Week 3: Zimbardo Experiments and Stanford Prison Sentence

         The Milgram experiment tested group behavior and blind obedience to authority even when it results in injury to others. Participants were told to apply electric shocks, in increasing intensity, every time another study participant failed to answer a question correctly. The participants who applied the shock did not know that the "shocks" were not real. More than half of the participants continued to apply the shocks when told to do so by researchers. 

     The Zimbardo experiment involved the simulation of a prison setting in an attempt to study prison behavior in which 12 of the participants were randomly assigned to be "prisoners" and 12 to be "guards." Philip Zimbardo sought to answer the question, does the prison itself generate violent behavior or is it due to the types of people incarcerated? The experiment was called off early because many of the "prisoners" broke down emotionally when the "guards" became extremely humiliating and psychologically abusive towards them. Most participants found it hard to separate reality from simulation.

     These experiments are similar because they both show that the situation or environment caused the participants' behavior, not anything in their inherent individual personalities. In Milgram's experiment, normal people appeared to deliver shocks to other participants, even though they were aware it was causing harm.  In Zimbardo's experiment,  "healthy" individuals acting as "guards" and "prisoners" began to act violently towards one another. Also, both demonstrate the obedience of people when provided with social and institutional support. In prison settings, guards have the upper hand when it comes to authority and thus, the "guards" in the experiment acted accordingly. The people who delivered the "shocks" did so at the command of the researcher who stated he was responsible for any adverse affect and that they would not be held responsible. 

      Both experiments had unintended ramifications, whether real or imagined. In Zimbardo's experiment, the psychological and physical well-being of the subjects were threatened to the point that the experiment had to be cancelled. In Milgram's experiment, the participants believed the ramifications of their actions ("shocking" the other participant) would fall upon the researchers and that they would carry no responsibility for any harm caused. 

     Modern ethical standards do not support either of the experiments. In Milgram's experiment, participants were deceived and were not aware of the consequences of their actions beforehand. They truly believed they were causing suffering to another human being, which could ultimately have caused severe emotional distress. Some participants displayed this by  laughing as a means of coping when delivering shocks. In Zimbardo's experiment, participants suffered from severe emotional distress that may have had long term effects. Four days into the experiment, five of the twelve prisoners were removed after displaying signs and symptoms of acute anxiety and psychological distress. Even still, the experiments were successful because they proved what researchers sought to validate their hypothesis. 

       I found this site interesting Top 10 Unethical Psychological Experiments. The Milgram Experiment is ranked #3 and Zimbardo is #8 on this site.