The Stanford Prison Experiment, though we did learn a vast amount from the study, was completely unethical. The people behind the experiment failed to give the volunteers full disclosure about it, and I am sure that the majority of the subjects would not have volunteered to be a part of the study if they had been warned of the repercussions it would have on their psyches. The men who broke early into the study would not have volunteered for it, and after the experiment, the people were not given the help they needed to receive in order for their mental health to show no effects from the study. This factors into the protection of the subjects. The subjects were not protected and left untreated after the study. Today, that piece, alone, would make the Stanford Prison Experiment unethical according to ASA guidelines. In addition, the subjects were also taken advantage of for their economic situation. The experiment offered $15 per day, which was a decent amount of money for the time period. They knew enough about the experiment beforehand to know that being in a prison for the intended two weeks would be less than ideal, and that decent amount of money would probably not be worth it. Those who thought maybe the paycheck was too good to be true and thought there had to be a catch were right. In no way was that amount of money suiting for the emotional toll the experiment would take on the volunteers, another ethical barrier. Another unethical act the experimenters did during the Stanford Prison Experiment was they did nothing when the guards began to get abusive. The prisoners were obviously suffering, being deprived of their basic liberties and things they did not even know could be taken away from them. Even air and having enough space to stretch out became luxuries, and though the experiment was ended early, it should have ended much sooner because the unethical practices from the guards were getting way out of hand. aardvark123
Even after what we learned in class today for conducting experiments this video was disturbing to watch. The experiment was completely wrong and I believe it should have been ended much sooner. I also believe the intentions for the experiment might not have been bad, however the entire concept is a very weird one to play out in real life. They were only offering fifteen dollars each day to endure something that psychologically destroyed most of those men. I know no amount of money can really make anyone want to do that, but fifteen dollars just seems like such a small amount. The experiment from the very beginning did not follow the guidelines of a good experiment. From the very beginning in the video he even says the words "deception of omission". He did not state to everyone in the experiment what would be happening to every person. He did not tell the prisoners that they were going to be arrested in real life and then blind folded and taken somewhere where they had no idea where they were going. Therefor from the beginning the experiment had a very wrong start. The fact that as the researcher he told the guards they were allowed to do whatever they wanted and then proceeded to follow through with their actions is morally wrong. For five days he allowed those guards to physically and mentally abuse innocent men. He sat and watched as the prisoners had mental break downs and become zombies in their cells. He did not intervene he allowed the experiment to continue. I understand he eventually stepped in and cut the experiment short, but he let it go on for entirely too long. He did not keep the people participating safe, he was not 100% honest or fair to them and therefor I think this experiment is very morally wrong. Litv123
The Stanford Prison Experiment was thought up by Phillip Zimbardo, and was carried out by mentally stable men to see how prison life would affect them. Zimbardo challenged authorities by saying that the environment that prisoners were held in contributed to their behavior, and he wanted to see if his claim was true. During the experiment, a group of men were randomly given the role to be guards and others to be prisoners. All off the men who participated in the experiment volunteered and were being paid $15 a day. However, Zimbardo left out a few details to the people that were the prisoners. He didn’t tell them that the people who were assigned to be guards had already set up the “prison” to their liking and gotten uniforms. He also did not tell them that they would be picked up at their house by a real police officer, handcuffed and brought into the station where they were then blindfolded. Once blindfolded, they were brought to the “prison” where the experiment was taking place. Zimbardo gave the guards full power to do what they wanted to do, and ultimately the experiment showed that human kind would take on a role if we were put in a certain situation. The experiment was unethical and immoral; it also was the catalyst to ethical guidelines being established. The fact that the people in the experiment were not given the full truth about what was going to happen was unethical. Ethics in science was brought to a new awareness, and as such there are now laws stating what was acceptable and what was not. The way this experiment happened never would have happened today. There are many consent forms that a lot of people must fill out before embarking on being the subject of an experiment. Not to mention that full disclosure must be brought to the subject’s attention as well. Today, no one can interview/study you without knowing exactly what they are getting into. sunflower123
The Stanford Prison Experiment is one of the most well known experiment to this day. It is taught in most schools around the nation, in Psychology classes and Sociology classes especially. Although the Sociology world learned a lot from this experiment, it was considerably unethical. The people conducting the experiment were very straightforward with the test subjects. They told them exactly what was going on, received their consent, and were getting paid quite nicely for their cooperation in the experiment. The experiment conducted was very interesting to me. I would of never thought taking good kids and putting them in a "jail" would have much effect on their behavior and who they were as people. The results were very surprising to me, especially in the time frame it happened. The thought that good people could take on the role of a prison guard or a prison inmate and believe it to be true in less than 24 hours is mind blowing to me. The purpose of the entire experiment was to see if situations have an effect on who we are as people. It is very true we adapt to our surroundings and act totally dependent on the situation at hand. The test subjects became totally subjective to the experiment. The prison guards, who used to be good kids, were considerably different when they put the uniform on. They became mean, aggressive, and demanding of the inmates, making them do whatever they wanted to keep order and to keep their power over them. I feel bad for the inmates who became totally compliant with whatever the guards told them to do. They became zombies who had no control over themselves because they were scared and powerless. The most interesting thing to me is how quickly all of this occurred. One person had a mental breakdown 36 hours in, and within 5 days the rest of the kids turned to zombies. Scuba123
I learned about the Stanford Prison Experiment in Psychology 110. We watched a movie on it, wrote a paper about it, and discussed it in class. We also discussed it in class today. The experiment occurred in 1971. The experiment had twenty-four test subjects. Half of them became guards, and the other half became prisoners. All of the test subjects were considered relatively well-behaved, good boys. When the officer arrested them, they put a blindfold on them and when they arrived to the prison, they stripped them. When prisoners would act out in violence or other manners, they would tie them up, beat them, and/or put them in solitary confinement. Each day the guards became more and more violent towards the prisoners. The guards became scarily powerful. Within the first thirty-six hours, a boy had a mental breakdown. He was screaming, crying, and freaking out. He was released by the experimenter. A few days later five more people had breakdowns and were released. The prisoners who were left, became "zombies". The prisoners had no control over themselves because of their fear and lack of power. It was psychological torture for both guards and prisoners. The results surprised the leaders of the study. They expected there to be verbal abuse, such as teasing, not physical abuse and a major power trip. This experiment was extremely controversial. Some people believe that this experiment is unethical because it psychologically and physically harms the test subjects. The opposite side argues that they were offered a generous sum of money, and that the test subjects knew exactly what the experiment would entail. While it is and was controversial, the experiment would not be allowed today under the current ethnical guidelines. In my opinion, it was unethical even though sociologists were able to learn a lot about human nature from this experiment. -softball_savvy123
