The Stanford Prison Experiment
After visiting: http://www.prisonexp.org/ and taking the slide show, respond to the following questions.
- Was it ethical to do this study? Was it right to trade the suffering experienced by participants for the knowledge gained by the research? (The experimenters did not take this issue lightly, although the Slide Show may sound somewhat matter-of-fact about the events and experiences that occurred).
- Knowing what this research says about the power of prison situations to have a corrosive effect on human nature, what recommendations would you make about changing our correctional system?
Responses are due by 8am Wednesday 4/17/13
Personally, I do not think it is really much of a debate over whether or not the experiment was ethical. In hindsight, is was clearly unethical, as men were subjected to humiliation and put in psychological distress. I also don't think it's much of a debate to see that the experiment also had major flaws, especially in that Philip Zimbardo was not an objective leader of the experiment, but rather a part of the experiment himself, as the head of the "prison". Because of this, Zimbardo was unable to recognize the unethical ways of the experiment, because like the men involved, he too became enthralled with the false world. The men clearly suffered distress as they began to accept the fake prison as their reality, and the guards took extra efforts to make the prison uncomfortable. The real debate, I feel, is whether or not the experiment was worth it. It can be argued that the guards did not need to humiliate the prisoners to such extremes, however, then I am not sure the experiment would have been so successful. Even Zimbardo remarked that he was afraid the experiment was going to be uneventful and boring, until one of the guards decided to go above and beyond in acting out his "role". Even though the experiment was totally unethical, I do think it was necessary to understand the capacity for evil in humans. The experiment was extreme, but a less extreme version probably would not have elicited the same results. I think the experiment helps explain the mentality of the Nazis during WWII, and how the prison setting brought out their capacity for evil against the Jews. To improve prison systems based on this experiment, I would recommend a more constructive environment, rather than a constant us-them struggle between the prisoners and guards. While prison is obviously supposed to be an unpleasant punishment, I think it would be beneficial for guards to be trained in treating the prisoners fairly and without humiliation. I also think it would be helpful to create a rewards system for prisoners, rewarding their compliance with rules, in order to allow them something to look forward to and something to motivate them.
ReplyDeleteThe ethics behind this study are in my opinion unquestionable. It was wrong to degrade these innocent men; however it is justified because they technically volunteered. I don’t believe that any of them knew quite what they were getting themselves into. None of them could have foreseen the trauma that they would have during and even after the experiment. Like Caroline said, I do not think that the actual results of the study would have been proven if they did not take it all the way and treat it like an actual prison. The only way to see if evil is produced in the prison environment itself was to take innocent men and throw them into prison life. I don’t think it was right to do the experiment, but this is said after the fact that it happened. If I had to judge whether or not it was moral before they conducted the experiment, I don’t know if I would have the same response. It seems like the only way to test the theory. I wouldn’t think that it would get to the point of emotional break downs or psychological distress. The basic concept of the experiment sounds like a good idea but it is only now that we can judge the experiment now that we see the effects. After learning the results of this experiment, especially eight days sooner than expected we are shown that prison really does have a corrosive effect on human beings. I feel like the humiliation and degradation of the prisoners is not necessary in the correctional system, at least not for everybody. This should be a last resort tactic used only when absolutely necessary. Although prison is a punishment, the system is not meant to feed into the criminal mentality or for the prisoners to have criminal thoughts if released. I feel like there should be therapies offered in some cases to work against the negative thoughts and learn how to be a better person in society. Things that would help children achieve desirable behavior would also help. For example, token economy, where the prisoners could earn positive rewards such as more visiting hours and negative rewards like not having to do a job or chore that day. The same motivation that gets kids to act like they should could also work on the adult prisoners.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was ethical to do this. There are other ways to gather information rather than risking the well being of non-criminal subjects. While the researchers could not have predicted the results when they began the experiment, they could have used naturalistic observation at a real prison rather than risking innocents.
