Achievement Standard 91848
Megan Shields
The Stanford Prison Experiment
We as a committee have received many allegations concerning the ethical compliance of the
1971 Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Dr Philip Zimbardo. This study took place in
the basement of Stanford University in attempt to understand the psychological effects of
perceived power in a simulated prison environment. In this report, we will discuss the areas of
compliance, as well as any issues with compliance, in reference to the four principles of the
NZ Code of Ethics. We will also suggest improvements as to how these issues can be addressed
and resolved.
Evaluation
Principle 1: Respect for the Dignity of Persons and Peoples
1.1: General Respect
The Stanford Prison Experiment does not comply to principle 1, value statement 1.1, regarding
general respect. This principle states that psychologists must maintain respect and be sensitive
towards the welfare and rights of human beings. Throughout the six-day long experiment, the
prisoners endured cruel and dehumanising abuse at the hands of the guards, clearly breaching
this code. Upon arrival at the experiment, the prisoners were blindfolded, stripped naked, and
“deloused” using a spray. This is an example of how the prisoners were humiliated, taunted,
and treated just like animals. They were also deprived of sleep after being rudely awakened on
night one at 2:30am and forced to line up and memorise their prison numbers. The guards
began to behave in ways which were aggressive and disrespectful towards the prisoners. For
example, as a form of punishment they responded by shooting fire extinguishers at the
prisoners, removing their beds, and prohibiting the use of the bathroom and providing buckets
in which the prisoners had to empty themselves. This demonstrates how Zimbardo did not
maintain the basic rights of individuals including the rights to adequate living standards,
freedom from degrading treatment, and freedom from intentionally inflicted pain.
In relation to this ethical breach, Zimbardo would argue that he followed the guidelines in order
to maintain respect. He would mention his decision to conduct the experiment in the basement
of Stanford University to make sure that the environment was protected and safe. As well as
how screening/background checks also took place to ensure that the participants would not be
in serious danger. He may also suggest that it was impossible to predict how the guards would
respond to having so much power over the prisoners, therefore he did not anticipate their
extreme reactions.
As a committee, we have decided upon an improvement that could help the Stanford Prison
Experiment comply to the NZ Code of Ethics. Zimbardo could gather a group of real-world,
trained guards to overlook the experiment from the sidelines, since he himself is not
, 2
knowledgeable in that field. Due to their levels of experience, this will enable them to recognise
exactly when the “guards” are taking their duties too far. Therefore, if the participants playing
the roles of the “guards” carry out any disrespectful or inhumane actions, they can be stopped
before the prisoner’s basic human rights are compromised. Implications of this improvement
include the safety of the prisoners from dehumanising abuse, physical harm, and humiliation.
It will also create a much safer environment for both the guards and the prisoners. Since the
“guards” no longer have full control over everything they do, this could slightly affect the
results since psychologists cannot measure exactly how far they would go to maintain
authority. However, in the long run, this improvement will benefit all participants, whilst also
enabling compliance to the NZ Code of Ethics.
1.2: Non-Discrimination + 1.4: Sensitivity to Diversity
Another two codes which are non-compliant in the experiment are principle 1, value statements
1.2 + 1.4, in relation to non-discrimination and diversity. These codes suggest that all persons
and peoples are entitled to contribute to psychology, and the decision to exclude persons from
experiments must be made on unjustly discriminatory grounds. Psychologists must also
recognise that there is a difference within people’s cultural and social groups and respect
diversity. These codes have been breached in The Stanford Prison Experiment because
Zimbardo intentionally selected all white, male subjects of middle-class. He also excluded
those with any criminal records, medical issues, or psychological impairments. This is not
being sensitive to diversity as Zimbardo has formed an unfair judgement that only men who
are white and of middle-class will be suitable for a position in his experiment. Not only is this
discriminatory towards the different sexes, races and classes, but as well as to those who have
been excluded due to lifestyle issues too. Due to the reasons prior, this is a direct violation of
the NZ code of ethics.
In response to the breach, Zimbardo would say that in the 1970s it was the standard for the men
to do all the work, while the women stayed at home to take care of the children. Additionally,
different races were seen as inferior to the white due to the high levels of racial inequality. He
therefore based his selection criteria on what was acceptable during that period of time, which
he would argue is very different to what is acceptable today. Zimbardo may also suggest that
his reason for choosing all white, middle-class, men is to see if people with similar traits react
differently in a prison environment.
An improvement that could be made to enable compliance could be to use a more diverse
selection of participants. This includes both males and females, different races, classes,
ethnicities, and people with different social backgrounds. This will ensure that all persons have
an equal opportunity to partake in the study, while maintaining respect and being sensitive
towards diversity, making the study compliant to the NZ Code of Ethics. Due to the larger
variation of participants, this could also be beneficial to the experiment by providing a greater
range of results. It will give a more accurate insight into the behaviour of a larger variety of
people, in comparison to Zimbardo’s select group.