The Stanford Prison experiment demonstrates this kind of evil human nature that is within every person as well as showing how environment affects how one acts. The most insane part of this entire experiment is how quickly the prisoners and guards fall into their roles. It only took five days for some of the “prisoners” to have mental breakdowns due to the guard’s awful treatment. One of the guidelines when conducting a sociological experiment is the safety of the participants Zimbardo did not intervene when the guards began beating and humiliating the prisoners. When dealing with sociology and psychology there are many different studies that may cause the participants to be harmed because society does some cruel things. So if you wanted to study those cruel things you may end up psychologically manipulating participants which causes great harm. Sociologists must find ways to study society without causing such harm. The Milgram experiment is simple to the Zimbardo experiment as it proves that normal humans have the capability to cause great harm to other people when put in a situation that enables them to do so, but there was no psychological or physical harm to any participants. Although this experiment is extremely unethical I think what it reveals about the human psyche is so important. Rush Limbaugh once debated on his talk show that if he had been on the bus with Rosa Parks he would have let her keep her seat. I think this experiment proves to Rush Limbaugh and to all of people that we would not have let Rosa Parks keep her bus seat nor would we be immune to participating in any cruel behavior. The kids of the Stanford Prison experiment were social advocates at the time, yet they were still susceptible to evil behavior. Thus, social justices warriors in our time have the capability to be oppressors they simply haven’t been put in the situation. - Glass123
Before even watching this video about the Stanford Prison Experiment, I can already say I’ve heard about this and it is just awful. To break things down, the newspaper put out an ad asking for college students who will be paid to stay in a prison for a couple of weeks for an experiment. They chose twenty-four healthy students and assigned half to be guards and half to be prisoners. Seems pretty harmless so far right? They had the “guards” come down and set the prison up to meet their needs and really make them feel like it's theirs. So, psychologically, this is already changing the way the students are thinking. The “prisoners” were then arrested like normal and taken to the prison, so this is psychologically making them feel less than their classmates already. By day two, the guards were showing force against the prisoners by breaking down their doors and tying them up. The guards started to gain more power all because of the mindset that they were taught within the first two days. The guards were made to feel untouchable and the guards were meant to feel worthless. The tasks that were performed against the prisoners were just absurd, making them clean toilets with their bare hands, throwing their blankets in the dirt. This whole experiment just makes my stomach turn. Eventually one students is released when he has an awful emotional break down and begs for a doctor. And five days later five more were released because they were so overwhelmed. The remaining students basically became poor, mindless zombies and just did what they were told. Not much in this tape is said about the guards however and how they are feeling during this whole endeavour. I mean, even the people conducting the experiment said that this started to make them sick and uncomfortable to watch. rosethorns123
The stanford county prison experiment illustrates the effects that come from a person having too much power. The guys in the experiment were not people you would expect abusive behavior out of, they were good people who were attending college and joined the experiment as a way to earn some extra money. Dr. Zimbardo followed some of the American Sociological Association guidelines for conducting research except he did not follow a lot of them which is why his experiment would be considered unethical today. He did pay the participants $15 per day which was good, however he failed to tell them all of the details of the experiment and he did not look out for their safety like he needed to. The men that were assigned as prisoners endured serious emotional trauma and some physical abuse. In fact, that is the part that is so shocking about this experiment. Nobody expected the guards to get so caught up on a power high and inflict such abuse on the prisoners. It opened people's eyes to the danger of trusting a large amount of power on a person or group of people. If these well intentioned college men reacted in the way that they did, what is to say that anyone given the same power would not act in the same way? This experiment aroused the concern for prisoners in real life who may be the victims of abuse from power crazed guards. It is debatable as to whether the stanford county prison experiment findings were worth the misery of the innocent prisoners. While I do not think it would be worth it to put the prisoners through what they went through now that we know, I think it was a huge breakthrough in our society that I am glad we discovered. -Chameleon123
The Stanford Prison experiment was the best known psychological study of all time. It all began in the West Coast America in the summer of 1971 people were anti authority. The experiment consists of the attempt to put good people in a bad place. In 1971, there was an ad put in the city newspaper to target male college students for a psychological study of prison life. $15 per day for 1-2 weeks. 75 volunteers were given psychological tests. They were split in two groups: prisoners or guards. A degradation ritual was done on the men once they were arrested. By the second day the prisoners would retaliate. It’s all about institutional power. Within 36 hours the prisoners from the experiment have an emotional break down and they must release them. The one’s who didn’t break down became mindlessly obedient. They followed any and everything that the guard may tell them. This experiment showed how easy it was to abuse power. What did they expect to be the outcome of the Stanford Prison experiment? With what they did with the Stanford Prison experiment it was done inhumane. I can understand why the experiment was done to get research on people as far as race, age frame, or any other method for collecting research. Researchers took people of the same demographic group and put them in a jail environment and control them. This caused the people to have long term mental problems. The prisoners that were released was probably on the verge of committing suicide. The males that were taken as guards used their authority and power to treat the inmates inhuman. The prisoners were being degraded. I really think that this research study was really messed up. They took male college students and put them in prisons are either guards or prisoners to get a mental reaction. Even tho the prisoners were paid for the research conduct it was not worth it in my opinion. I’m quite sure the volunteers from this experiment is suffering in so many ways. Rendezvous123
The Stanford Prison experiment was an unjust act towards innocent people. The first mistake the researchers made was not telling their group everything that was going to happen to them. It’s important that you inform the group of what they’re signing up for before they agree to do it, or else you are doing things to them against their will, which is not right. The researchers sent cops to “arrest” the prisoners without telling them and blindfolded them. Then they loused them pretending it was lice to degrade them. This is an unethical experiment because of the inhumane treatment. I think that when the experiment got out of hand and the guards took control of it, it should have been shut down. I don’t think there is a point to continue research when you’re only witnessing abnormal behavior. I’m not aware of any guards in real life who treat prisoners so bad in a prison. And if there is such a thing going on somewhere in the world, the researchers could just go witness that instead of harming innocent people. I think that it was right to let some of the prisoners go when they acted out. Although, I think that the silence from the rest of them is just as worrisome. I think those that stayed quiet might have either been keeping their thoughts inside and freaking out or had a strong mindset and knew it was all pretend. I think sociologists could learn that humans react quickly to power and being degraded. This fact could help shape societies and prevent harm in reality. I think the prison settings should change because this experiment proved that the prison cause the guards and prisoners to act the way they did, considering they were all good people before it started. I also think that it was beneficial because of what sociologists and other researchers learned of how to treat their future subjects. -Kiwi123
