The Stanford prison experiment



Lots of evidence that the guards played up to the event, ie they 'acted' in the way they thought the observers wanted them too. Just read it in a Jon Ronson book also. This is a similar concept to hypnotism. Whichever way you look at it though, they participants still change their behaviour significantly.
 
toxic tracksuit said:
Lots of evidence that the guards played up to the event, ie they 'acted' in the way they thought the observers wanted them too. Just read it in a Jon Ronson book also. This is a similar concept to hypnotism. Whichever way you look at it though, they participants still change their behaviour significantly.
Click to expand...
One of the guards said he wanted to see how far he could push his luck with the prisoners but nobody questioned him or stood up to him so he kept pushing.
Then when the guard started telling each other what they done the others (not all of them) tried to up their game to try and do one better
 
Carlo Prescott, who was Zimbardo's "prison consultant" during the experiment by virtue of having served 17 years in San Quentin for attempted murder, spoke out against the experiment publicly in a 2005 article he contributed to the Stanford Daily, after he had read about the various ways in which Zimbardo and others used the experiment to explain atrocities that had taken place in real prisons. In that article, entitled "The Lie of the Stanford Prison Experiment",[31] Prescott wrote:

[...] ideas such as bags being placed over the heads of prisoners, inmates being bound together with chains and buckets being used in place of toilets in their cells were all experiences of mine at the old "Spanish Jail" section of San Quentin and which I dutifully shared with the Stanford Prison Experiment braintrust months before the experiment started. To allege that all these carefully tested, psychologically solid, upper-middle-class Caucasian "guards" dreamed this up on their own is absurd. How can Zimbardo and, by proxy, Maverick Entertainment express horror at the behavior of the "guards" when they were merely doing what Zimbardo and others, myself included, encouraged them to do at the outset or frankly established as ground rules?
 
toxic tracksuit said:
Carlo Prescott, who was Zimbardo's "prison consultant" during the experiment by virtue of having served 17 years in San Quentin for attempted murder, spoke out against the experiment publicly in a 2005 article he contributed to the Stanford Daily, after he had read about the various ways in which Zimbardo and others used the experiment to explain atrocities that had taken place in real prisons. In that article, entitled "The Lie of the Stanford Prison Experiment",[31] Prescott wrote:

[...] ideas such as bags being placed over the heads of prisoners, inmates being bound together with chains and buckets being used in place of toilets in their cells were all experiences of mine at the old "Spanish Jail" section of San Quentin and which I dutifully shared with the Stanford Prison Experiment braintrust months before the experiment started. To allege that all these carefully tested, psychologically solid, upper-middle-class Caucasian "guards" dreamed this up on their own is absurd. How can Zimbardo and, by proxy, Maverick Entertainment express horror at the behavior of the "guards" when they were merely doing what Zimbardo and others, myself included, encouraged them to do at the outset or frankly established as ground rules?
Click to expand...
Tbf they did a real number on Carlo in the film, made him look an absolute prick who was complicit with those same white men.

The bit that amazed me was even when it was obvious the "prisoners" were having mental health issues, Zimbardo wanted to keep going.

I'm not surprised they're raging as Zimbardo's been dining out on that experiment ever since with the awld "What we have learned" schtick.
 
toxic tracksuit said:
Carlo Prescott, who was Zimbardo's "prison consultant" during the experiment by virtue of having served 17 years in San Quentin for attempted murder, spoke out against the experiment publicly in a 2005 article he contributed to the Stanford Daily, after he had read about the various ways in which Zimbardo and others used the experiment to explain atrocities that had taken place in real prisons. In that article, entitled "The Lie of the Stanford Prison Experiment",[31] Prescott wrote:

[...] ideas such as bags being placed over the heads of prisoners, inmates being bound together with chains and buckets being used in place of toilets in their cells were all experiences of mine at the old "Spanish Jail" section of San Quentin and which I dutifully shared with the Stanford Prison Experiment braintrust months before the experiment started. To allege that all these carefully tested, psychologically solid, upper-middle-class Caucasian "guards" dreamed this up on their own is absurd. How can Zimbardo and, by proxy, Maverick Entertainment express horror at the behavior of the "guards" when they were merely doing what Zimbardo and others, myself included, encouraged them to do at the outset or frankly established as ground rules?
Click to expand...
The fact that the results have not been able to be duplicated since, speaks volumes as to the conditions of the experiment and why its results are questioned.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
The fact that the results have not been able to be duplicated since, speaks volumes as to the conditions of the experiment and why its results are questioned.
Click to expand...
It’s a tough one though. I don’t think it could be replecated in today’s age. It’s a different world now so people’s upbringings will definitely mould them to react differently. Some people are sadistic without actually realizing it.
Like the theory of would you like to feel what it’s like to kill someone if you knew there would never be any consequences? There’s a lot of “normal” people that would. So if you’re ever put in an environment where you’re in complete control how far would you go?

Soldiers on tour with PoW’s is a good example. Most are decent people and family men. However it still didn’t stop them from behaving similar (or worse) to the prison guards in this experiment. Again it could be put down to upbringing (or training).
 
safcforever said:
It’s a tough one though. I don’t think it could be replecated in today’s age. It’s a different world now so people’s upbringings will definitely mould them to react differently. Some people are sadistic without actually realizing it.
Like the theory of would you like to feel what it’s like to kill someone if you knew there would never be any consequences? There’s a lot of “normal” people that would. So if you’re ever put in an environment where you’re in complete control how far would you go?

Soldiers on tour with PoW’s is a good example. Most are decent people and family men. However it still didn’t stop them from behaving similar (or worse) to the prison guards in this experiment. Again it could be put down to upbringing (or training).
Click to expand...
I would say training has a lot to do with it. They break soldiers during boot camp and basically dehumanize them to build them back up again as what they need them to be. The training (at least here in the US) varies per the military branch, too. The kill machines that are the Marines have a more rigorous boot camp than those in the Air Force.

Of course upbringing has a lot to do with how a person would react. Some people live their lives aiming to please others, especially someone who is in power or above them.
 
Bulmers said:
I thought we haven't allowed any similar experiments since
Click to expand...
I believe there were some attempts made to replicate the experiment early on. I'm rather certain I read about that back when I was in university eons ago. We studied it in school when I was attending, but even back then, the results were already being questioned. Well, at least by my professor at the time.
 

Back
Top