Conformity to social roles (Zimbardo)

• What is conformity to social roles?


  When an individual adopts a particular behaviour and belief, while in a particular social situation.
• Who conducted the Stanford prison experiment and when was it done?

  Phillip Zimbardo (1970).
• What was the aim of the Stanford Prison Experiment?

  To investigate whether the increasing prison violence/guard brutality in America was a result of dispositional (did the guards have sadistic personalities) or situational factors (their social role as a prison guard)?
• AO1 describe the Stanford Prison Experiment?

  -A mock prison was set up in a basement in Stanford University.

  -21 male student volunteers were selected who went under intense screening and were judged to be the most physically and mentally stable. The students were randomly assigned to the role of prisoner or guard.

  -Prisoners and guards were encouraged to conform to their social roles: the prisoners were given loose smocks to wear and used ID numbers, not their own names. The guards were given khaki uniforms and sunglasses. These uniforms created a loss of their own identity (making them more likely to conform to the perceived social role).

  The guards were encouraged to play their role by being reminded they had complete control over the prisoners.
• What were the findings of The Stanford prison experiment?

  -Guards began to abuse their power and humiliate/punish the prisoners, taking up their role enthusiastically. They became inventive to try and keep control e.g at night they would conduct headcount's making the prisoners stand in line and call out their numbers.

  -On the second day, prisoners organised a mass riot and protested. After their rebellion was put down by the guards, with fire extinguishers, the prisoners showed extreme emotional distress. 5 Prisoners had to be released early because of extreme emotional reactions, they became depressed, subdued and anxious.

  -The experiment had to be stopped after 6 days instead of the planned 14 days.
• What were the conclusions of The Stanford prison experiment?

  Rejects the dispositional hypothesis e.g that it's due to the guards sadistic personalities. The behaviour of the participants who had been randomly assigned to each condition was due to their assigned social role; social roles appear to have a strong influence on individuals behaviour as the guards became brutal and the prisoners submissive.
• AO3: limitation- describe an ethical issue involved in the SPE?

  -The participants who were due to play prisoners were arrested at night in their own homes and handcuffed outside in the street before being bundled into police cars. This was done without their prior knowledge and in full view of the neighbours. This raises several ethical issues such as informed consent as the participants were not informed they would be arrested. It also raises the issue of protection from harm as the participants were not protected from psychological harm; being arrested in your own neighbourhood would cause distress and embarrassment as those watching may be unaware the arrest was faked.
• AO3: strength- control. Describe how the Zimbardo and his colleges had control over key variables in the SPE? (Give an example)

  The most obvious example of this was the selection of participants. Emotionally stable individuals were chosen and randomly assigned to their roles as guard or prisoner- they went under intense screening before the experiment started for things like family history, previous mental health issues, criminal records etc. This was one way in which the researchers ruled out individual personality differences as an explanation of the findings. If the guards and prisoners behaved very differently, but were in those roles only by chance, then their behaviour must have been due to the role itself. The degree of control over the variables increased the internal validity of the study, so we can be much more confident in drawing conclusions about the influence of roles on conformity.
• AO3: limitation- lack of realism. Who argued that the SPE did not have the realism of a true prison?

  Movahedi argued the participants were 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. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role on a brutal character from a film. This would also explain why the prisoners rioted- they thought that was what real prisoners. This suggests that the findings of the SPE tell us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
• Counterpoint- strength, realism. Who argued that participants did behave as if prison was real to them, why did he think this?

  Mark McDermott argues that the participants did behave as if prison was real to them. For example 90% of the prisoners conversations were about prison life. Amongst them they discussed how it was impossible to leave the SPE before their 'sentences' were over. One prisoner later explained how he believed the prison was a real one, but run by psychologists rather than the government. This suggests that the SPE did replicate the social roles of prisoners and guards in a real prison, giving the study a high degree of internal validity.
• Why did Mohavedi think that participants were merely play acting rather than genuinely conforming to a social role?

  He believed participants performances were based off stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. For example, one of the guards claimed he had based his role off a brutal character from a film.
• Why did Mark McDermott think that participants did behave as if prison was real to them?

  90% of the prisoners conversations were about prison life. Amongst themselves they discussed how it was impossible to leave the SPE before their 'sentences' were over. One of the prisoners explained later how he believed that the prison was real but run by psychologists rather than the government.