. 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). Therefore, the findings support the situational explanation of behavior rather than the dispositional one. Contributions the Stanford Prison Experiment remains an important study in our understanding of how the situation can influence human behavior. The study recently garnered attention after reports of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuses in Iraq became known. Many people, including Zimbardo himself, suggest that the abuses at Abu Ghraib might be real-world examples of the same results observed in Zimbardo's experiment. Ethical Considerations Lack of fully informed consent by participants as Zimbardo himself did not know what would happen in the experiment (it was unpredictable). Also, the prisoners did not consent to being 'arrested' at home. Ethical Considerations Beneficence participants playing the role of prisoners were not protected from psychological harm, experiencing incidents of humiliation and distress. For example, one prisoner had to be released after 36 hours because of uncontrollable bursts of screaming, crying and anger. Ethical Considerations Debriefing Zimbardo did conduct debriefing sessions for several years afterwards and concluded they were no lasting negative effects.