Conformity to social roles

    Cards (9)

    • Evaluation: Exaggerated the power of roles (limitations)
      Zimbardo may have exaggerated the power of social roles to influence behaviour.
      Only one-third if the guards actually behaved in a brutal manner, another third apply the rules fairly, and the rest actively tried to help and support the prisoners.
      They sympathised, offered cigarettes and reinstated privileges, most guards were able to resist situational pressure to conform to a brutal role.
      Suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that SPE ppts were confirming to social roles and minimised the influence of dispositions, factors (eg personality).
    • Evaluation: Lack of realism (limitation)

      It didn't have the realism of a true prison.
      Ali Banazizi and Siamak Movahedi argued that ppts were merely okay-acting rather than confirming to a role, ppts' performances were based on their stereotypes of how they prisoners and guards are supposed to behave.
      Eg one guard claimed that he based his role on a brutal character from the film 'Cool Hand Luke'.
      Also explains why the prisoners rioted - they thought that was what real prisoners did.
      Suggests that the findings tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
    • Evaluation: Control (strength)
      Zimbardo and his colleagues had control, over key variables.
      Emotionally-stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to the roles of guard or prisoner , this ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings.
      If guards and prisoners behaved differently, but were in the roles by chance, then their behaviour must've been due to the role itself.
      This degree of control over variables increased the internal validity, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.
    • Conclusion of the SPE
      Social roles appear to have a strong influence on behaviour - guards because brutal and prisoners became submissive.
      Roles were very easily taken on by all ppts - even volunteers who came in to perform specific functions found themselves behaving as if they were in prison rather than in a study.
    • Findings of the SOE
      Planned duration was 2 weeks but was stopped after 6 days, this is because of increased passivity of the 'prisoners' in the face of increased brutality of the 'guards' - eg they harassed prisoners by conduction headcount's in the night.
      Some of the prisoners had pathological reaction - eg showing signs of depression and anxiety
    • Instructions about behaviour
      Prisoners were further encouraged to identify with. Their role through several procedures - ie instead of leaving the study early, prisoners could 'apply for parole'.
    • Uniforms
      Prisoners were given uniforms and ID numbers.
      Guards were given uniforms, clubs, whist,except and wore reflective glasses.
      The uniforms created a loss of personal identity (de-individuation) -meant that they were more likely to conform to the perceived social roles.
    • Procedure of the SPE
      Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford university.
      24 American male student volunteers who were randomly assigned the role of prisoners or guard. The prisoners were unexpectedly arrested at home. Zimbardo took the role of prison superintendent.
    • Social roles
      The 'parts' people play as a member of various social groups, they're accompanied by expectations we and others have of what's appropriate behaviour in each role.
    See similar decks