After watching the video on The Stanford Prison Experiment I feel that it was not conducted properly. Even though it was suppose to last one to two weeks long it was shut down only after five days. My thoughts are it should of ended much sooner, or not even at all. The man performing the experiment was Dr. Philip Zimbardo. Dr. Zimbardo was not one hundred percent totally honest with the subjects being tested. Even though the subjects were paid fifteen dollars a day, which wasn’t a bad salary in the late seventies when the experiment was being conducted, their safety was not taken into consideration. One of the main goals of an experiment is that the safety of the subjects is never questioned. The subjects did answer an ad in the paper and did volunteer to participate in the experiment. The subjects were good natured kids at the beginning of the experiment. Twenty four people were involved in the experiment. Twelve of the people were to be guards at a jail and the other twelve were to be inmates. The twelve guards were allowed to help develop the prison cell and that gave them a feeling that it was their own. The twelve inmates were actually picked up by real police officers blindfolded and taken to the fake jailhouse. There they were stripped, degraded of their dignity, and sent to jail. Once there the inmates were made to do things like clean toilets with their bare hands, beaten, tied up, and some were even put into solitary confinement. Zimbardo did not stop the beatings the guards were giving. He only wanted to know what was going on. The power the guards received went to their heads, and they even got more aggressive. After thirty-six hours some of the inmates had to be released from the experiment because of their mental state. The ones that were left were no more than zombies, just doing what they were told to do without any life at all. The biggest part of the experiment I had a problem with is that there was a lack of honesty with what the experiment was going to be about. The other part I had a problem with is the safety of the inmates and their mental state even after the experiment was over, for the years to come. Diver 123
What I find so fascinating about the Stanford Prison Experiment is the lack of moral empathy for anyone participating in the experiment from those organizing the experiment. Although it may just be a construct of its time, as with the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, to put the test subjects through as much physical and emotional pain as possible. It seems to me that a bigger lesson was learned regarding humanity and the ill will to do bad unto others before you do bad unto yourself. Although the Stanford Prison Experiment was meant to be a learning experience it was more of a reminder on how humans truly are the most dangerous species on the planet. With just the flip of a coin a choice was made by the odds that some students would be guards while the other students would be prisoners. It is hard for me to believe however, and maybe it's because I'm just a couple decades too late, but wouldn't the experiment prisoners being blindfolded be a dead giveaway that something just wasn't right about this whole thing? At what point do you draw the line between being over dramatic for the effect of an experiment, and just being plain silly? Again, maybe it's just because I wasn't born in this specific time period. Getting back to the scenario however, the man in the video pointed out that the prisoners who were already rebels of society in the outside world, had completely conformed to the commands of the prison guards over a matter of days and had become zombies against their own will. That sort of reminds me of society today, but in a way more twisted Frankenstein kind of way. Needless to say, the Stanford Prison Experiment will serve as a valuable lesson for those who wish to conduct raw studies for years to come. Perhaps a little more subject control is in order to provide better results for such an experiment. Just a thought.-MrG123
As a psychology major, the Stanford Prison Experiment was one of the first things I learned in school that made me fall in love with psychology. As an experiment itself, it was unethical and should not have been allowed. However, it demonstrates just how large of an effect that our culture and surroundings have on us. We cannot undo this experiment, so the best we can do is to learn from it. The experiment offers us ways to better dissect ethics and ways to better understand how easy it is to adapt to a new culture if the conditions are right. The people who participated in this experiment were average, young adults. The people placed into guard roles were no more likely to become guards than the men who were placed into prisoner roles were likely to become prisoners. It is incredible, and a bit terrifying, to see how much and how easily someone can change based on their situation and environment. These people were only in this experiment for five days (thank goodness it wasn’t any longer) and there were huge differences in the participants from day one to day five. The power really got to the people placed in the roles as guards. This lead to a lot of misuse of power, and many of the guards began to take it way too far. In 2015, a movie replicating the experiment came out. I was in tears by the time it was over. I could not believe the horrendous things that the guards had made the prisoners do. And to think, the guards were just random, young adults trying to make some cash off of participating in an experiment. The Stanford Prison Experiment allows people to see how easily one can change his values, beliefs, and way of life based on his surroundings. This experiment made it easier for me to understand how the Jonestown Massacre could have occurred. When placed into a setting where immoral values are justified and rationalized, people may begin to pick up these heinous actions and ideas. Culture defines us, whether we like it or not. -M&M
The Stanford Prison Experiment was something I have learned in multiple classes throughout high school and college. While I understand that this experiment was done years ago in a different culture and time, I do not believe that this was an ethical experiment. The unethical components that I see that are most disturbing are stripping the prisoners naked, putting them in that tiny closet as solitary confinement and the physical abuse. I think all of those things crossed the line and really dehumanized these people that will most likely have lasting issues on them. With that being said, the outcome of the experiment is so intriguing. To be honest, it’s kind of scary to think about the conclusions from the experiment. We all like to think that if we were in that place then we would not behave the same way the test subjects did. But in reality, we are so alike and experiment after experiment proves that good people want power and will follow whatever everyone else is doing to fit in and be part of the group. The test subjects were young, college kids just trying to make quick money. The subjects were targeted through a newspaper ad. Out of the chosen subjects, half were randomly decided to be guards and the others were prisoners. The guards came a day early and helped set up the prison and chose their outfits. The prisoners were arrested by actual cops, blindfolded, and stripped. On the first day, Zimbardo almost stopped the experiment because he didn’t think anything was happening. On the second day, the prisoners rebelled and the guards made intense rules in which they stripped their clothes, acted violent, and took away ‘privileges’ - which were considered anything other than air. One kid had an emotional breakdown and was released. In the five days, five prisoners were released. The kids that were not released fell into thinking they were actually prisoners. They began to actually do whatever the guards wanted - they were as Zimbardo said ‘mindlessly obedient’. This experiment is extremely sad and disturbing. -SAS123
