Introduction In 1971 Famed Social Psychologist Philip Zimbar

Introduction In 1971 Famed Social Psychologist Philip Zimbardo Began

In 1971, famed social psychologist Philip Zimbardo began an experiment on the campus of Stanford University that was intended to study social roles and designed to last about two weeks. The experiment quickly took a dark turn and was abruptly ended on the sixth day. While heavily criticized, the experiment demonstrated the power of authority on behavior and sparked dialogue and new research on the human response to captivity. For this assignment, please complete the following steps:

Part 1 To learn more about the Stanford Prison Experiment, watch the documentary at the following link: (Opens in new window) Additional information about the Stanford Prison Experiment can be found at (Opens in new window)

Part 2 In an essay, discuss the following: What in your life would be examples of conforming into assigned roles? What would be examples of conforming to submission or conforming to authority? What are some real world examples that would compare with the prison guard/prisoner relationship? Explain how and why. Important essay guidelines to follow: Required font: Arial, 12 point Required formatting: Double-spaced, 1-inch margins Required length: 1 page (minimum) When using outside sources (other than your textbook), you must use APA style to reference your source(s) at the end of your submission.

Paper For Above instruction

The Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo in 1971 remains one of the most revealing studies on human behavior under authoritative influence. It exemplifies how individuals conform to assigned roles, especially when authoritative power and situational factors come into play. Reflecting on personal experiences, instances of conforming to roles often manifest in workplace dynamics, familial responsibilities, or social groups where roles are clearly defined. For example, a person might adopt the role of a team leader or a caregiver, acting in accordance with expectations that come with these positions. In these contexts, individuals often conform out of a sense of obligation, societal norms, or the desire to fulfill perceived responsibilities.

Conforming to submission or authority is similarly observed in everyday scenarios, such as obeying traffic laws, adhering to workplace directives, or following instructions from authority figures like teachers or police officers. These behaviors are rooted in the understanding that authority figures possess the power to enforce rules and maintain order. The Milgram experiment, for instance, demonstrated how ordinary individuals could commit acts of obedience under authority’s influence. A real-world analogy to the prison guard/prisoner relationship can be seen in military or corporate hierarchies, where individuals are expected to follow orders from superiors, often at the expense of personal judgment or morality.

In the context of the prison environment, the power dynamics between guards and prisoners reveal how situational forces and assigned roles can dramatically influence behavior. Guards may become authoritarian or aggressive, while prisoners might exhibit submissive or rebellious behaviors, driven by the pressure to conform to these roles. Such dynamics highlight the importance of understanding situational influences on behavior, as demonstrated by the experiment. These insights help explain why ordinary individuals can commit acts they might not consider in different circumstances, emphasizing the need for ethical oversight during such studies and real-world applications.

References

• Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1973). A study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. Naval Research Reviews, 30(9), 4-17.
• Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the 'nature' of captivity: An alternative look at the Stanford prison experiment and its implications. PLoS Biology, 10(11), e1001416.
• Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. Political Psychology, 27(5), 651-670.
• Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. Random House.
• Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad Is Stronger Than Good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370.
• Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of Obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378.
• Sharif, M., & Sherif, C. (1956). A student-based illusion: The Robbers Cave experiment. Journal of Social Psychology, 43(2), 245-251.
• Blass, T. (2004). The Milgram paradigm after 35 years: Some things we now know about obedience to authority. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(7), 1521–1554.
• Fine, G. A. (1987). With the People at the Prison: The Stanford Prison Experiment. New York University Press.
• Bandura, A. (1973). On the psychopolitical effects of propaganda. Science, 180(4099), 1243-1247.