Megan Shields
The Stanford Prison Experiment
We as a committee have received many allegations concerning the ethical compliance of the
1971 Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Dr Philip Zimbardo. This study took place in
the basement of Stanford University in attempt to understand the psychological effects of
perceived power in a simulated prison environment. In this report, we will discuss the areas of
compliance, as well as any issues with compliance, in reference to the four principles of the
NZ Code of Ethics. We will also suggest improvements as to how these issues can be addressed
and resolved.
Evaluation
Principle 1: Respect for the Dignity of Persons and Peoples
1.1: General Respect
The Stanford Prison Experiment does not comply to principle 1, value statement 1.1, regarding
general respect. This principle states that psychologists must maintain respect and be sensitive
towards the welfare and rights of human beings. Throughout the six-day long experiment, the
prisoners endured cruel and dehumanising abuse at the hands of the guards, clearly breaching
this code. Upon arrival at the experiment, the prisoners were blindfolded, stripped naked, and
“deloused” using a spray. This is an example of how the prisoners were humiliated, taunted,
and treated just like animals. They were also deprived of sleep after being rudely awakened on
night one at 2:30am and forced to line up and memorise their prison numbers. The guards
began to behave in ways which were aggressive and disrespectful towards the prisoners. For
example, as a form of punishment they responded by shooting fire extinguishers at the
prisoners, removing their beds, and prohibiting the use of the bathroom and providing buckets
in which the prisoners had to empty themselves. This demonstrates how Zimbardo did not
maintain the basic rights of individuals including the rights to adequate living standards,
freedom from degrading treatment, and freedom from intentionally inflicted pain.
In relation to this ethical breach, Zimbardo would argue that he followed the guidelines in order
to maintain respect. He would mention his decision to conduct the experiment in the basement
of Stanford University to make sure that the environment was protected and safe. As well as
how screening/background checks also took place to ensure that the participants would not be
in serious danger. He may also suggest that it was impossible to predict how the guards would
respond to having so much power over the prisoners, therefore he did not anticipate their
extreme reactions.
As a committee, we have decided upon an improvement that could help the Stanford Prison
Experiment comply to the NZ Code of Ethics. Zimbardo could gather a group of real-world,
trained guards to overlook the experiment from the sidelines, since he himself is not
, 2
knowledgeable in that field. Due to their levels of experience, this will enable them to recognise
exactly when the “guards” are taking their duties too far. Therefore, if the participants playing
the roles of the “guards” carry out any disrespectful or inhumane actions, they can be stopped
before the prisoner’s basic human rights are compromised. Implications of this improvement
include the safety of the prisoners from dehumanising abuse, physical harm, and humiliation.
It will also create a much safer environment for both the guards and the prisoners. Since the
“guards” no longer have full control over everything they do, this could slightly affect the
results since psychologists cannot measure exactly how far they would go to maintain
authority. However, in the long run, this improvement will benefit all participants, whilst also
enabling compliance to the NZ Code of Ethics.
1.2: Non-Discrimination + 1.4: Sensitivity to Diversity
Another two codes which are non-compliant in the experiment are principle 1, value statements
1.2 + 1.4, in relation to non-discrimination and diversity. These codes suggest that all persons
and peoples are entitled to contribute to psychology, and the decision to exclude persons from
experiments must be made on unjustly discriminatory grounds. Psychologists must also
recognise that there is a difference within people’s cultural and social groups and respect
diversity. These codes have been breached in The Stanford Prison Experiment because
Zimbardo intentionally selected all white, male subjects of middle-class. He also excluded
those with any criminal records, medical issues, or psychological impairments. This is not
being sensitive to diversity as Zimbardo has formed an unfair judgement that only men who
are white and of middle-class will be suitable for a position in his experiment. Not only is this
discriminatory towards the different sexes, races and classes, but as well as to those who have
been excluded due to lifestyle issues too. Due to the reasons prior, this is a direct violation of
the NZ code of ethics.
In response to the breach, Zimbardo would say that in the 1970s it was the standard for the men
to do all the work, while the women stayed at home to take care of the children. Additionally,
different races were seen as inferior to the white due to the high levels of racial inequality. He
therefore based his selection criteria on what was acceptable during that period of time, which
he would argue is very different to what is acceptable today. Zimbardo may also suggest that
his reason for choosing all white, middle-class, men is to see if people with similar traits react
differently in a prison environment.
An improvement that could be made to enable compliance could be to use a more diverse
selection of participants. This includes both males and females, different races, classes,
ethnicities, and people with different social backgrounds. This will ensure that all persons have
an equal opportunity to partake in the study, while maintaining respect and being sensitive
towards diversity, making the study compliant to the NZ Code of Ethics. Due to the larger
variation of participants, this could also be beneficial to the experiment by providing a greater
range of results. It will give a more accurate insight into the behaviour of a larger variety of
people, in comparison to Zimbardo’s select group.