Being a psychology major, I have seen the Stanford Prison Experiment used in nearly every textbook for my courses thus far; the experiment has been one of the most pivotal and controversial experiments of the past century. Ethics and sociology must go hand in hand when one is talking about research. A researcher should first and foremost always be concerned about and take into consideration the safety of the participants. One quote that stuck out to me was when Zimbardo started that he would not have wanted his son to have played a role in his own experiment. If he had possessed that thought at the time instead of in retrospect, perhaps the experiment could have been altered towards a more ethically sound basis. In my humble opinion, one of the main problems with Zimbardo’s experiment (besides the unethicality of it, obviously) was that Zimbardo was an active participant himself. He played a sort of “warden” role over the whole thing and not at all an objective observer. While most scientific, especially psychological, studies try to limit implicit biases, Zimbardo chose to place himself right in the middle of the chaos. Another non-ethical problem I have with the Stanford Prison Experiment is that the participants used were all middle class Caucasian college-aged men. The study did not attempt to include any women or minorities or any people from different socioeconomic classes or anyone from a different age group. Ethically, the experiment was a nightmare. While the study did, to a certain extent, extrapolate the information it was trying to get at, it did so at the harm and risk or harm to all those involved. Experiments, as we talked about in class, should always primarily be concerned with the safety for all of those participants who agree to be involved. -ThreeTwo123
The Stanford Prison Experiment shouldn’t have been an experiment on human beings. This video was disturbing to watch. To ‘scare people’ into not escaping etc. should not rely on making them do harsh things within the prison. The prisoners shouldn’t have had to wash the toilets with their bare hands. The video was about how police officers had power over the prisoners. They called it institutional power. They decided to do whatever it takes to keep prisoners in order and maintain order within the facility. Many of the prisoners cried, screamed, and had irrational thinking. This experiment didn’t really prove anything back in the 1970’s besides decrease humans thinking, and turned them into a whole different person. As said in the video the prisoners who didn’t break down turned into zombies. This experiment showed two different outcomes, one of the outcomes the prisoners went crazy so they had to be released and the other outcome was the prisoners did everything they were told to do. Neither one of these are a good outcome of the experiment because It’s an unhealthy way of life and they weren’t actually prisoners they were just the ones chosen to do this experiment. Dr. Phillip Zimbardo shouldn’t have allowed this to get this far after witnessing what it was doing to the prisoners. This should have been reported and looked into because the way they treated ‘prisoners’ were inhumane. This experiment made humans look weak and crazy. They were treated like slaves and puppets. As said in the video situations can affect us more than we think. Meaning we may not think we would ever fall for inhumane things like slave work etc. until it happens and we have no other way around it. Dr. Phillip Zimbardo should have found a different way to get the prisoners to listen and obey other than torturing them. -Dancer123
The Stanford experiment is a well known experiment from the seventies that taught us about the use of power over other individuals. During this time period, there were many young individuals that rebelled and seemed to not want to listen to their authorities. It was a time when protests for peace and anti-government were common. Dr. Philip Zimbardo designed an experiment to see how the use of power and authority could affect other individuals. He was trying to see what would happen when putting good people in a bad place. The subjects were well paid for their participation and they were informed with what they were getting into. The controversial part of the experiment was that subjects were harmed psychologically. Though the subjects were informed that they were a part of a psychological study, some of the prison subjects could not handle the conditions. Within 36 hours, one inmate had a mental breakdown and was removed from the experiment. The guards used psychological tactics instead of physical force to maintain control of their prisoners. The guards degraded the prisoners and made them feel powerless by calling then names and making them perform many daunting tasks. As each day passed, the guards used harsher and harsher tactics towards the prisoners. The prisoners eventually turned into zombies that did whatever they were told. They were lifeless and obedient. After five days, the experiment was cut short. I think that this experiment was very interesting. Though it is a controversial experiment, I think that we learned a lot about the power of authority. I think that this experiment is on the edge of being unethical. Many people argue that harm was done to the prisoners. Psychological harm was done, but not physical harm. I think that more regulation should have been kept on the guards by the experimenter so that things would not get too out of hand. There came a point in the experiment where the prisoners were suffering and the entire simulation had to be stopped. I don’t think the experiment could be performed again today. I think it would have been interesting to see the roles of the guards and prisoners switch places midway in the experiment. I wonder whether or not the new guards would treat the new prisoners more harsh. Check123
This experiment just brings about thoughts of disgust and cruelty. I was appalled reading and listening to the horrific things that happened to the young men during this study. I do find it, however, to be very interesting that the individuals in this study became a product of their environment, taking on roles or identities that he may have never assumed during their home life. It also makes me wonder what allows peoples mind to snap and change, what allows people to feel they are more superior and can dehumanize an individual who is thought to be “beneath” them for lack of a better word? Also, why is it that after only two days’ people started portraying signs of having a mental break by their actions? How is it that young men who were given test after test after test who knew the length of time they’d be considered incarcerated and knew what the study was about, allow themselves to act in such a way to cause harm to one another? I understand the experiment took place in 1971, but in my opinion, $15 a day was not enough compensation for every ounce of torture these men endured during the three to five days they were incarcerated and researched. Seeing the things these men were subject to made me realize how important it is to follow the guidelines for research established by the American Sociological Association because it is my belief that at the first sign of depression, anxiety, relentless crying, and abuse that the research should have been cancelled instead of making them suffer through another one to three more days of tumultuousness. It is the duty of the researcher to keep people safe from harm and not intentionally place them in dangers way. I don’t think the researcher knew what would come of this situation but I’m sure there was an inkling of what might happen in which the researcher should have been well prepared to handle any situation that may have arose and reacted sooner than what he did. Benoodles123
