Conformity to social roles: Zimbardo’s research

• Conclusions related to social roles

  Social roles have a strong influence on a person's behaviour. Guards brutal and the prisoners submissive. The roles were taken on easily and the volunteers who came in to perform specific functions acted like they were in real prison not a psychological study.
• Guards took role easily and treated the prisoners brutally using the divide and rule tactic by playing the prisoners off against each other and reminding the prisoners of their powerlessness. The guards highlighted the differences in the roles by creating opportunities administrating rules and punishments. Many prisoners left due to psychological disturbance. One hunger strike and guards tried to force feed and as punishment put in the hole which was a tiny dark closet. The guards identified more closely with their role. The study ended after 6 days and not the intended 14.
• SPE

  In 1973 stanford university, 21 male students from  the uni were selected and they were tested as emotionally stable. They were randomly assigned the role of guard or prisoners. They were encouraged to conform to the roles through the uniform that they wore and their behaviour.
• Uniform the prisoners were given smock and cap to cover their hair and were identified as numbers. Guards had their own uniform representing their status club, handcuffs and mirrored shades. The uniforms created de-individualisation. Prisoners were further encouraged to identify with roles as instead of leaving the stuffy early they had to apply for parole and the guards were told they had complete power over the prisoners.
• Strength is that they had control over the key variables Emotionally-stable individuals were randomly assigned to the roles of guard and prisoner. This was one way that the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings. If the guards and the prisoners behaved differently, but were in these roles only by chance then the behaviour must be due to the roles itself. The degree of the control has high internal validity so can be more confident drawing conclusions about the influence of roles of conformity.
• Limitation is that it lacks the realism of a true prison. Researchers Banuazizi and Movahedi 1975 argued that the participants were play- acting rather than conforming to a role. Participants' roles were based on stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to act. This would further explain why the prisoners rioted as they thought that happened in true prisons. This suggests that the SPE tells us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
• However McDermott 2019 argues that the participants did behave as if it was a real prison to them. 90% of the prisons had conversations about prison life such as discussing how it was impossib;e to l;eave before their sentences were over. Prisoner 416 explained how he believed that the prison was a real one but run by psychologists not the government. This suggests that the SPE did replicate the social roles of guards and prisoners in a real prison given the high internal validity. 
• Limitation exaggerated the power of the social roles that influence the behaviour (Fromm 1973).⅓ of the guards acted brutally, another third acted fairly and the other third tried to help and support the prisoners. They supported the prisoners by reinforcing privileges like sympathising and offering cigarettes (Zimbardo 2007). Most guards were able to resist the situational pressures to conform to a brutal role. This suggests that Zimbardo overstated his view that the SPE participants were conforming to social roles and minimising the influence of dispositional factors like personality.