The Stanford Prison Experiment was meant to research participants’ behaviours in a simulated prison environment. But after a few days, it showed us so much more.

In 1971, a research psychologist from Stanford University conducted an experiment that would impact our knowledge of power and authority for decades.

The experiment, Stanford Prison Experiment, was done in August of 1971. The head researcher, Philip G. Zimbardo, wanted to measure the effects that role-playing, labelling, and social expectations had on an individual’s behaviour. To do it, he created a fake prison with fake guards and prisoners. He acted as the prison warden. The roles of guard and prisoner were determined by random selection. A total of 24 applicants participated in this experiment.

The Experiment

The prison guards had the freedom to do as they pleased to maintain law and order, but were not allowed to physically harm the prisoners. That meant that they can scream or bully the prisoners if they wanted to, but couldn’t hit them. As for the prisoners, they were forced to wear dresses and had to wear a chain that was padlocked to an ankle. They also had to follow the orders of the guards.

On the second day of the experiment, the prisoners staged a rebellion, but it failed. To prevent this from happening again, the guards created a rewards and punishments system to keep the prisoners in line.

But after a few days, the guards started to abuse their authority more and more. They became aggressive with the prisoners and dehumanized them. However, some of the guards were able to resist the temptations of the fountain of power.

“Only a few people were able to resist the situational temptations to yield to power and dominance while maintaining some semblance of morality and decency; obviously, I was not among that noble class,” Zimbardo wrote in his book, The Lucifer Effect.

As a result of this abuse, some of the prisoners began to develop mental issues. They became extremely stressed and anxious and experienced severe negative emotions. And rightfully so. They were being treated horribly and no one was helping them.

Because of the extremity of this experiment, it had to be shut down early. A few days into the experiment, an outside observer witnessed what was going on in the “prison” and was shocked. This was a signal to Zimbardo that there was something wrong with his methodology and the experiment had to end.

The Stanford Prison Experiment was meant to be a two-week trial, but it was concluded after six days.

Findings from the Stanford Prison Experiment

So what were the findings from this experiment? The first thing is that people who are not prepared to be in positions of authority tend to abuse their power. Second is that individuals tend to fall into the roles that society gives them.

One of the participants, Richard Yacco (he was a prisoner if you were wondering), who is now a teacher at an inner-city school in Oakland, California, told the Stanford Alumni Magazine that he was really frustrated with some of his students when he started his career because they weren’t taking advantage of the resources that were given to them.

“But what frustrates my colleagues and me is that we are creating great opportunities for these kids, we offer great support for them, why are they not taking advantage of it? Why are they dropping out of school? Why are they coming to school unprepared?”

But he eventually realized that they were just playing the role that society assigned to them –something that he learned while being part of the experiment.

“I think a big reason is what the prison study shows—they fall into the role their society has made for them.”

What Can Be Learned from the Stanford Prison Experiment?

So what can we learn from the Stanford Prison Experiment? How can the findings be applied to today’s society? Well, there are quite a few things that it can explain. It explains why some top business executives and celebrities sexually harass. It also explains why some police officers abuse their powers. Finally, it helps to explain why, to an extent, students from wealthier neighbourhoods tend to perform better than students from poorer ones.

The Trayvon Martin Case

In 2012, a community watchman by the name of George Zimmerman shot and killed a 17-year-old by the name of Trayvon Martin. Martin was going to visit his relatives one evening when Zimmerman approached him. Zimmerman, who was the community guard that night, decided to confront Martin because he looked suspicious.

Rather than asking where Martin was going or just leaving him alone, Zimmerman chose to exercise his “power” and be hostile. The two got into an argument that escalated to a scuffle. During the fight, Zimmerman pulled out a gun and shot Martin, and killed him.

That night, Zimmerman had this role of protector of the neighbourhood. He had to make sure that nothing bad was going to happen to the residents. And even though all he had to do was call the police and report his suspicions (which he did), and wait until they came (which he didn’t do), he chose to take matters into his own hands because this role allowed him to do so.

Zimmerman had no experience being an enforcer of the law. He had applied to be a police officer in the past but was rejected. So this job, this role, fed him false tales that he became drunken with.

And this was what many of the guards from the Stanford Prison Experiment were going through. They soaked up the pond of their made-up role and abused it to the fullest because they didn’t know what they were experiencing and how to control it.

But this is just an example of people who abuse their power. This experiment also revealed that the oppressed fall into their assigned roles as well. So what can we do to prevent people from becoming what their environment expects them to become?