ReplyDeleteI would put an emphasize on ensuring the mental health of jailers. If a jailer acts up he should be required to talk to a psychologist or go through a program to ensure prisoners are treated with humanity
I agree with Devon that the experiment was definitely unethical. Although the psychologists who designed the experiment did not intend for it to break ethical standards, the psychological havoc and physical abuse wrought on the prisoners was extremely unethical. If the psychologists had stepped in and set ground rules for the guards, the experiment may have gotten out of hand. The conditions the prisoners were subject too were definitely not what they had volunteered for. In this case, although the knowledge gained by the research was definitely interesting, it was not worth the suffering of the prisoners. For a menial fifteen dollars, the prisoners did not deserve this. Also, the experiment quickly crossed ethical boundaries when the experimenters fell victim to it as well, as indicated by the efforts to quell a prison riot. Thus, such an experiment spun out of control way too fast.
ReplyDeleteIf I could make any recommendations to the correctional system, it would be to keep the guards and prisoners constantly under surveillance. Any signs of abuse of power by the guards would have to be handled, possibly by firing the guards. Also, I think it would be very important to keep the psychological state of the prisoners under surveillance; as exhibited by the experience of the person in solitary confinement, the person can leave prison with psychological problems that turn them into a greater criminal.
I definitely agree that this experiment was unethical. To expose a group of innocent volunteers to such a degrading, humiliating, and stressful experience, no matter what the purpose of the experiment was, is completely unethical. Even Zimbardo himself realized that what he was doing was unethical and thus shut down the experiment after six days and the experiment was referred to as "mistreatment." Perhaps that was really the most surprising element of the experiment to me - this massive plot twist and series of mental breakdowns took place over the course of just six days. I understand that the experiment was composed of volunteers, but they were not told exactly what would happen to them considering Zimbardo left it to the "guards'" discretion. Zimbardo himself did not even know what was going to happen step-by-step in the experiment! Which brings me to my next point - Zimbardo should have intervened at some point or should have set guidelines beforehand for what the guards could and could not do because, in the end, it was ultimately the guards' quest for power that caused the "prisoners" to be exposed to such detrimental conditions.
ReplyDeleteAs far as our correctional system goes, after seeing this, I felt compelled to say we have to change it altogether! It is quite literally called a "correctional" system - how are we supposed to correct anyone's behavior by subjecting them to such vulgar and humiliating occurrences? Especially for criminals who already have psychological issues upon entering into a correctional facility, it would appear that this would only worsen the situation and increase mental breakdowns! Clearly criminals deserve to be punished for their crimes, but not to these lengths. My recommendation would be to hold almost correctional classes for such people, which would allow them to get out of their cells while still under supervision and would really be able to take on the "correctional" aspect of jail-time instead of literally locking a group of criminals in what is essentially a cage (which is de-humanizing in itself from the get-go).
Hindsight can be a person’s best friend or their worst enemy. A person can look back on their life and be completely satisfied with their decisions and actions or they can look back and regret them deeply. I think that hindsight in this case would be the experimenter’s worst nightmare. There is no question that the experiment was unethical but in the moment I’m sure they believe that their actions were not unethical and the experiment was considered justifiable for research purposes. This type of experiment was unprecedented and therefore no one knew how fine the line between experiment and reality would become. There were things that could have been changed to make it more ethical. The leader of the experiment should not have actual participated in the experiment but observed from a outside standpoint. If he was not as emotionally involved as the volunteers he might have discovered the problems before Christina Maslach brought them to his attention. At that point, the humiliation and punishment of the prisons at the hands of the guards was past the point of simple experimentation. Both parties had truly began to believe in their roles, transformed themselves into a number or a harsh enforcer. I don’t think that the result of the experiment can justify the suffering of the participants because nothing has really changed. The tactics that are used in prisons are just as humiliating and degrading as they were beforehand. If there truly was a change in the prisons then the suffering might be justified but the experiment only served to hurt innocent people. We are aware of the problems in our system, yet we are not doing anything about them and until that correction is made then the volunteers suffered for virtually nothing. I think that the mindset people have when they think of prisoners needs to be changed before any real progress can be made. The prisoners in the experiment were identified by numbers and made to look the same. The degrading and equalizing feeling created in the experiment is what creates the power exchange used in prison. The problem is these people truly become just numbers or just another prisoner they are no longer a person. When human beings are no longer valued in the same way the rest of society’s members are, situations like those that occurred in the prison become a reality. Until we view each and every prisoner with the most basic respect a person deserves there can be no progress made.
