Revising the Stanford Prison Experiment: A lesson in the Power of situation, by Phillip G. Zimbago - Case Study Example

Case Study: Law Case Study: Law Zimbardo’s article reflects on a social experiment he conducted previously seeking to documentthe effect of psychological effects of the state of a prisoner and prison guard. The effects of social power of groups and whether direct confrontation can turn good people bad was investigated. The said social experiment was conducted in the basement of Stanford Psychology Department. The article describes how participants were recruited for both prisoner and guard roles and the challenging scenarios to which they were exposed.

The author ends closes the article with conclusions drawn from a retrospective view of the occurrences during the experiment. In the analysis of the data he collected, Zimbardo considered how guards reacted when they perceived prisoners as dangerous. The analysis shows how the guards retaliated using abuses, strict rules and punishment. Sexual harassment is another form of punishment that was used by guards to command prisoners’ conformity. Zimbardo’s experiment has significance and relevance to the criminal justice system.

It helps the criminal justice to remain cognizant of the possible atrocities committed against suspects and prisoners both intentionally and unintentionally. Also important, the experiment depicts the negative psychological effects that certain extreme situations have on law enforcers such as prison guards. The Stanford Prison experiment has several aspects that are similar to the Abu Ghraib Situation and other that are different. Both happened in controlled setting, a prison, only that the Stanford Prison was not a real prison whereas the Abu Ghraib situation took place in a real detention centre.

The guards in the Stanford experiment and the captors in the Abu Ghraib situation coerced prisoners. Both cases involved similar forms of punishment and dehumanization. Such acts include stripping and making male prisoners wear women clothes. One of the differences between the two cases is that while the Stanford experiment used male prisoners only, Abu Ghraib prisoners were both male and female. Another difference is that the participants of Stanford experiment were paid but the Abu Ghraib prisoners were being tortured as a way of obtaining information from them and to punish them for alleged crimes.

Although they happened in different times and under different circumstances, the two cases arrived at practically the same conclusion because they both involved exposure to relatively similar extreme situational stressors for both prisoners and guards. The prisoners in both cases were exposed to elements of anonymity, dehumanization and coercion and as such were bound to respond in a relatively similar manner. Guards and captors were confronted with the need to dominate and subdue their subjects.

The outcomes of the two cases could have been different due to the fact that the participants of the Stanford experiment had knowledge that they were going to participant in a psychology experiment. As such, these participants could have faked their behaviours to suit what they thought the researchers were looking for. The author concluded that situational forces can overwhelm the good nature of individuals. Many people respect people they believe are in authority or have authority in a certain aspect of life.

Uncontrolled power can transform people’s characters in directions that are unpredictable. Zimbardo also concludes that evil fascinates because it demonstrates power and domination over others and not because of its consequences. I agree with Zimabardo’s conclusions because human beings can respond to situations in an evil way in an attempt to survive. Authority intimidates individuals and commands conformity as people try to avoid unpleasant consequences.