The Stanford Prison Experiment
Ethics is one of the fundamental pillars of psychology. While the two subjects are distinct, ethics requires morality to be upheld while conducting experimental work. In this perspective, conducting a psychological experiment should consider ethical implications aligned with legal, professional and other facets (Dolly, 2006). However, observing moral codes while doing a psychological research may be challenging as the researcher aim to realize expected results. Such scenario leads to an ethical dilemma in experimental work. This has resulted in review of ethical codes by relevant bodies concerning psychological experiments. This paper examines ethical issues in the Stanford prison experiment as a psychological research; establish an in-depth understanding before drawing a conclusion.
The Stanford prison experiment is one the most influential studies in the field of psychology. The test was conducted in 1971 from 14th to 20th August at Stanford University (Gerrig, Zimbardo & Campbel, 2011). The research was led by Philip Zimbardo, who was a psychology professor at the University. The experiment involved 24 undergraduate students who were selected from a broad cross-section of 70 volunteers. The participants were to take the role of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison that was set in the basement of the psychology building at the University. The primary aim of the experiment was to test the hypothesis that situational variables influences human behavior and causes the prevalence of abusive acts in the prison environment. Zimbardo and his research team wanted to know the response of the ‘prisoners’ after being held in a simulated prison surrounding (Rtnesar, 2011). To enhance the accuracy of the results, the research team ensured that all the participants had no criminal records, and were free from psychological issues and mental illness.
However, the experiment that was projected to take two weeks was terminated earlier than expected. The experiment was prematurely terminated on the sixth day after the guards became cruel to the prisoners causing severe distress to them. The interaction between the guards and prisoners became more hostile and dehumanizing. At the end of the experiment, it became apparent that individual behaviors are highly influenced by the situation rather than the personalities (Zimbardo, 2006). For instance, the guards acted with authority as they were placed in a commanding position while the prisoners were placed in a situation that portrayed the loss of control thus making them inferior, passive and distressed. As a superintendent of Stanford Prison, Zimbardo was also absorbed by the job as he admitted to overlooking abusive behaviors by the jail guards till Christina Maslach questioned the morality of the experiment (Zimbardo, 2006). The Stanford prison experiment is a proof of how the situation can influence an individual to change their character without their awareness. The experiment explains why prison environment is always characterized by abusive and dehumanizing behaviors.
The ethicality of Stanford Prison experiment has been questioned by many psychology scholars. Based on the current codes of ethics in the psychology field, the test appears to have a very low score regarding fulfilling the rules, conditions, and criteria. Firstly, the ethical codes of conduct require an experiment to adhere to the principle of beneficence. In this context, the researcher should minimize the possible harms while maximizing the benefits. The Stanford research violated the principle of beneficence at a greater magnitude. Zimbardo experiment participants suffered a considerable anguish while the research team was aware of the situation. For instance, five of the participants in the experiments had to be released early due to the harsh prison environment and cruel behaviors perpetrated by the guards (Zimbardo, 2011). The violation of the principle of beneficence was exhibited by numerous incidences that involved humiliation and dehumanizing of prisoners.
The Stanford prison experiment also violated the principle of rights which a fundamental concept in ethicality. The principle of rights stipulates that participants in any research study have a right to leave at their free will at any stage of the experiment. Zimbardo violated the freedom of the members which is against this principle. For instance, the research team allowed the operation to continue despite the willingness of the participants to leave the mock prison. The ethical codes also require the researcher to adhere to the principle of respect for persons. In this regards, the participants of a study should be treated as autonomous agents and ensure that individuals with diminished autonomy are protected. For instance, Zimbardo became absorbed into his role as superintendent of Stanford Prison and allowed the guards to continue with their harsh and unethical conducts. However, the participants in this experiment were randomly selected, and the roles assigned were for research purpose only (Ratnesar, 2011). From this perspective, Zimbardo acted unethically for failing to protect ‘prisoners’ from cruel acts of the guards.
The principle of respect for persons was highly infringed. The Zimbardo experiment also violated the principle of justice. Thus, the policy calls for a fair distribution of benefits and risks of a particular research. The adverse impacts of the Stanford Prison environment were apparent on the second day of the experiment. However, it took Zimbardo five extra days to terminate the operation. He only considered the decision after a third party questioned the morality of the experiment. In this context, there was an unfair distribution of benefits and risks arising from Zimbardo experiment. More priority was given to potential scientific benefits compared to the resulting psychological harm. A partial replication of Zimbardo experiment is observed in a BBC prison study undertaken in 2002 by Steve Reicher and Alex Haslam (Zimbardo, 2011). However, the results and conclusion of this study differed with Stanford experiment regarding the role of leadership and stress. The difference in results was highly attributed to lack of generalizability in Zimbardo experiment.