ReplyDeleteI think, in hindsight, everyone would agree that this study was unethical. But at the time, the researchers may have not thought this type of study would have such detrimental results. Psychologists at the time were just curious, they did not intend on harming the mentality of the participants. Like the saying, "curiosity killed the cat", came into play during the study, no one PLANNED on harming the innocent participants. The information was gathered through an unfortunate circumstance, but the psychologists did get what they were looking for. Was is worth hurting those young men? I personally don't think so, but the researchers were interested in this topic. And, I do find that maybe the participants were unaware of how "real" the prison theme will become after spending that time with no other outside contact with the world. I agree that the psychologists should have set up ethical rules to save "prisoners" from physical/psychological abuse by the "guards". But, I wonder were the "guards" just trying to have fun with their power roles? What else can they do in a prison? They are 20 year old males hanging out together doing nothing in particular, so they must get bored at some point. I don't think the realization that when given power, people tend to abuse it came about. And the prison being their only reality, the "guards" began owning their new role.
ReplyDeleteAs far as correctional system goes, I am unsure how to approach dealing with some of the nation's worst. I do not think that physically and psychologically torturing prisoners is the right way of going about it. The prisoners are still people, and even in prisons today, petty criminals like thieves do go after more serious criminals like molesters and rapists. I think solitude for prisoners is enough, because when one is alone with their own thoughts they can contemplate their actions or suffer their imprisonment. And even being stuck with other criminals can simulate a kind of "Hell". Sartre's French play, "Huis Clos", defines Hell as being trapped with others forever. And being trapped in a prison with crazy, violent and volatile criminals can really make one believe he has entered Hell, a real living Hell.
Like everyone mentioned above, I do not feel it was ethical to do this study. The men who participated were victimized, humiliated and dehumanized for the sake of research. The study most likely influenced some permanent psychological damage on the prisoners. However, I think the results of the study were unprecedented and were completely unexpected by everyone involved in the study, including the volunteers and Zimbardo. It was the first time a study like this was ever performed to this degree. I don't think Zimbardo or the volunteers understood the potential amount of damage this study could have on everyone involved. In hindsight, I think it's very easy to conclude that this experiment was unethical, but before the study occurred, I don't think Zimbardo or the volunteers really saw any potential danger in the study. All of the men were innocent, mentally stable people who volunteered to take part in the study. Throughout the whole process, the volunteers were aware that they were taking part in a study, and besides the roles they were assigned (guard or prisoner), there was no real difference between them. Most importantly, they were all cognizant of these facts. I feel that if I was Zimbardo or the volunteers, I would not be able to see the extent of suffering that occurred before the experiment took place. I honestly feel that I would not have predicted the domineering, superior, and abusive behavior of the guards toward the prisoners, especially since they were innocent, average men with no compelling differences from the guards. With that said, I was very surprised with the outcome of the study. The amount of suffering the guards imposed on the prisoners is hard to fathom. The men were given a position of power in an environment that called for no rules regulation, and used these variables to their full advantage. As the days progressed, the treatment became progressively worse, and I think it's frightening to see how comfortable the guards felt with abusing innocent people in such grotesque ways. The experiment revealed the dangers of placing people in power without rules or regulations to regulate their actions.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the experiment was unethical, it did reveal some compelling information on the power of prison situations. Because of the corrosive effect on human nature, I think that there should be regulations on dehumanizing practices. I also feel that the correctional system should encourage positive behavior in prisoners through the use of a token economy to reward good behavior. They should remain cognizant of the prisoner's dignity and try to employ ways to discourage dehumanizing and abusive practices of superiority and to foster the growth of desired behavior for prisoners.
