Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo's research

• Stanford Prison Experiment - Zimbardo et al (1973)

  • mock prison set up in basement of psych. dept. in Stanford University
  • selected 21 men (student volunteers) - emotionally stable
  • ppts randomly allocated to social role of guard or prisoner
  • encouraged to conform through uniforms and instructions about behaviour
• uniforms

  prisoners: loose smock; cap; identified by number (never names)

  guards: uniform; wooden club; handcuffs; mirror shades

  • these caused de-individuation (loss of personal identity) -> more likely to conform to perceived soc. role
• instructions abt behaviour

  prisoners: identify with role through procedures (e.g., applying for parole instead of leaving study early)

  guards: reminded of their complete power over the prisoners
• findings (guards)

  • guards: enthusiastic; treated prisoners harshly
  • 2 days: prisoners rebelled - ripped uniforms; swore at guards -> guards retaliated with fire extinguishers

  divide-and-rule tactics used

  1. harassed prisoners - remind of powerlessness
  2. frequent headcounts - sometimes at night

  Guards highlighted difference in social roles by creating opps. to enforce rules + administer punishments
• findings (prisoners)

  • after rebellion: subdued; depressed; anxious
  • one released b/c symptoms of psychological disturbance
  • two more released on 4th day
  • one went on hunger strike - guards force-fed and then punished by putting him in the hole, a tiny dark closet
• Guards identified more and more closely with SR; behaviour became more brutal and aggressive.

  • some appeared to enjoy the power they had over the prisoners
• Zimbardo ended the study after 6 days instead of the intended 14 days.
• conclusions

  • social roles have strong influence on individ. behaviour
  • guards - more brutal
  • prisoners - submissive

  Roles were easily taken on by all ppts.

  • outside volunteers who came in for spec. functions (e.g., prison chaplain) behaved as if they were in a real prison, not a psych. study
• strength: highly controlled

  point: Zimbardo and colleagues had control over key variables

  evidence: selection of ppts - emotionally stable + randomly allocated to guard or prisoner

  • this ruled out individual personality diffs. as explanation of findings

  explain: strength b/c it means the researcher could be certain that the findings were due to conformity to social roles as opposed to ppt variables.

  link: strength - high control in study b/c this increased internal validity of the study.
• limitation: lack of mundane realism

  point: study didn't have realism of a real prison.

  evidence: Banuazizi and Movahedi (1975) - ppts play-acting instead of genuine conformity

  • ppt performances based on stereotypes - e.g., guard claimed they based their role on a character from the film Cool Hand Luke
  • explains why prisoners rioted; they thought this is what real prisoners do

  explain: limitation b/c it suggests that Zimbardo's research tells us very little about conformity to social roles in real prisons

  link: limitation - lack of mundane realism b/c little real-world application
• counterpoint (lack of mundane realism)

  • McDermott (2019): ppts behaved as if the prison was real
  • 90% of prisoners' convo. abt prison life - impossible to leave until 'sentences' were over
  • 'Prisoner 416': believed prison was real, but run by psychologists instead of govt.

  This suggests the study replicated the social roles of guard and prisoner in a real prison, thus giving the study high internal validity
• limitation: exaggerates the power of social roles

  point: Zimbardo may have exaggerated roles to influence behaviour (Fromm 1973)

  evidence: only 1/3 of guards were brutal; another 1/3 tried implementing rules fairly

  • rest tried to help and support prisoners: sympathised; offered cigarettes; reinstated privileges (Zimbardo 2007)

  explain: limitation as it means Zimbardo overstated view that ppts were conforming to SR; minimised dispositional factors.

  link: limitation - exaggerates power of social roles b/c fails to consider dispositional factors
• Most guards in Zimbardo's study were able to resist situational pressure to conform