Personally, I believe the Stanford prison experiment should have conducted as it happened regardless of several ethical issues raised by the research. The study revealed the extent to which situational variables can influence human behavior. It is notable that not all scholars in social science believe that Stanford experiment achieved valid results. For instance, the authors in the BBC prison study argued that Zimbardo experiments lacked consistency as the guards were only acting according to the instructions. However, the participants in the Stanford experiment were randomly assigned roles and neither prisoners, nor the guard had legally earned their positions. Moreover, the participants were scrutinized to ensure that none of them had past criminal records (Gerrig et al., 2006). The validity of the results can be further be ascertained by the fact that even Zimbardo was also absorbed by the situation despite him being aware it was just an experiment. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that Stanford experiment was a worthy research.
In my viewpoint, the Zimbardo experiment required an essence of a real prison to realize expected results. However, the research team should have altered some issues to ensure that the analysis upholds ethics. For example, the participants who were negatively affected by the prison environment should have been granted free will to leave the prison. This adheres to the principle of right as stipulated by the ethical codes of conduct (Dolly, 2006). Zimbardo also had a duty to ensure that the autonomy of the participant is respected by the guards. This would have protected the guards from unnecessary stress and anxiety. In my right frame of mind, I will only participate in such an experiment either as a research participant only if I am treated with dignity and I have a free will to leave. In the modern society, Zimbardo’ experiments set up and results would have been altered to ensure that it reflects gender balance and to observe established codes of ethics.
The above discussion reveals that ethics is a fundamental pillar in psychology. Psychological experiments need to adhere to the established codes of ethical conduct in order to uphold morality and human dignity. The paper shows that the Stanford prison experiment violated key principles of ethics. These include the principle of right, justice, respect, and beneficence. Despite criticism from several social scientists concerning validity and generalizability of Zimbardo results, the experiment clearly proved that situational variable has an upper hand in individual behavior. This proves that Zimbardo’s experiment was a worthy research. However, future experiments need to incorporate codes of ethics and gender balance to enhance generalizability and validity of results and conclusion.
Dolly, J. R. (2006). Research ethics and philosophy (chapter 3). Retrieved November 18, 2015, from http://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/39937_3.pdf
Gerrig, R., Zimbardo, P., & Campbell, A. (2011). Psychology and life. New York: Pearson Higher Education AU.
Zimbardo, P. (2011). The Lucifer effect: How good people turn evil. New York: Ebury Publishing.
Ratnesar, R. (2011). The menace within. Stanford Alumni. Retrieved from https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=40741
Zimbardo, P.G. (2006). Or rethinking the psychology of tyranny: the BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 47-53.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of the situation. The Chronicle of Higher Education 53(30).
Why Work with Us
Top Quality and Well-Researched Papers
We always make sure that writers follow all your instructions precisely. You can choose your academic level: high school, college/university or professional, and we will assign a writer who has a respective degree.
Professional and Experienced Academic Writers
We have a team of professional writers with experience in academic and business writing. Many are native speakers and able to perform any task for which you need help.
Free Unlimited Revisions
If you think we missed something, send your order for a free revision. You have 10 days to submit the order for review after you have received the final document. You can do this yourself after logging into your personal account or by contacting our support.
Prompt Delivery and 100% Money-Back-Guarantee
All papers are always delivered on time. In case we need more time to master your paper, we may contact you regarding the deadline extension. In case you cannot provide us with more time, a 100% refund is guaranteed.
Original & Confidential
We use several writing tools checks to ensure that all documents you receive are free from plagiarism. Our editors carefully review all quotations in the text. We also promise maximum confidentiality in all of our services.
24/7 Customer Support
Our support agents are available 24 hours a day 7 days a week and committed to providing you with the best customer experience. Get in touch whenever you need any assistance.
Try it now!
How it works?
Follow these simple steps to get your paper done
Place your order
Fill in the order form and provide all details of your assignment.
Proceed with the payment
Choose the payment system that suits you most.
Receive the final file
Once your paper is ready, we will email it to you.
No need to work on your paper at night. Sleep tight, we will cover your back. We offer all kinds of writing services.
No matter what kind of academic paper you need and how urgent you need it, you are welcome to choose your academic level and the type of your paper at an affordable price. We take care of all your paper needs and give a 24/7 customer care support system.
Admission Essays & Business Writing Help
An admission essay is an essay or other written statement by a candidate, often a potential student enrolling in a college, university, or graduate school. You can be rest assurred that through our service we will write the best admission essay for you.
Our academic writers and editors make the necessary changes to your paper so that it is polished. We also format your document by correctly quoting the sources and creating reference lists in the formats APA, Harvard, MLA, Chicago / Turabian.
If you think your paper could be improved, you can request a review. In this case, your paper will be checked by the writer or assigned to an editor. You can use this option as many times as you see fit. This is free because we want you to be completely satisfied with the service offered.