It is obvious now that it was not ethical to do this study. Even though it may have seemed like a good idea at the time, the emotional and mental trauma that was caused by the study was not worth the knowledge gained by research. The people conducting the research had no idea that their would be such detrimental effects from their study, so the psychologists can't be blamed for the fact that this study was unethical. Although the findings were helpful to psychologists, this study could never be reproduced. It must be accepted that this study occurred and there is nothing we can do to change that, so psychologists should use the information collected from this study. Knowing the research about the power of prison situations has a corrosive effect on human nature, I believe that some things within the correctional system must change. It is not fair to treat any human so unethically. If the person is going to come out of prison and reenter the normal world, we want them to fit into society and be able to adjust to normal life. The abuse of power in the correctional system does not allow convicts to adjust to normal life easily. If these boys were able to be so harmed by the correctional system in just 6 days, imagine how affected people will be after spending years in the correctional system. I think that solitary confinement would be the best way to punish people. By allowing them time with themselves and there thoughts, they would hopefully be punished by their own guilt. I also think that the government could use prisoners for cheap labor, but treated fairly. This way the government can benefit from prisoners and the prisoners would be more used to a normal life. I am not sure exactly what needs to change, but I do believe that something in the correctional system should change based on the results of this study.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the website, it is very clear that this experiment was extremely unethical. Obviously the experimenters never imagined it would get so out of hand or intense, however there should have been more experimental guidelines. Most of the experiment seemed open to interpretation by the volunteers, especially those posing as prison guards. The experimenters did a good job of setting up the physical jail environment, but the activities of the volunteers were not monitored or controlled to the appropriate degree. What really shocked me was the experimenter's apparent disregard for the prisoner's mental state. When volunteer's were released from the experiment it was done almost grudgingly. As for the prison guards, the fact that they were allowing the guards to be excessively aggressive when they believed no one was watching was alarming. Prison environments do have a violent, dark side, however this experiment was taking it to the extremes. The guards were beginning to enjoy the power the held over the prisoners and using it wrongly.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to come up with a solution to help our correctional facilities today because it is a complex issue. I think one thing that could be considered is use a system of rewards to reinforce good behavior. Set it up so consistent good behavior leads to a greater or better reward, whereas poor behavior puts the prisoner back at the bottom and includes some sort of punishment. This is an important matter that needs to be discussed because our penal institutions do cause psychological distress or torment.
As most have already mentioned, in hindsight we can see that this study was in no way ethical; however, with no guidelines or restrictions in place and without precedent studies such as this to set a standard for treatment, the ethics of the issue was a topic probably not thought much of. Zimbardo himself admitted that no one expected it to go this far; he himself saw himself as a prison guard.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, we seem very easy to agree that suffering does not justify the knowledge - yet, the idea of torture still remains in some prisons. Is the suffering of suspected criminals acceptable for knowledge? Even knowledge that could save lives?
It is obvious that the current prison system corrodes at moral integrity. Understanding that control needs to be kept in prisons in order to ensure the safety of the guards and other prisoners, prisoners need to be able to feel like they are still human. When their humanity is taken away, so does their morality. The abuse, degradation, and extreme punishments should not be acceptable. Also, I feel that solitary confinement is not a method that controls or rehabilitates a person, but drives them further to the blade of a knife. Humans are social creatures, and to put a person into a solitary box for hours, even years on end, is cruel, inhuman, and detrimental to their psychological health. Instead, a punishment such as a loss of privileges should be given. For rewards, the prisoner can perhaps spend more time outside, or perform more enjoyable chores. Running a prison almost like a school is best: when their is a high level of respect for their teacher or "guard", the prisoner can still retain their identity yet accept that there will be consequences for their actions.
