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

Abstract

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.

Coverage of the Stanford Prison Experiment in Introductory Psychology Courses

“…However, numerous articles critical of the SPE have accumulated over the years since its publication addressing the following issues: the questionable ecological validity of the mock prison, the role of personality in the selection of environments, demand characteristics including the guard orientation, Zimbardo’s dual role as principal investigator and prison superintendent, and the variance in guard behavior. While a thorough description of each is beyond the scope of this article (see Bartels, 2015; Griggs, 2014; Griggs & Whitehead, 2014), a summary of each is provided in Table 1. To better address the factors that influence role adoption in a prison setting and address some of the methodological and theoretical shortcomings of the SPE, Reicher and Haslam (2006) conducted a simulated prison study, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) prison study.…”

“…Recently, several authors, as summarized in Table 2, have examined the extent to which SPE criticisms are addressed in introductory psychology textbooks (Bartels, 2015; Bartels & Hernandez, 2013; Bartels, Hernandez, Henning, & Bekovic, 2015; Griggs, 2014; Griggs & Whitehead, 2014) with results suggesting a relative paucity of coverage. Griggs (2014) found SPE criticism mentioned in only 6 of the 11 textbooks, and the coverage was minimal.…”

“…In a sample of introductory social psychology textbooks, Griggs and Whitehead (2014) found similar coverage with less than half of the textbooks including criticisms of the SPE. Bartels (2015) also conducted an analysis of SPE criticism in introductory psychology books. None of the 14 textbooks in the Bartels’ sample included a mention of replications of the SPE including the BBC prison study; none mentioned ecological validity problems; and there was only a single mention of participant selection bias, demand characteristics, and the guard orientation.…”

“…None of the 14 textbooks in the Bartels’ sample included a mention of replications of the SPE including the BBC prison study; none mentioned ecological validity problems; and there was only a single mention of participant selection bias, demand characteristics, and the guard orientation. Additionally, Bartels (2015) and Bartels, Hernandez, Henning, and Bekovic (2015) assessed the extent to which textbook authors clarified the variance in guard behavior finding only one specific reference to a lack of uniformity in guard behavior in general introductory texts and little more than half of the introductory social psychology textbooks, respectively.…”

“…While the textbook analyses examined ethical issues more broadly, the survey responses reflect coverage of the dual roles occupied by Zimbardo. Griggs (2014) and Bartels (2015) examined coverage of the SPE in introductory textbooks, and Griggs and Whitehead (2014) and Bartels et al (2015) examined social psychology textbooks. NA = data not provided.…”