The Stanford Prison Experiment, though we did learn a vast amount from the study, was completely unethical. The people behind the experiment failed to give the volunteers full disclosure about it, and I am sure that the majority of the subjects would not have volunteered to be a part of the study if they had been warned of the repercussions it would have on their psyches. The men who broke early into the study would not have volunteered for it, and after the experiment, the people were not given the help they needed to receive in order for their mental health to show no effects from the study. This factors into the protection of the subjects. The subjects were not protected and left untreated after the study. Today, that piece, alone, would make the Stanford Prison Experiment unethical according to ASA guidelines. In addition, the subjects were also taken advantage of for their economic situation. The experiment offered $15 per day, which was a decent amount of money for the time period. They knew enough about the experiment beforehand to know that being in a prison for the intended two weeks would be less than ideal, and that decent amount of money would probably not be worth it. Those who thought maybe the paycheck was too good to be true and thought there had to be a catch were right. In no way was that amount of money suiting for the emotional toll the experiment would take on the volunteers, another ethical barrier. Another unethical act the experimenters did during the Stanford Prison Experiment was they did nothing when the guards began to get abusive. The prisoners were obviously suffering, being deprived of their basic liberties and things they did not even know could be taken away from them. Even air and having enough space to stretch out became luxuries, and though the experiment was ended early, it should have ended much sooner because the unethical practices from the guards were getting way out of hand. aardvark123
ReplyDeleteEven after what we learned in class today for conducting experiments this video was disturbing to watch. The experiment was completely wrong and I believe it should have been ended much sooner. I also believe the intentions for the experiment might not have been bad, however the entire concept is a very weird one to play out in real life. They were only offering fifteen dollars each day to endure something that psychologically destroyed most of those men. I know no amount of money can really make anyone want to do that, but fifteen dollars just seems like such a small amount. The experiment from the very beginning did not follow the guidelines of a good experiment. From the very beginning in the video he even says the words "deception of omission". He did not state to everyone in the experiment what would be happening to every person. He did not tell the prisoners that they were going to be arrested in real life and then blind folded and taken somewhere where they had no idea where they were going. Therefor from the beginning the experiment had a very wrong start. The fact that as the researcher he told the guards they were allowed to do whatever they wanted and then proceeded to follow through with their actions is morally wrong. For five days he allowed those guards to physically and mentally abuse innocent men. He sat and watched as the prisoners had mental break downs and become zombies in their cells. He did not intervene he allowed the experiment to continue. I understand he eventually stepped in and cut the experiment short, but he let it go on for entirely too long. He did not keep the people participating safe, he was not 100% honest or fair to them and therefor I think this experiment is very morally wrong. Litv123
ReplyDeleteThe Stanford Prison Experiment was thought up by Phillip Zimbardo, and was carried out by mentally stable men to see how prison life would affect them. Zimbardo challenged authorities by saying that the environment that prisoners were held in contributed to their behavior, and he wanted to see if his claim was true. During the experiment, a group of men were randomly given the role to be guards and others to be prisoners. All off the men who participated in the experiment volunteered and were being paid $15 a day. However, Zimbardo left out a few details to the people that were the prisoners. He didn’t tell them that the people who were assigned to be guards had already set up the “prison” to their liking and gotten uniforms. He also did not tell them that they would be picked up at their house by a real police officer, handcuffed and brought into the station where they were then blindfolded. Once blindfolded, they were brought to the “prison” where the experiment was taking place. Zimbardo gave the guards full power to do what they wanted to do, and ultimately the experiment showed that human kind would take on a role if we were put in a certain situation. The experiment was unethical and immoral; it also was the catalyst to ethical guidelines being established. The fact that the people in the experiment were not given the full truth about what was going to happen was unethical. Ethics in science was brought to a new awareness, and as such there are now laws stating what was acceptable and what was not. The way this experiment happened never would have happened today. There are many consent forms that a lot of people must fill out before embarking on being the subject of an experiment. Not to mention that full disclosure must be brought to the subject’s attention as well. Today, no one can interview/study you without knowing exactly what they are getting into.
ReplyDeletesunflower123
The Stanford Prison Experiment is one of the most well known experiment to this day. It is taught in most schools around the nation, in Psychology classes and Sociology classes especially. Although the Sociology world learned a lot from this experiment, it was considerably unethical. The people conducting the experiment were very straightforward with the test subjects. They told them exactly what was going on, received their consent, and were getting paid quite nicely for their cooperation in the experiment. The experiment conducted was very interesting to me. I would of never thought taking good kids and putting them in a "jail" would have much effect on their behavior and who they were as people. The results were very surprising to me, especially in the time frame it happened. The thought that good people could take on the role of a prison guard or a prison inmate and believe it to be true in less than 24 hours is mind blowing to me. The purpose of the entire experiment was to see if situations have an effect on who we are as people. It is very true we adapt to our surroundings and act totally dependent on the situation at hand. The test subjects became totally subjective to the experiment. The prison guards, who used to be good kids, were considerably different when they put the uniform on. They became mean, aggressive, and demanding of the inmates, making them do whatever they wanted to keep order and to keep their power over them. I feel bad for the inmates who became totally compliant with whatever the guards told them to do. They became zombies who had no control over themselves because they were scared and powerless. The most interesting thing to me is how quickly all of this occurred. One person had a mental breakdown 36 hours in, and within 5 days the rest of the kids turned to zombies. Scuba123
ReplyDeleteI learned about the Stanford Prison Experiment in Psychology 110. We watched a movie on it, wrote a paper about it, and discussed it in class. We also discussed it in class today. The experiment occurred in 1971. The experiment had twenty-four test subjects. Half of them became guards, and the other half became prisoners. All of the test subjects were considered relatively well-behaved, good boys. When the officer arrested them, they put a blindfold on them and when they arrived to the prison, they stripped them. When prisoners would act out in violence or other manners, they would tie them up, beat them, and/or put them in solitary confinement. Each day the guards became more and more violent towards the prisoners. The guards became scarily powerful. Within the first thirty-six hours, a boy had a mental breakdown. He was screaming, crying, and freaking out. He was released by the experimenter. A few days later five more people had breakdowns and were released. The prisoners who were left, became "zombies". The prisoners had no control over themselves because of their fear and lack of power. It was psychological torture for both guards and prisoners. The results surprised the leaders of the study. They expected there to be verbal abuse, such as teasing, not physical abuse and a major power trip. This experiment was extremely controversial. Some people believe that this experiment is unethical because it psychologically and physically harms the test subjects. The opposite side argues that they were offered a generous sum of money, and that the test subjects knew exactly what the experiment would entail. While it is and was controversial, the experiment would not be allowed today under the current ethnical guidelines. In my opinion, it was unethical even though sociologists were able to learn a lot about human nature from this experiment. -softball_savvy123