In the end, the goal of prisons is to rehabilitate, and our current penal system does not seem very effective in that goal.
While I understand that the participants agreed to do the study, I think that it was unethical. The participants were subject to horrible living conditions and psychological manipulation that probably had lasting effects. I do not think that the experience that the participants went through was justified by the research gained. It became clear after a while that the participants began to believe that they were prisoners or prison guards, and that this was having a negative effect on their health and behavior. I also think that the researches allowed some of the participants to go too far, and I doubt that having the prisoners go without food or toilets was necessary to the experiment. I think that the research could have been gathered in a less extreme way, without negatively impacting the participants. In order to change our correctional system, I think that laws should be passed and enforced which prohibit certain treatment of prisoners. I think that guards should not be allowed to physically or mentally abuse prisoners, and that things like food and access to bathrooms cannot be taken away. I think that research needs to be done to find better ways for prison guards to control prisoners without hurting them. Prisoners need to be treated with respect and given basic human rights.
ReplyDeleteThere is no question weather or not that this experiment was ethical. They grabbed random college students and took away there freedom by placing them in small cells and physically punishing them if they did something wrong. I believe that the psychologist were curious and inclined to do these studies but I believed that they took it too far. I believe that they knew that they took it too far because when they had the parents visit the prisoners in the cells, they completely changed up the place to make it look happier and groomed the inmates. If the prison was actually something to be proud of then there would be no adjustments. I do not believe that it was right to trade the suffering experience by participants for the knowledge gained by the research because no torture should amount to new knowledge. I believe that there could have been a better way to explore these methods by doing a different experiment that would not effect human lives. This experiment not only physically hurt people but as well as mentally.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it is hard to come up with, I agree with Marissa that some prisoners should be used as cheap labor. The jobs would have to be something that no one would want, due to the fact that unemployment is a huge factor in today's society.
While I agree that this study was in no way ethical, I do agree with Jess that we believe this now greatly because of hindsight bias. At the time, the experimenter had the idea that he would be in full control of the situation and that it would be strictly for research. He never believed that he would become so immersed and just as intense as the others who were involved. Because of his lack of professionalism, he failed to see the terrible things that he was doing to innocent people. He not only harmed normal, unexpecting college students physically, but he mentally changed the way they perceived reality. He turned able-bodied, intelligent young men into either helpless prisoners or power hungry guards and fully convinced them of their roles. He dangerously altered the way they thought about themselves.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't think the terrible nature of this experiment was worth the small amount of knowledge that it gained, I do believe that now we must learn from it. It's important that correctional systems not only keep prisoners physically safe from abusive guards and such, but also from the mental deterioration that comes with long term imprisonment.
I agree with Jacky that with the hindsight bias we now have, of course the study seems unethical, but I think that the issue that most people feel towards the study is that it was immoral. The study at first seemed to be conducted according to standard guidelines of informing the volunteers of the type of situation they would be put into and Dr. Zimbardo's decision to let the guards decide what they wanted to do gives the situation a bit more reality and gravity (although he should have given them the guidelines that actual prison guards received since he did have a consultant on prisons helping him with the study). In my opinion, the knowledge gained by the research is important but it still will always be tainted by the abuse that the volunteers went through- although the question in hindsight is if that suffering was really avoidable even if the guards were given guidelines because this type of abuse still happens in prisons where guards are trained on how to "properly" do their job.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that everyone in the experiment fell so easily into their roles and did not realize the human suffering they were causing and how easily and realistically this translates to what happens everyday in prisons especially in this country. The penitierary system is supposed to be one of rehabilitation so that criminals with a chance of rejoining society as productive citizens, such as thieves and others that committed petty crimes, and there is supposed to be some semblance of basic human rights within that system. I would recommend that the correctional system undergo reforms such as creating better training programs for the guards so that aggression can be contained and programs for the prisoners to learn how to re-enter society as better individuals instead of continually returning to jail because their circumstances outside of jail do not improve since they are not rehabilitated.
