How long did the experiment last

As for the guards, the volunteers were given the appropriate uniform and a wooden baton to establish their roles in the experiment. We're going to take away their individuality in various ways. In general what all this leads to is a sense of powerlessness.

That is, in this situation we'll have all the power and they'll have none. As seen in the trailer above, things quickly got out of hand. Guards started to abuse their power, prisoners started to revolt and everyone was just psychologically unstable — and personally, I would include Zimbardo in that category for letting it go on longer than it needed to.

I shudder to think of what would have happened if this experiment lasted the entire two weeks, as judging by what's known about the study and the recreation in this month's film, even a few days led to horrible — if fascinating — results. The study is also criticized for its lack of ecological validity. Ecological validity refers to the degree of realism with which a simulated experimental setup matches the real-world situation it seeks to emulate.

While the researchers did their best to recreate a prison setting, it is simply not possible to perfectly mimic all of the environmental and situational variables of prison life. Because there may have been factors related to the setting and situation that influenced how the participants behaved, it may not really represent what might happen outside of the lab. More recent examination of the experiment's archives and interviews with participants have revealed major issues with the research's design, methods, and procedures that call the study's validity, value, and even authenticity into question.

These reports, including examinations of the study's records and new interviews with participants, have also cast doubt on some of the key findings and assumptions about the study. Among the issues described:. In , the journal American Psychologist published an article debunking the famed experiment, detailing its lack of scientific merit, and concluding that the Stanford Prison Experiment was "an incredibly flawed study that should have died an early death.

In a statement posted on the experiment's official website, Zimbardo maintains that these criticisms do not undermine the main conclusion of the study—that situational forces can alter individual actions both in positive and negative ways.

The Stanford Prison Experiment is well known both in and out of the field of psychology. While the study has long been criticized for many reasons, more recent criticisms of the study's procedures shine a brighter light on the experiment's scientific shortcomings. Ever wonder what your personality type means? Sign up to find out more in our Healthy Mind newsletter. Stanford University. The Stanford Prison Experiment: 40 years later. Published August Stanford Prison Experiment. Setting up.

The Stanford Prison Experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment. Sommers T. An interview with Philip Zimbardo. The Believer. Published September 1, Ratnesar, R. The menace within. Stanford Magazine. Horn S. Landmark Stanford Prison Experiment criticized as a sham. Prison Legal News. Published October 12, Bartels JM. The Stanford Prison Experiment in introductory psychology textbooks: A content analysis. American Psychological Association. Ecological validity. Blum B.

The lifespan of a lie. Published June 7, There is no control group. Would you agree, as a scientist, that an early demonstration of an idea is bound to be reinterpreted in time, bound to be reevaluated?

Oh, they should. Let me just add one thing: There are many, many classic studies that are now all under attack. They want to correct the record. And I wonder from your point of view, as a scientist, do you need to be okay with losing control of the narrative of your work as it gets reevaluated? Of course. The moment, the moment any of it was published, the moment any of this was put online, which I did as soon as I could, I lost.

You lose control of it. A study like the prison experiment might just be too big and complicated, with too many inputs, too many variables, to really nail down or understand a single, simple conclusion from it. The single conclusion is a broad line: Human behavior, for many people, is much more under the influence of social situational variables than we had ever thought of before.

There are other researchers who are trying to drill down more into understanding what turns bad behavior on and off. Well, the gist of what he and his colleagues are arguing is this: Social identity is a really powerful motivator. And perhaps the guards in your experiment became cruel because your warden used his authority to foster a social identity within them.

Of course people have social identity. In a particular situation, you begin to play a role. You are the boss, you are the foreman, you are the drill sergeant, you are the fraternity hazing master. And in that role, which is not the usual you, you begin to do something which is role-bound. This is what anybody in this role does. And your behavior then changes. Is there experimental evidence outside the prison experiment that supports that view?

There are plenty of examples in history and current events, but is that something we know as a fact, as an experimental fact? And I will stand by that, my whole career depends on that. What would you fear might happen if people stop believing in the integrity of the Stanford Prison Experiment?

The fear is they will lose an important conclusion about the nature of human behavior as being, to some extent, situationally influenced. You demonstrate gravity by throwing a ball up and seeing if it comes down.

All of this controversy is happening now because you gave your notes and tapes from the prison experiment to the Stanford archives. That transparency is commendable. Do you regret it? The reason I did it is to make it available for researchers, for anybody, and people have gone through it. So again, the last thing in the world I need is for people to doubt my honesty, my professional credibility.

Is it okay if we just move on from the Stanford Prison Experiment? Maybe we need to ground our understanding of acts of evil in something a little bit more scientific, to be honest. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower through understanding.

Financial contributions from our readers are a critical part of supporting our resource-intensive work and help us keep our journalism free for all. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today to help us keep our work free for all. Cookie banner We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targeted ads, analyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from.

By choosing I Accept , you consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies. Philip Zimbardo defends the Stanford Prison Experiment, his most famous work. Reddit Pocket Flipboard Email. Philip Zimbardo. The conversation was tense.