ReplyDeleteThe Stanford Prison experiment demonstrates this kind of evil human nature that is within every person as well as showing how environment affects how one acts. The most insane part of this entire experiment is how quickly the prisoners and guards fall into their roles. It only took five days for some of the “prisoners” to have mental breakdowns due to the guard’s awful treatment. One of the guidelines when conducting a sociological experiment is the safety of the participants Zimbardo did not intervene when the guards began beating and humiliating the prisoners. When dealing with sociology and psychology there are many different studies that may cause the participants to be harmed because society does some cruel things. So if you wanted to study those cruel things you may end up psychologically manipulating participants which causes great harm. Sociologists must find ways to study society without causing such harm. The Milgram experiment is simple to the Zimbardo experiment as it proves that normal humans have the capability to cause great harm to other people when put in a situation that enables them to do so, but there was no psychological or physical harm to any participants. Although this experiment is extremely unethical I think what it reveals about the human psyche is so important. Rush Limbaugh once debated on his talk show that if he had been on the bus with Rosa Parks he would have let her keep her seat. I think this experiment proves to Rush Limbaugh and to all of people that we would not have let Rosa Parks keep her bus seat nor would we be immune to participating in any cruel behavior. The kids of the Stanford Prison experiment were social advocates at the time, yet they were still susceptible to evil behavior. Thus, social justices warriors in our time have the capability to be oppressors they simply haven’t been put in the situation. - Glass123
ReplyDeleteBefore even watching this video about the Stanford Prison Experiment, I can already say I’ve heard about this and it is just awful. To break things down, the newspaper put out an ad asking for college students who will be paid to stay in a prison for a couple of weeks for an experiment. They chose twenty-four healthy students and assigned half to be guards and half to be prisoners. Seems pretty harmless so far right? They had the “guards” come down and set the prison up to meet their needs and really make them feel like it's theirs. So, psychologically, this is already changing the way the students are thinking. The “prisoners” were then arrested like normal and taken to the prison, so this is psychologically making them feel less than their classmates already. By day two, the guards were showing force against the prisoners by breaking down their doors and tying them up. The guards started to gain more power all because of the mindset that they were taught within the first two days. The guards were made to feel untouchable and the guards were meant to feel worthless. The tasks that were performed against the prisoners were just absurd, making them clean toilets with their bare hands, throwing their blankets in the dirt. This whole experiment just makes my stomach turn. Eventually one students is released when he has an awful emotional break down and begs for a doctor. And five days later five more were released because they were so overwhelmed. The remaining students basically became poor, mindless zombies and just did what they were told. Not much in this tape is said about the guards however and how they are feeling during this whole endeavour. I mean, even the people conducting the experiment said that this started to make them sick and uncomfortable to watch. rosethorns123
ReplyDeleteThe stanford county prison experiment illustrates the effects that come from a person having too much power. The guys in the experiment were not people you would expect abusive behavior out of, they were good people who were attending college and joined the experiment as a way to earn some extra money. Dr. Zimbardo followed some of the American Sociological Association guidelines for conducting research except he did not follow a lot of them which is why his experiment would be considered unethical today. He did pay the participants $15 per day which was good, however he failed to tell them all of the details of the experiment and he did not look out for their safety like he needed to. The men that were assigned as prisoners endured serious emotional trauma and some physical abuse. In fact, that is the part that is so shocking about this experiment. Nobody expected the guards to get so caught up on a power high and inflict such abuse on the prisoners. It opened people's eyes to the danger of trusting a large amount of power on a person or group of people. If these well intentioned college men reacted in the way that they did, what is to say that anyone given the same power would not act in the same way? This experiment aroused the concern for prisoners in real life who may be the victims of abuse from power crazed guards. It is debatable as to whether the stanford county prison experiment findings were worth the misery of the innocent prisoners. While I do not think it would be worth it to put the prisoners through what they went through now that we know, I think it was a huge breakthrough in our society that I am glad we discovered. -Chameleon123
ReplyDeleteThe Stanford Prison experiment was the best known psychological study of all time. It all began in the West Coast America in the summer of 1971 people were anti authority. The experiment consists of the attempt to put good people in a bad place. In 1971, there was an ad put in the city newspaper to target male college students for a psychological study of prison life. $15 per day for 1-2 weeks. 75 volunteers were given psychological tests. They were split in two groups: prisoners or guards. A degradation ritual was done on the men once they were arrested. By the second day the prisoners would retaliate. It’s all about institutional power. Within 36 hours the prisoners from the experiment have an emotional break down and they must release them. The one’s who didn’t break down became mindlessly obedient. They followed any and everything that the guard may tell them. This experiment showed how easy it was to abuse power. What did they expect to be the outcome of the Stanford Prison experiment? With what they did with the Stanford Prison experiment it was done inhumane. I can understand why the experiment was done to get research on people as far as race, age frame, or any other method for collecting research. Researchers took people of the same demographic group and put them in a jail environment and control them. This caused the people to have long term mental problems. The prisoners that were released was probably on the verge of committing suicide. The males that were taken as guards used their authority and power to treat the inmates inhuman. The prisoners were being degraded. I really think that this research study was really messed up. They took male college students and put them in prisons are either guards or prisoners to get a mental reaction. Even tho the prisoners were paid for the research conduct it was not worth it in my opinion. I’m quite sure the volunteers from this experiment is suffering in so many ways. Rendezvous123
ReplyDeleteThe Stanford Prison experiment was an unjust act towards innocent people. The first mistake the researchers made was not telling their group everything that was going to happen to them. It’s important that you inform the group of what they’re signing up for before they agree to do it, or else you are doing things to them against their will, which is not right. The researchers sent cops to “arrest” the prisoners without telling them and blindfolded them. Then they loused them pretending it was lice to degrade them. This is an unethical experiment because of the inhumane treatment. I think that when the experiment got out of hand and the guards took control of it, it should have been shut down. I don’t think there is a point to continue research when you’re only witnessing abnormal behavior. I’m not aware of any guards in real life who treat prisoners so bad in a prison. And if there is such a thing going on somewhere in the world, the researchers could just go witness that instead of harming innocent people. I think that it was right to let some of the prisoners go when they acted out. Although, I think that the silence from the rest of them is just as worrisome. I think those that stayed quiet might have either been keeping their thoughts inside and freaking out or had a strong mindset and knew it was all pretend. I think sociologists could learn that humans react quickly to power and being degraded. This fact could help shape societies and prevent harm in reality. I think the prison settings should change because this experiment proved that the prison cause the guards and prisoners to act the way they did, considering they were all good people before it started. I also think that it was beneficial because of what sociologists and other researchers learned of how to treat their future subjects. -Kiwi123
