Page 474 -

466 CHAPTER 15 Working with human subjects

THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT
Many interesting and important questions about human behavior in difficult
situations can only be examined by conducting studies that expose participants
to the risk of significant psychological distress. As interesting as these questions
may be, the risks are substantial enough to make this research effectively off
limits.
The Stanford prison experiment, conducted by Philip Zimbardo and his
colleagues during the summer of 1971, provides an example of both the risks
and insight potentially associated with research that exposes participants to
significant emotional distress. In order to examine the social forces associated
with prisons, the researchers divided a group of Stanford undergraduates
(all males) into “guards” and “prisoners.” Prisoners were arrested at their
homes, blindfolded, placed in uniforms, and incarcerated in a makeshift
prison constructed in the basement of Stanford's psychology building. Guards
were not given training—they were simply told to do what was necessary to
maintain order.
The researchers and participants were all surprised by their responses.
Both guards and prisoners completely fell into their roles. Guards humiliated
prisoners, using tactics such as awaking prisoners throughout the night for
“counts” and placing people in solitary confinement to establish their authority
and prevent rebellion. Prisoners temporarily lost their personal identity,
thinking of themselves only by their prisoner number. They were passive,
depressed, and helpless. One prisoner suffered significant stress, including
crying and rage. Both the guards and the researchers responded like real prison
staff, believing that he was faking. Dr. Zimbardo—the professor in charge
of the experiment—found himself acting like a prison warden, bristling at
concerns for the well-being of the prisoners—who were, after all, innocent
bystanders. Originally planned for 2 weeks, the study was terminated after
six days, out of concern for the participants (Haney et al., 1973; Zimbardo,
2008b).
The observation that seemingly ordinary people would quickly assume the
role of sadistic prison guards raises serious questions about the role of context
in determining human behavior. Although we would all like to think that we
would not behave abusively in such contexts, the Stanford Prison Experiment
raises the concern that environment and expectations can play a huge role
in encouraging seemingly inhuman behavior. This lesson continues to have
significant relevance, through explorations including Kyle Alvarez’ 2015 film
The Stanford Prison Experiment and Philip Zimbardo’s outspoken commentary
on the behavior of guards at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (Zimbardo,
2008a,b).
The Stanford prison experiment also provides a cautionary tale regarding
the evolution of research ethics. Despite the known potential for harm, this