In 1971, social psychologist Zimbardo embarked on a social experiment to understand how people respond to social roles. He constructed a simulated prison in the basement of Stanford University's psychology department, where 24 male college students were randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners for a two-week study.
The prisoners were mandated to obey the guards' orders throughout the experiment. Guards were instructed to be firm in asserting authority, but strictly forbidden from resorting to violence.
Out of 75 applicants, 24 psychologically stable individuals were chosen and divided into two groups of 12, forming the guard and prisoner teams.
Zimbardo collaborated with city police, who arrested the subjects at their homes without any forewarning, treating them as if they had committed an actual armed robbery. They were fingerprinted and photographed, then brought to the simulated prison. The prisoners were stripped naked, sprayed with a de-lousing agent, and given numbered uniforms, while small chains were attached to their ankles to induce a sense of captivity.
The guards, on the other hand, worked in shifts and returned home at the end of their shifts. They wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses to deter eye contact, aiming to establish authority. They were given batons, but were reminded not to resort to physical punishment.
Each cell in the Stanford Prison Experiment housed three prisoners and was cramped. Guards, in contrast, had spacious quarters. They worked eight-hour shifts in groups of three, then returned home.
Initially, the experiment proceeded smoothly, but tensions escalated on the second day. Prisoners in the first cell barricaded their doors with their beds, undressed, and openly rebelled against following any of the guards' instructions. Ordinary college students transformed into sadistic guards and increasingly frightened prisoners within days.
As days passed, both guards and prisoners became more entrenched in their roles. Guards escalated to more severe forms of psychological control. For example, non-participants in rebellions were rewarded by being placed in a special cell. Additionally, prisoners had their beddings and sponges confiscated, being forced to sleep on metal beds and concrete. Guards even implemented secret or overt violence on the prisoners.
They prolonged routine prison counts, turning them into mental and physical torment for the prisoners. They forced them to do endless push-ups. Bathroom visits were restricted, and prisoners were compelled to relieve themselves in buckets. The small simulation prison reeked of urine. They established a dark room for punishment, and those who refused to eat had their own form of isolation. Within 36 hours, Prisoner 8612 exhibited severe psychological distress, leading to his removal from the experiment.
Rumors of a prisoner escape plan circulated on the fourth day, prompting Zimbardo to consider the safety of the subjects. He contacted the city police to ask if they could use the actual jail for the experiment, but was refused.
During this time, Prisoner 4016, who replaced 819 after the latter was removed due to psychological distress, began a hunger strike to demand parole.
Ultimately, the simulated prison bore a striking resemblance to a real correctional facility in a remarkably short time. On the sixth day, Philip Zimbardo was forced to terminate the experiment as the situation spiraled out of control. He acknowledged being affected by the experiment himself, as he had made decisions allowing the guards, who were also role-playing, to perpetrate the violence against the role-playing prisoners.
Zimbardo categorized the observed guard behaviors into three groups: sadistic guards who revelled in cruel practices, rule-bound guards who strictly enforced prison rules, and guards who occasionally provided secret assistance to the prisoners but were dissatisfied with the situation.
During post-experiment interviews, all subjects acknowledged their tendency to adopt the assigned roles. Even Prescott, who acted as a parole officer, began questioning prisoners about how their release would benefit society.
A real prison chaplain visited the experiment one day and spoke with the prisoners. Afterward, he remarked that the prisoners' psychological state mirrored that of actual inmates and noted that they introduced themselves by their numbers, not their names, reflecting how quickly they internalized the prison conditions and lost their individuality. Some prisoners even asked the chaplain to find them a lawyer.
The guards developed a fondness for the simulated prison environment and, even though they wouldn't be paid after their shifts ended, chose to stay in the prison. They were deeply saddened by the experiment's conclusion.
Zimbardo's astounding experiment later sparked significant criticism. This harrowing study has since been the subject of numerous films.
Post a Comment