Outline and evaluate research into conformity (16 marks)

Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment is an example of individuals conforming to particular social roles. Zimbardo carried out his experiment with 21 participants, they were selected as they were seen to be the most ‘stable’ after psychological testing. Before the experiment the participants were randomly allocated either the role of the guard or the prisoner. The guards were given a uniform including reflective glasses. The prisoners on the other hand were ‘arrested’ form their homes, given a de humanising de lousing treatment and were then given prisoner clothing and a number which they would be referred to by the guards for the rest of the experiment. The guards and prisoners then entered into the mock prison which was in the basement of the psychology building and Zimbardo (who also had the role of the prison warden) proceeded to watch their behaviour unfold. They found that the guards in the experiment became increasingly dominating and controlling while the prisoners became increasingly obedient and docile. Without being told to the guards inflicted their imagined authority over the prisoners in many ways for example they made them clean toilets with their bare hands. If the prisoners did not comply they were made to do gruelling physical tasks like press-ups. The experiment was meant to last for two weeks but after multiple mental breakdowns by the prisoners Zimbardo’s girlfriend at the time forced Zimbardo to terminate the experiment after five days as she was under the impression it was no longer ethical. On evaluation of Zimbardo’s study there was research carried out by the BBC prison study that indicates that the results from Zimbardo’s study are not reliable. When they conducted a very similar experiment they did not find the same results. They separated participants into groups of three- one participant was the guard and the other two were prisoners. When entered into prison environment the BBC did not find the same level of guard brutality- in fact they found that the guards did not want to enforce any form of power on the prisoners. This indicates that Zimbardo’s experiment is not reliable as the same results have not been found. This could be due to the fact that Zimbardo’s experiment was a child of its time, it was carried out in a time of huge compliance in America which could explain the guard’s behaviour.A negative of Zimbardo’s experiment is that it involves huge ethical issues. Although the participants were given the right to withdraw at any time the nature of the experiment would have made it extremely hard to do so. They were also being paid $14 a day for taking part so even if the participants were suffering they may feel the need to stay due to the money, they were students after all so likely needed it. Zimbardo did debrief participants afterwards and does claim there was no ongoing psychological trauma but the events that happened during the experiment are in no way ethical. The participants would have suffered from extreme psychological and physical harm so even though the experiment did pass the Stanford university ethics board at the time we can see now it is very unethical. This doesn’t mean to say it has not been helpful in seeing how conformity to social roles can have an effect on individuals though. A strength of the study is that there is real life application to support that conformity to social roles does occur in everyday life. One example is the torture of Israel soldiers by American soldiers when they were prisoners of war in Abu Ghraib this indicates that a uniform and perceived authority can make normal people do abnormal things. Zimbardo’s study therefore has been useful in advising the way those who have some form of authority like the police or the army should be controlled and how their position of power can be structured so that they do not do things that they wouldn’t otherwise. For example, much of the brutality in the Zimbardo experiment was caused by the guards feeling anonymous due to the uniform and glasses etc meaning they could commit acts and not feel entirely responsible.  A final point of evaluation is that the experiment lacks validity, Zimbardo himself was also the prison warden meaning his connection to the experiment was even greater this means it lacks internal validity as there could be an element of researcher bias if Zimbardo in any way effected the results of the study. In other words, he himself was an extraneous variable. There is also the fact that the sample was small and very bias. It was a group of white American male students. This means the results are not representative of the whole population as cannot be generalised to women, any other ethnicity other than American or people who aren’t students. The results therefore also lack external validity.