Palo Alto, CA, 1971: Stanford University psychology professor Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues set out to conduct a study that measured the impact of becoming either a prison guard or a prisoner. 24 male students out of a pool of 75 were selected to participate; participants had no criminal records and were rigorously screened to insure no one suffered from mental deficiencies (i.e. anxiety, etc.). The group was then divided when members were randomly assigned either the role of prison guard or prisoner.
Distributed by IFC, a movie called The Stanford Prison Experiment is being released in select theaters Friday, July 17th; this film will be available on VOD platforms on July 24th. But before you rush out and see this one, learn the shocking truth about the psychological study that stunned academia—and still resonates to this day.
A mock-prison was set-up in the basement of one of the university’s academic buildings. The study was expected to last two weeks, but was abruptly halted after only 6 days when it became obvious that Zimbardo and his team had lost control—and real abuses began to occur.
If you plan on seeing The Stanford Prison Experiment later this month, keep the following facts in mind in order to gage the film’s authenticity:
•Identify and explain at least two ethical dilemmas that the participants faced.
•Determine how the ethical dilemmas that you identified in part one of this discussion relate to criminal justice employees (law enforcement/courts/ corrections) and the challenges that they face today.
Watch the video titled “The Stanford Prison Experiment” (13 min 41 s) located here. Be prepared to discuss.
The Stanford Prison Experiment video shows us how quickly we can take on the role that is assigned to us (e.g., prisoner or guard in this case). As discussed in the video, there were some ethical concerns about this video, especially in regard to the “correctional officers’” behavior. What are the main things you learned from watching this video? Do you think it was a worthwhile experiment, or are the ethical concerns so great that this type of experiment should not be allowed to be conducted?
Is this why so many people walk through life like automatons, afraid to voice opinions that challenge the powerful, tacitly accepting institutional abuses? And what does the Stanford Prison Experiment imply about the core nature of all human beings? Best to draw your own conclusions.
What I find most disturbing about the Stanford Prison Experiment isn’t that it proved humans have a natural propensity towards evil (the pessimist in me accepted that fact long ago). What disturbs me most is that only one of the participants quit the study.
The results of the Stanford Prison Experiment have been used to explain the actions of the Nazis, the disenfranchisement of inner-city youth, and the abuse and torture of Iraqis by American soldier at Abu Ghraib Prison.
So what does it all mean? According to Zimbardo, his experiment proved that a person’s environment plays a prominent role in his or her behavior. When the guards were given power, they tended to abuse it; when prisoners were dehumanized, they became depressed and passive. In other words, if given the chance to misbehave, a person will become a monster. Likewise, when deprived of basic liberties, people can easily become sheep.
The recent video below includes interviews with Zimbardo and other participants of the Stanford Prison Experiment, reflecting on their experiences and how participating in this study has effected their lives, as well as actual footage filmed during the study. It also does a great job of putting the experiment into proper historical context.