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the video on The Stanford Prison Experiment I feel that it was not conducted properly. Even though it was suppose to last one to two weeks long it was shut down only after five days. My thoughts are it should of ended much sooner, or not even at all. The man performing the experiment was Dr. Philip Zimbardo. Dr. Zimbardo was not one hundred percent totally honest with the subjects being tested. Even though the subjects were paid fifteen dollars a day, which wasn’t a bad salary in the late seventies when the experiment was being conducted, their safety was not taken into consideration. One of the main goals of an experiment is that the safety of the subjects is never questioned. The subjects did answer an ad in the paper and did volunteer to participate in the experiment. The subjects were good natured kids at the beginning of the experiment. Twenty four people were involved in the experiment. Twelve of the people were to be guards at a jail and the other twelve were to be inmates. The twelve guards were allowed to help develop the prison cell and that gave them a feeling that it was their own. The twelve inmates were actually picked up by real police officers blindfolded and taken to the fake jailhouse. There they were stripped, degraded of their dignity, and sent to jail. Once there the inmates were made to do things like clean toilets with their bare hands, beaten, tied up, and some were even put into solitary confinement. Zimbardo did not stop the beatings the guards were giving. He only wanted to know what was going on. The power the guards received went to their heads, and they even got more aggressive. After thirty-six hours some of the inmates had to be released from the experiment because of their mental state. The ones that were left were no more than zombies, just doing what they were told to do without any life at all. The biggest part of the experiment I had a problem with is that there was a lack of honesty with what the experiment was going to be about. The other part I had a problem with is the safety of the inmates and their mental state even after the experiment was over, for the years to come. Diver 123
ReplyDeleteWhat I find so fascinating about the Stanford Prison Experiment is the lack of moral empathy for anyone participating in the experiment from those organizing the experiment. Although it may just be a construct of its time, as with the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, to put the test subjects through as much physical and emotional pain as possible. It seems to me that a bigger lesson was learned regarding humanity and the ill will to do bad unto others before you do bad unto yourself. Although the Stanford Prison Experiment was meant to be a learning experience it was more of a reminder on how humans truly are the most dangerous species on the planet. With just the flip of a coin a choice was made by the odds that some students would be guards while the other students would be prisoners. It is hard for me to believe however, and maybe it's because I'm just a couple decades too late, but wouldn't the experiment prisoners being blindfolded be a dead giveaway that something just wasn't right about this whole thing? At what point do you draw the line between being over dramatic for the effect of an experiment, and just being plain silly? Again, maybe it's just because I wasn't born in this specific time period. Getting back to the scenario however, the man in the video pointed out that the prisoners who were already rebels of society in the outside world, had completely conformed to the commands of the prison guards over a matter of days and had become zombies against their own will. That sort of reminds me of society today, but in a way more twisted Frankenstein kind of way. Needless to say, the Stanford Prison Experiment will serve as a valuable lesson for those who wish to conduct raw studies for years to come. Perhaps a little more subject control is in order to provide better results for such an experiment. Just a thought.-MrG123
ReplyDeleteAs a psychology major, the Stanford Prison Experiment was one of the first things I learned in school that made me fall in love with psychology. As an experiment itself, it was unethical and should not have been allowed. However, it demonstrates just how large of an effect that our culture and surroundings have on us. We cannot undo this experiment, so the best we can do is to learn from it. The experiment offers us ways to better dissect ethics and ways to better understand how easy it is to adapt to a new culture if the conditions are right. The people who participated in this experiment were average, young adults. The people placed into guard roles were no more likely to become guards than the men who were placed into prisoner roles were likely to become prisoners. It is incredible, and a bit terrifying, to see how much and how easily someone can change based on their situation and environment. These people were only in this experiment for five days (thank goodness it wasn’t any longer) and there were huge differences in the participants from day one to day five. The power really got to the people placed in the roles as guards. This lead to a lot of misuse of power, and many of the guards began to take it way too far. In 2015, a movie replicating the experiment came out. I was in tears by the time it was over. I could not believe the horrendous things that the guards had made the prisoners do. And to think, the guards were just random, young adults trying to make some cash off of participating in an experiment. The Stanford Prison Experiment allows people to see how easily one can change his values, beliefs, and way of life based on his surroundings. This experiment made it easier for me to understand how the Jonestown Massacre could have occurred. When placed into a setting where immoral values are justified and rationalized, people may begin to pick up these heinous actions and ideas. Culture defines us, whether we like it or not.
ReplyDelete-M&M
The Stanford Prison Experiment was something I have learned in multiple classes throughout high school and college. While I understand that this experiment was done years ago in a different culture and time, I do not believe that this was an ethical experiment. The unethical components that I see that are most disturbing are stripping the prisoners naked, putting them in that tiny closet as solitary confinement and the physical abuse. I think all of those things crossed the line and really dehumanized these people that will most likely have lasting issues on them. With that being said, the outcome of the experiment is so intriguing. To be honest, it’s kind of scary to think about the conclusions from the experiment. We all like to think that if we were in that place then we would not behave the same way the test subjects did. But in reality, we are so alike and experiment after experiment proves that good people want power and will follow whatever everyone else is doing to fit in and be part of the group. The test subjects were young, college kids just trying to make quick money. The subjects were targeted through a newspaper ad. Out of the chosen subjects, half were randomly decided to be guards and the others were prisoners. The guards came a day early and helped set up the prison and chose their outfits. The prisoners were arrested by actual cops, blindfolded, and stripped. On the first day, Zimbardo almost stopped the experiment because he didn’t think anything was happening. On the second day, the prisoners rebelled and the guards made intense rules in which they stripped their clothes, acted violent, and took away ‘privileges’ - which were considered anything other than air. One kid had an emotional breakdown and was released. In the five days, five prisoners were released. The kids that were not released fell into thinking they were actually prisoners. They began to actually do whatever the guards wanted - they were as Zimbardo said ‘mindlessly obedient’. This experiment is extremely sad and disturbing. -SAS123
ReplyDeleteBeing a psychology major, I have seen the Stanford Prison Experiment used in nearly every textbook for my courses thus far; the experiment has been one of the most pivotal and controversial experiments of the past century. Ethics and sociology must go hand in hand when one is talking about research. A researcher should first and foremost always be concerned about and take into consideration the safety of the participants. One quote that stuck out to me was when Zimbardo started that he would not have wanted his son to have played a role in his own experiment. If he had possessed that thought at the time instead of in retrospect, perhaps the experiment could have been altered towards a more ethically sound basis.
