conformity to social roles

• social roles?

  the parts people play as members of various social groups. everyday examples include parent child or student. these are accompanied by the expectations we and others have of what is appropriate behaviour in each role.
• zimbardo's research stanford prison experiment?

  -set up a mock prison in basement of psychology department at stanford university.

  -21 men who tested as emotionally stable randomly assigned to pay guard or prisoner.

  -were encouraged to conform to social roles both through uniforms they wore and instructions about their behaviour.

  -prisoners given a loose smock and a cap to wear and were identified by a number.

  -guards had their own uniform with wooden club, handcuffs and mirror shades. (causes deindividuation)
• zimbardo's findings?

  -guards treated prisoners harshly. within 2 days prisoners rebelled and guards retaliated with fire extinguishers.

  -guards harassed prisoners constantly & highlighted differences in social roles by creating opportunities to enforce rules and do punishments.

  -prisoners became depressed & anxious. 1 released as he showed signs of psychological disturbance. 2 more released on 4th day. 1 went on hunger strike & guards tried to force feed him then punished him by putting him in hole. -guards became more brutal and aggressive. study ended in 6 days rather than 14.
• conclusions about zimbardo's research?

  social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals behaviour.

  guards became brutal and prisoners became submissive. such roles were taken on very easily by participants. even volunteers who came in to perform specific functions found themselves behaving as if they were in a prison rather than a study
• strength of zimbardo's research?

  P- control over key variables

  E- only emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to roles of prisoner and guard. so individual personality differences ruled out as an explanation of findings.

  E- if guards and prisoners behaved very differently but were in those roles by chance then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself.

  L- this degree of control over variables increased internal validity of study so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about influence of roles on conformity.
• limitation of zimbardo's research?

  P- didn't have realism of true prison

  E- banuazizi and movahedi argued the participants merely play acting rather than genuinely conforming to a role. participants performances were based on their stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave.

  E- one guard claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from a film. would also explain why prisoners rioted

  L- findings of the SPE tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
• CA to limitation to zimbardos research?

  P - mcdermott argues that participants behaved as if prison was real to them

  E - 90% of prisoners conversations were about prison life. discussed how it was impossible to leave SPE before their sentences over. prisoner 416 believed it was a real prison run by psychologists rather than GOV.

  L - did replicate social roles of prisoners and guards in real prison giving high internal validity.
• another limitation ?

  P - Zimbardo may have exaggerated power of social roles to influence behaviour.

  E - only 1/3 of guards behaved in a brutal way. other 1/3 tried to apply rules fairly. rest tried to help and support prisoners. most guards were able to resist situational pressures to conform to brutal role.

  L - overstated his view that SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimised influence of dispositional factors.