Analysis Of Stanford Prison Experiment

An Overview of The Stanford Prison Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was designed and conducted by a Social Psychologist Dr. Zimbardo at Stanford University in 1971. According to Zimbardo (1971), the experiment was intended to better interpret “the basic psychological mechanisms underlying human aggression” (p. 1). The experiment’s goal was to test the dispositional hypothesis - whether the uncontrollable violence within an ordinary prison environment was legitimately caused by the existing violent nature of one’s self and personality flaws or simply situational. The researchers also focused on the observation and evaluation of the changes in mental states and psychological health in both authoritative guards and submissive prisoners.
The guards adopted authoritative power quickly and began abusing the prisoners within a very brief time. Even though physical violence was not allowed, verbal insults, humiliation, and intimidation were sufficient to cause great emotional and mental distress. A few prisoners had to be released early due to the extreme depression, crying and acute anxiety, while some prisoners expressed desires to inflict harm on others. The distress of the guards was obvious when the experiment ended, guards were reluctant to give up their power – the power to deprive the prisoners of their basic rights and personal identity. Self-evaluations of all participants corresponded to the negativity observed, participants generally lost sight of
Zimbardo’s study was informative and valuable; as it exposed the hidden causes of unrest in “total institutions” with details which are comparable to modern day settings. Violence and deaths are still overlooked and problems are unresolved (Coyle, A., 2004). While guidelines in prisons seem to have emerged years after the study, such as the appearance of the Handbook for Prison Staff written by the former British home secretary Right Hon. Jack Straw (Bronstein, Alvin J., 2003); the focus in 2017 seems to have shifted from prisons to high-tech overseas factories that are dealing with a large number of employees in countries where human rights are not guaranteed (Yuan, A.F., Human Rights Watch, 2016). The CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, said “…but it’s a factory. But they’ve had some suicides and attempted suicides – and they have 400,000 people there. The rate is under what the US rate is, but it’s still troubling.” (Merchant, B., 2017, June 18). The inhumane workload and conditions companies impose on its manufacturing subcontractors to achieve competitive low prices and high productivity in a prison-like environment contributed to the destruction of factory workers’ health (Chen, J., Pun, N., & Selden, M., 2016). The experiment has also brought attention to the ethical concerns in scientific experiments. Regardless of the benefits a scientific experiment could bring to the humankind, researchers should remain conscious of the safety of the participants, since