Philip G. Zimbardo on his career and the Stanford Prison Experiment's 40th anniversary.

Drury, Scott; Hutchens, Scott A.; Shuttlesworth, Duane E.

doi:10.1037/a0025884

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zimbardo’s attempt to create a functional simulation of a prison was informed by ex-con Carlo Prescott, yet by Prescott’s (2005) own admission years later, the simulation and results were contrived as the sadistic behaviors of the guards were reproductions of personal experiences Prescott disclosed to the experimenters. In a 2012 interview, Zimbardo described the simulation as “a minimally adequate representation of what I knew was kind of the demonization that went on in prisons” (Drury, Hutchens, Shuttlesworth, & White, 2012, p. 162). Yet it is the “what went on in real prisons” that Zimbardo and colleagues failed to confirm (Fromm, 1973; Haslam & Reicher, 2006).…”

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Stanford prison experiment in introductory psychology textbooks: A content analysis

Bartels

2015

Psychology Learning & Teaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present content analysis examines the coverage of theoretical and methodological problems with the Stanford prison experiment (SPE) in a sample of introductory psychology textbooks. Categories included the interpretation and replication of the study, variance in guard behavior, participant selection bias, the presence of demand characteristics including the contribution of the guard orientation, and the ecological validity of the prison. In general, results revealed minimal coverage of problems with the study, with only two of the 14 textbooks citing any critical articles. The majority of textbooks presented the study in a fashion consistent with a ''power of the situation'' interpretation with no account of a more theoretically robust study, namely the BBC prison study, nor mention of methodological shortcomings. A review of the post-SPE criticisms and suggestions for addressing the landmark study in introductory textbooks are included.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Stanford prison experiment in introductory psychology textbooks: A content analysis

Bartels

2015

Psychology Learning & Teaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this simulation to be realistic and to have ecological validity, it should have been based on a thorough study of real places of imprisonment. Yet, at the time of the SPE, as Zimbardo admitted, “I knew really nothing about prisons” (Drury, Hutchens, Shuttlesworth, & White, 2012, p. 162). He imagined the SPE almost entirely on the basis of the testimonies of the paid prison consultant Carlo Prescott and of the Toyon Hall experiment.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Texier

2019

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Author NoteThibault Le Texier is associate researcher at the University of Nice.This research has been funded by the Région Centre, Ciclic Fund. I am particularly indebted to Richard Griggs for detailed comments and suggestions. I would like to thank too the participants in the Stanford prison experiment who agreed to answer my questions, along with Alex Haslam and the two other reviewers who discussed this paper in detail, James Lyle Peterson, Daniel Hartwig of the Stanford Library Special Collections, AbstractThe Stanford prison experiment (SPE) is one of psychology's most famous studies. It has been criticized on many grounds, and yet a majority of textbook authors have ignored these criticisms in their discussions of the SPE, thereby misleading both students and the general public about the study's questionable scientific validity. Data collected from a thorough investigation of the SPE archives and interviews with fifteen of the participants in the experiment further question the study's scientific merit. These data are not only supportive of previous criticisms of the SPE, such as the presence of demand characteristics, but provide new criticisms of the SPE based on heretofore unknown information. These new criticisms include the biased and incomplete collection of data, the extent to which the SPE drew on a prison experiment devised and conducted by students in one of Zimbardo's classes three months earlier, the fact that the guards received precise instructions regarding the treatment of the prisoners, the fact that the guards were not told they were subjects, and the fact that participants were almost never completely immersed by the situation. Possible explanations of the inaccurate textbook portrayal and general misperception of the SPE's scientific validity over the past five decades, in spite of its flaws and shortcomings, are discussed. Keywords: Stanford prison experiment, P. G. Zimbardo, epistemology DEBUNKING THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT 3 Debunking the Stanford Prison ExperimentTo show that normal people could behave in pathological ways even without the external pressure of an experimenter-authority, my colleagues and I put college students in a simulated prison setting and observed the power of roles, rules, and expectations. Young men selected because they were normal on all the psychological dimensions we measured (many of them were avowed pacifists) became hostile and sadistic, verbally and physically abusing others -if they enacted the randomly assigned role of all-powerful mock guards. Those randomly assigned to be mock prisoners suffered emotional breakdowns, irrational thinking, and behaved self-destructively -despite their constitutional stability and normalcy. This planned two-week simulation had to be ended after six days because the inhumanity of the "evil situation" had totally dominated the humanity of the "good" participants.

show abstract

“…The SPE clearly showed that human nature could be shaped by social circumstances (Drury et al 2012). Therefore, the inevitable relationship between Zimbardo's main argument, the power of situation (Slavich 2009), and the social model of disability becomes much clearer.…”

Section: The Stanford Prison Experiments and The Social Model Of Disabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment from the Perspective of the Social Model of Disability: A Teaching Experience

Koca-Atabey

2020

EAC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to revisit the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) from the perspective of disability studies. The SPE is an issue that inevitably comes to light while teaching Social Psychology and how it contributes to a different course titled Psychological, Social and Cultural Aspects of Disabilities. The SPE presents a pioneering piece of research within Social Psychology. Similarly, the social model has reformed the concept of disability. The SPE and further studies demonstrate the importance of social forces in shaping human behaviour; i.e. they explore how good people might turn evil in particular circumstances. The social model of disability emphasises the role of social oppression in creating disability. As these two courses contribute to each other, it is discussed that an appropriate level of analysis within the discipline of psychology has much to contribute to the inherently interdisciplinary field of disability studies and vice versa. Interdisciplinary curriculums might be a step towards inclusive higher education.

show abstract

Philip G. Zimbardo on his career and the Stanford Prison Experiment's 40th anniversary.

Cited by 14 publications

References 10 publications

The Stanford prison experiment in introductory psychology textbooks: A content analysis

The Stanford prison experiment in introductory psychology textbooks: A content analysis

Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment from the Perspective of the Social Model of Disability: A Teaching Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About