ReplyDeleteIn my humble opinion, one of the main problems with Zimbardo’s experiment (besides the unethicality of it, obviously) was that Zimbardo was an active participant himself. He played a sort of “warden” role over the whole thing and not at all an objective observer. While most scientific, especially psychological, studies try to limit implicit biases, Zimbardo chose to place himself right in the middle of the chaos. Another non-ethical problem I have with the Stanford Prison Experiment is that the participants used were all middle class Caucasian college-aged men. The study did not attempt to include any women or minorities or any people from different socioeconomic classes or anyone from a different age group.
Ethically, the experiment was a nightmare. While the study did, to a certain extent, extrapolate the information it was trying to get at, it did so at the harm and risk or harm to all those involved. Experiments, as we talked about in class, should always primarily be concerned with the safety for all of those participants who agree to be involved.
-ThreeTwo123
The Stanford Prison Experiment shouldn’t have been an experiment on human beings. This video was disturbing to watch. To ‘scare people’ into not escaping etc. should not rely on making them do harsh things within the prison. The prisoners shouldn’t have had to wash the toilets with their bare hands. The video was about how police officers had power over the prisoners. They called it institutional power. They decided to do whatever it takes to keep prisoners in order and maintain order within the facility. Many of the prisoners cried, screamed, and had irrational thinking. This experiment didn’t really prove anything back in the 1970’s besides decrease humans thinking, and turned them into a whole different person. As said in the video the prisoners who didn’t break down turned into zombies. This experiment showed two different outcomes, one of the outcomes the prisoners went crazy so they had to be released and the other outcome was the prisoners did everything they were told to do. Neither one of these are a good outcome of the experiment because It’s an unhealthy way of life and they weren’t actually prisoners they were just the ones chosen to do this experiment. Dr. Phillip Zimbardo shouldn’t have allowed this to get this far after witnessing what it was doing to the prisoners. This should have been reported and looked into because the way they treated ‘prisoners’ were inhumane. This experiment made humans look weak and crazy. They were treated like slaves and puppets. As said in the video situations can affect us more than we think. Meaning we may not think we would ever fall for inhumane things like slave work etc. until it happens and we have no other way around it. Dr. Phillip Zimbardo should have found a different way to get the prisoners to listen and obey other than torturing them. -Dancer123
ReplyDeleteThe Stanford experiment is a well known experiment from the seventies that taught us about the use of power over other individuals. During this time period, there were many young individuals that rebelled and seemed to not want to listen to their authorities. It was a time when protests for peace and anti-government were common. Dr. Philip Zimbardo designed an experiment to see how the use of power and authority could affect other individuals. He was trying to see what would happen when putting good people in a bad place. The subjects were well paid for their participation and they were informed with what they were getting into. The controversial part of the experiment was that subjects were harmed psychologically. Though the subjects were informed that they were a part of a psychological study, some of the prison subjects could not handle the conditions. Within 36 hours, one inmate had a mental breakdown and was removed from the experiment. The guards used psychological tactics instead of physical force to maintain control of their prisoners. The guards degraded the prisoners and made them feel powerless by calling then names and making them perform many daunting tasks. As each day passed, the guards used harsher and harsher tactics towards the prisoners. The prisoners eventually turned into zombies that did whatever they were told. They were lifeless and obedient. After five days, the experiment was cut short. I think that this experiment was very interesting. Though it is a controversial experiment, I think that we learned a lot about the power of authority. I think that this experiment is on the edge of being unethical. Many people argue that harm was done to the prisoners. Psychological harm was done, but not physical harm. I think that more regulation should have been kept on the guards by the experimenter so that things would not get too out of hand. There came a point in the experiment where the prisoners were suffering and the entire simulation had to be stopped. I don’t think the experiment could be performed again today. I think it would have been interesting to see the roles of the guards and prisoners switch places midway in the experiment. I wonder whether or not the new guards would treat the new prisoners more harsh. Check123
ReplyDeleteThis experiment just brings about thoughts of disgust and cruelty. I was appalled reading and listening to the horrific things that happened to the young men during this study. I do find it, however, to be very interesting that the individuals in this study became a product of their environment, taking on roles or identities that he may have never assumed during their home life. It also makes me wonder what allows peoples mind to snap and change, what allows people to feel they are more superior and can dehumanize an individual who is thought to be “beneath” them for lack of a better word? Also, why is it that after only two days’ people started portraying signs of having a mental break by their actions? How is it that young men who were given test after test after test who knew the length of time they’d be considered incarcerated and knew what the study was about, allow themselves to act in such a way to cause harm to one another? I understand the experiment took place in 1971, but in my opinion, $15 a day was not enough compensation for every ounce of torture these men endured during the three to five days they were incarcerated and researched. Seeing the things these men were subject to made me realize how important it is to follow the guidelines for research established by the American Sociological Association because it is my belief that at the first sign of depression, anxiety, relentless crying, and abuse that the research should have been cancelled instead of making them suffer through another one to three more days of tumultuousness. It is the duty of the researcher to keep people safe from harm and not intentionally place them in dangers way. I don’t think the researcher knew what would come of this situation but I’m sure there was an inkling of what might happen in which the researcher should have been well prepared to handle any situation that may have arose and reacted sooner than what he did. Benoodles123
ReplyDelete