Conformity to social roles

• Zimbardo prison experiment procedure

  Zimbardo set up a mock prison in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford university to investigate the effect of social roles on conformity. 21 male students who were 'emotionally stable' were randomly allocated to the role of guard or prisoner. The social roles were encouraged by two routes :

  1. Uniform - prisoners were strip searched, given a uniform and number (dehumanisation). Guards enforced rules, had uniform and handcuffs
  2. Instructions about behaviour - prisoners were told they could not leave and guards told they had complete power
• Zimbardo prison experiment findings

  The guards played their roles enthusiastically and treated prisoners harshly. Prisoners rebelled within 2 days and the guards retaliated with fire extinguishers and harassed the prisoners. The guards behaviour threatened the prisoners' psychological and physical health for example : prisoners became depressed and anxious, three prisoners were released early as they showed signs of psychological disturbance and one prisoner went on a hunger strike and the guards attempted to force feed him and punished him with the 'hole' a dark closet.
• Zimbardo prison experiment conclusions

  Social roles are powerful influences on behaviour as most conformed strongly to their role. Guards became brutal and prisoners became submissive,. Other volunteers also easily conformed to their social roles in the prison e.g. the chaplain.
• Evaluation

  One strength of the Stanford prison experiment is the control over key variables. Emotionally stable participants were recruited and randomly allocated the roles of guard or prisoner. The guards and prisoners had those roles only by chance. so their behaviour was due to their role itself and not their personalities. This control increased the study'd internal validity, so we have more confidence in drawing conclusions about the effect of social roles on conformity.
• Evaluation

  One limitation is that the Stanford prison experiment lacked the realism of a true prison. Some psychologists suggested participants were play acting. Their performances reflected stereotypes of how prisoners and guards are supposed to behave. One guard based his character off of a film. Prisoners rioted as they thought hat is what real prisoners did. This suggests the stanford prison experiment tells us little about conformity to social roles in actual prisons.
• Evaluation

  One limitation is that Zimbardo exaggerated the power roles. The power of social roles to influence behaviour may have been exaggerated in the stanford prison experiment. Only a third of the guards behaved brutally. Another third applied the rules fairly. The rest supported the prisoners by offering them cigarettes and reinstating privileges. This suggests the stanford prison experiment overstates the view that the guards were conforming to a brutal role and minimised dispositional influences.