As everyone has already said, I completely agree that this experiment was unethical. That makes me question my whole moral compass though. I mean, if this experiment was so blatantly unethical and if it was only mirroring the affects of a real-life prison, than that poses the question- is the crime the prisoners committed to end up in prison worth taking away their human rights? Do they not deserve basic ethics because they are criminals? With that aside, these people only lasted about 6 days. Men in prison stay in there for years, if not for life.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found extremely unethical, however, was the complete lack of guidelines. Now, this might be ignorant to not know how the prison system works, but I would hope there are some guidelines regulating the guards/ privacy of the prisoners. The guards being able to induce physical punishments like push-ups and for the experimenters to be able to read all the prisoners' mail just seemed extreme. I have no idea though, in an actual prison all of these things might occur as well.
In order to improve our correctional system, I, like others have said, would create jobs for the prisoners. I am aware most prisons do this, but the jobs seem trivial. For example, I think there should be jobs catered to the different levels of education within the prison. Not all jobs should be collecting the sheets from the bed, but not all jobs can be calculating the statistics of paroles either. There needs to be a balance of both. That way, the prisoners are reminded of jobs in real-life, not just jobs that occur within the monopoly of the prison.
This really is seen in Shawshank Redemption when Brooks gets released. The thought of him not living in the prison anymore was so awful that he had a mental breakdown. Even once he got out, he was so unable to deal with the real world, he (spoiler alert- stop reading if you haven't seen it!) commits suicide. This is a sad truth. Our correctional facilities are supposed to make the prisoners more "suitable" for the real world, not make it more difficult for them one day. Even the real life prisoner said that he no longer wanted to steal, he wanted to kill after prison.
I think it was entirely unethical to perform this study. Perhaps the study began ethically. The experimenters made sure to disclose the purpose to the participants. In theory, they knew what they were getting into. However, there were no guidelines for those given the roles of guards. Soon, the prisoners were being degraded. There was no right to trade this suffering for knowledge. The experimenters even lost control of the situation, succumbing to the illusion they had created. The experiment was not safe and most likely had long lasting consequences for its participants.
ReplyDeleteThe correctional system should do more to promote the prisoners' humanity. Perhaps classes, hobbies, etc would channel the aggression and frustration felt by prisoners at being incarcerated into a healthy source that could benefit later once they are released. Guards should not try to make prisoners turn on each other to deflect the danger from themselves. Rather, they should promote unity perhaps by rewarding for a majority good behavior. The prisoners would then encourage each other to behave well in order to receive equal rewards for all.
There certainly is no question that this study was unethical. Although it started out with good intentions purely for the sake of gaining knowledge through research, what became of the study was a complete dehumanization of innocent, random people who were unsuspecting of exactly what they were going to endure. Almost every aspect of the study points to its immoral and unethical methods, especially the physical punishment and humiliation that the prisoners had to endure. What I think is the worst part is that the prisoners began to show signs of actual mental and emotional anguish so early on in the study, and it continued for days after anyway. The guards even began to experience violent and aggressive behavior even when they knew the cameras were no longer on them and they were not being monitored. This is a perfect example of the fact that everyone involved in the study was settling into their roles and losing sight of reality. I think that to make our correctional facilities less corrupt, they should not involve destroying human values but should rather promote them. Nothing is gained from such dehumanizing of prisoners and the processes that go on in our correctional facilities should be reevaluated.
ReplyDeleteI'd definitely say that this experiment was not ethical, and was in fact permanently damaging to the emotions, personalities, and identities of the participants. When entering into the study, both researchers and participants had a good idea of what was being observed and what knowledge would be gained from such an experience. There were expectations and standards which had been set, and all parties involved believed they were prepared for what was to come. However, when the experiment began, full-force, none of the behavior that resulted was in the plans of the researchers. When prisoners were being physically harmed and psychologically degraded, and when guards took their roles much too far, the experiment took a turn for the worse. At this point, the knowledge gained by the research was not worth the trauma endured by the participants. Especially the final statement by prisoner #416 shows the emotional damage the project had on his entire life. He truly felt that he had lived in a prison, had been a part of the prisoner lifestyle, and would never truly be the same person he was before he entered the experiment. This is a scary thought.
ReplyDeleteSince both the experimental prisoners and actual, real-world prisoners agreed that prison entirely ruined their sense of self and their perception of humanity, I think major changes need to be made in our correctional system. For one, there needs to be set guidelines and boundaries for authority figures (like guards) to follow. The law and the concept of justice must govern these prisons, not the personal biases and feelings of the guards and what they see is best. There should also be better ways for the prisoners to learn from their mistakes and see where they went wrong. Forcing them to do meaningless, repetitive tasks like push-ups teaches them absolutely nothing.
This study was definitely not ethical whatsoever. While there was definitely sufficient data gathered from this experiment, the lasting psychological effects left on the group inside the fake prison outweigh the knowledge gained. These men were psychologically tortured, degraded and abused for less than a week and already took on the prisoner's complete persona.
ReplyDeleteFrom studying this experiment, I understand how prisoners serving long-term sentences can go crazy quite easily- the feeling of having your human rights violated is disarming. I think that the United States correctional system needs to ensure the human treatment of inmates, or else we could all be subject to the wrath of a mentally broken criminal that is eventually released into society to cause more harm.
I definitely do not think that this study was ethical. There is absolutely no way that the participants were properly informed about what exactly was going to happen in the experiment. It was noted that they were informed that they would not be getting fed properly, but they probably did not know that they were going to be that physically and mentally abused. It was not right to trade the suffering experience by participants for the knowledge because knowledge should not be attained through immoral actions. On top of this, the people that were running the study got so wrapped up in it that they started becoming extremely inhumane and stopped doing what was best in order to elicit knowledge about the psychology involved in prison.
ReplyDeleteIt was extremely upsetting to read at the end of the slideshow that correctional policies in the United States have become even more destructive. Prison is meant to serve as a time out for adults so that they think about what they have done wrong and hopefully make better decisions later after they have learned their lesson; it should not be causing the prisoners to become extremely mentally disturbed. In order to fix our correctional system, I would recommend not giving guards power to do whatever they would like to the prisoners. It was when the hired guards were given the authority to deal with the hired prisoners that everything started going out of control. The guards had just as much of a possibility to be picked as a prisoner as anyone else, yet they abuse their power when given the position of a guard. In the experiment, the guards truly started believing that they had the right to be harsh on the prisoners because they did something wrong. If that was not even true and the guards exploited their power, I can only imagine how brutal guards in real prisons could act when dealing with people who they know actually committed serious crimes.
I definitely agree that this experiment was entirely unethical. They did not entirely explain to the participants what the study would entail, and put their psychological health at risk. In a sense they did subject themselves to it, but it was impossible for them to know how horrible it would really be, and I think that if they had know that no one would have volunteered. Prisoners were being physically harmed both physically and psychologically, and this damage and experience is sure to effect them for the rest of their lives. They conductors of this experiment had feel into their roles as superintendent as well, so besides the basic result that people are victims of their environment much of the other information is not objective.
ReplyDeleteIn dealing with our correctional system today, it is hard to pinpoint exactly what needs to be changed in order to avoid the problems exposed by this experiment. I think that the guards should be carefully watched and monitored to ensure that no one is getting too "power happy" and that there is no foul play between the guards and prisoners. Real prisoners have done something illegal and many of them are unfit to live in the outside world with the rest of society, and some may argue that a serial killer will not have the same psychological reaction to an enviorment as an innocent college student. They clearly can not follow rules and so they see physical force as the only way to make sure they know their place. I think that this experiment began to show the evils that exist in man kind, and I think that these finds can explain many other tragedies through out our history.
I do think it was ethical to do this study because it taught everyone the ins and outs of being put in prison to do time. Of course living in prison can be hard and tough, but these people voluntarily signed up to do this. The experiment was for research and was not just done for fun. Of course the people who ended up volunteering and doing this suffered a lot because they were in “prison”. I felt bad for these people because this was a mock jail and they didn’t’ actually commit a crime.
ReplyDeleteI think there are good parts of the correctional system, but there are also flaws. One of my least favorite techniques from this research done is how the guards strip the new prisoners and humiliate them in front of everyone. I think this is too demeaning, even for a real prisoner because they have the right to be private. Another tactic I do not necessarily agree with is the distributing of numbers to the prisoners staying at jail. This doesn’t really have a purpose except making the prisoners feel unsafe and uncomfortable there.
I do not think that it was ethical to study this just for pure knowledge. Primarily, participants were not properly informed and were not aware of the possible detrimental effects that this experiment would have of their psychological health. The participants did consent to this experiment however they did not know exactly what they were subjecting themselves to.
ReplyDeleteI would change our correctional system by not putting such an emphasis on the higher level of the guards and the lowness of the prisoners, each are human beings and despite what they may have done they deserve a level of respect.
While it may not be ethical for this study to be performed, the information it yielded was crucial to our understanding of social psychology. While individuals in the case study were harmed in a psychological aspect, important insight was given to how stressful situations affect individual and group behavior.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Val! I would lessen the emphasis on the subjugation of prisoners by the guards through harmful unethical means. While individuals in correctional facilities may be dangerous to society, subjugating them further will make them dangerous to themselves. Correctional facilities, therefore, should aid individuals in becoming better members of society once their parole is up.
In hindsight, there is no doubt that this experiment was not ethical. The experimenter put the participants at risk of physical, emotional and psychological damage that might or might not have been irreversible. While it is true that the experimenter practiced formed consent, the participants were not nearly as prepared as they should have been. Participants were aware of what was to come but they did not fully understand the danger they were subjecting themselves to. Additionally, once the experiment began, the concern was on the experiment itself not the people involved. Eventually, prisoners were being physically and psychologically harmed and the guards took their roles much too far. It got to the point that the experimenter should have questioned if the knowledge gained was important enough to risk trauma. The extent of the damages caused by experiment can be seen when prison #416 states that he truly felt like a prisoner and would never be the same person again due to this experience. Lastly, while I do think that this experiment was unethical, it was absolutely necessary to achieve the desired results.
ReplyDeleteDue to the fact that both the experimental prisoners and guards lost themselves and fell helpless to their roles, major changes need to be made in correctional facilities. One change that is necessary is that guards need to have restrictions on how harsh they can be towards prisoners. Guards do need to have authority use necessary actions to ensure the safety of the facility but they need to have ways to prevent unnecessary use of power over the prisoners. Additionally, making prisoners feeling like are awful people will cause them to become horrible people. Prisoners need to be taught that there is good in every one of them and that they can change their ways.
While this study is without a doubt unethical, there was some sort of informed consent and no one was forced to do anything against their will. I don't think anyone was prepared for the "suffering" that ensued. It took an outside party to recognize the inappropriateness of it all in order for the study to end, a week early I might add. Although unethical, this study was highly effective in showing the dynamics within the American justice system. I have no doubt that the situations in actual prisons are much worse than that of even the experiment. I'm sure people in powers of authority take advantage of it frequently, and there is more than just 6 days of suffering, but an extended period of trauma. In my personal opinion, I don't think minor adjustments to prison systems would have any effect or positive outcome. I think corruptness within society as a whole needs to be considered, and then with that in mind precautions should be taken so that extreme corruption is avoidable. Just as the guards in the experiment abused the simulated prisoners, I'm sure real-life jail replicates this ten-fold. Proper security measures should be taken in order to prevent this. We take animal cruelty more seriously than prisoner abuse. What does that say about American culture as a whole?
ReplyDelete