Why I Chose To Attend Stanford University

Why I Chose To Attend Stanford University
Of course the college of my dreams is Stanford University, because it could make me a millionaire!
I want to attend Stanford for many reasons not just because it will help me make a lot of money, but
that's always a plus. It would be really great for me to go to school at Stanford. Stanford is a great
college for academics and it , also has many great sports teams and clubs. Stanford is located in
Stanford California I would be pretty far away from home but, it would be worth it for the kind of
schooling Stanford has to offer. There are 16,122 students enrolled right now, and almost all these
kids that made it through Stanford are very successful later in life. I know stanford is really
expensive but, there are ways to make it affordable, and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Stanford offers many things you can Study in I could major biomedical engineering and that would
be a great career. They also have many activity and clubs I could join so I would definitely never be
bored at Stanford university. I wrote this essay to tell you all the great things that stanford has to
offer, and why I want to go there so bad, because it really is a great school. No other school would
be right for me stanford is by far my best
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Stanford University Admissions Essay
Located in Northern California, near Palo Alto, Stanford University is a medium sized, private
university with 16,000 students. It is often referred to as the "Ivy League of the West." As the most
selective college in the United States, Stanford accepts only 4.8% of the approximately 44,000
applicants, carefully selecting applicants that have the potential to be leaders in the future. Leaders
such as John F. Kennedy (US President), Larry Page & Sergey Brin (co–founders of Google), and
Elon Musk (Entrepreneur – best known for Tesla motors) are well known alumni of Stanford who
have become extremely successful in their respective fields. When applying to Stanford one should
consider the admissions criteria, tuition, and academic majors. Also, it is important to have academic
support, understand the college's demographics, and familiarize oneself with campus life. Of the
44,000 applicants, only 4.8% are accepted, making Stanford University admission an uncommon
feat. When applying, the admissions office looks at several factors to determine an application. (see
fig. 1) Like many colleges, Stanford does not have specific requirements for different factors ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The cost for basic tuition at Stanford is $45,729 per year. Other costs such as room and board,
required fees, books/supplies, transportation, and other expenses raise the total to $65,177 per year.
Given this, the cost of 4 years at Stanford equates to roughly $260,000. Many students only have to
pay a fraction of this cost as nearly 70% of students receive an average financial aid. Also, if a
student's parent income is less than $125,000 per year a student does not have to pay tuition, and if
income is less than $65,000 per year a student is not expected to pay tuition or room and board.
Attending Stanford is definitely an expense, but the university offers many financial aid options to
students unable to

Stanford Prison Experiment
Abstract
This paper will review the study conducted in 1971 called the Stanford Prison Experiment. I will
start off by reviewing the reason the study was conducted, the person who conducted it, his goals,
and the story of what happened as a result. My review will include the influence of the political, and
cultural climate of the time, how these outside forces can directly affect our perceptions, and the
choices we make. I will also discuss the goals and purpose of the study, if the study proved
anything, look at the ethical standards compared to todays, and conclude by reviewing the
knowledge gained as a result of the study.
Review of the 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment
The general topic of this study was to understand the roles that guards as authoritarian figures, and
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Professor Zimbardo also played the part of the prison warden. All 24 were college students looking
for some extra money during the summer break. The professor and his team randomly chose the
volunteers to be either guards or prisoners, and would pay them $15 dollars a day. Before the study
began all the participants had a psychological evaluation to ensure they were physically, and
mentally healthy. All of the 24 selected participants were healthy, intelligent, middle class men.
The study would take place in a few of the offices in the basement of the psychology department at
Stanford University. Most of the college students would be gone for summer break, and that would
give the study plenty of privacy while being conducted. In order to simulate a prison atmosphere the
professor brought in people who had experience working and living in such institutions. They made
small offices into cells that only had cots for the prisoners to lay on. There were no clocks to tell
time, and no windows either. The prisoners would have a hallway that would be considered the yard,
and closet that would be salutary

Essay On The Stanford Prison Experiment
From the beginning of humanity, many have attempted to understand the behavior of individuals.
Whether it just being a mother trying to understand "why" her son dislikes vegetables or even a
psychologist trying to understand the behavior of a criminal, "why" is the question that's being
investigated and examine. The source that lead us to the explanation towards a person's behavior is
social psychology. Social psychology is the scientific–based study that examine and explains how an
individual's thoughts, feelings, and how does it affect a person's behavior within a society. This is
also being said that social settings in which people interact impacts social behavior which is where
the idea of behavior comes to play. Behaviorism is the function ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The purpose of this experiment was to make a breakthrough study of the human response to
imprisonment, in specific, to the real world condition of prison life. In social psychology, this is
known as "mundane realism"; which refers to the ability to imitate the real world as much as
possible, which is exactly what this study did. There were twenty–four people who were selected to
do this experiment. These subjects were randomly assigned to play the role as "prisoner" or "guard"
and they were made to perform to these roles. These subjects actually started to behave and act like
the roles that they were assigned as; the guards started to act as if they really worked in the prison.
This was something that Zimbardo had told these subjects to think this way and what it did was
make the guards mistreat and abuse the prisoners cruelly While, these occurrences can be analyzed
using social psychology because the environment, situation, and those holding authority influenced
the behavior of others. Due to these influences, the prisoners and guards acted out on the roles
which were given to them, in the way that society sees them as. The description itself is the
definition of social psychology because it caused a lot of emotional distress on the prisoner who
were treated cruelly by the

Stanford Prison Experiment : Stanford Jail Experiment Essay
Nathan Mariano Estepa September 13, 2015 Stanford Prison Experiment Zimbardo decided to run
an experiment where he would turn a basement under the Stanford campus into a mock prison where
he would interview several participants where they would randomly get assigned either guard, or
prisoner. Zimbardo aimed to see how everyone pertained the roles they were placed in. Interviewing
75 potential participants, Zimbardo only chose 24 male college students which they received
payments of $15/day. They had two reserves in which were the back–ups just in case any of them
wanted to drop out. The prison simulation was kept as real as possible. The participants were
"arrested" taken to the police station booked, finger printed, and photographed. Then being
blindfolded they were taken back to the campus in the basement where Zimbardo created the mock
prison with real barred doors and windows along with bare walls with small cells. Once the
"prisoners" arrived, they were stripped naked and given the prison clothes and bedding. The
prisoners had their own number which they were only referred to. They wore just a smock with no
clothes under along with a nylon cap and a chain around their ankle. Guards were given a
stereotypical khaki outfit with whistles, handcuffs, and mirrored glasses working 8 hour shifts a day
with three people working each shift. Physical violence was not permitted to the guards. Observing
the behaviors of the guards and prisoners, Zimbardo realized how everyone was

Stanford Prison Experiments
In my opinion, I believe that the Stanford Prison study led to more harm than the Immunization
study because according to prisoner Mr. Ramsey, "the experiment should never have taken place as
it had no true scientific basis and was ethically wrong" (Leithhead, 2011). The abuse in this study
was so harsh, that they had to end the study early due to " a string of mental breakdowns, an
outbreak of sadism and a hunger strike"(Leithhead, 2011). This study was conducted to see if the
violent behaviors are as a result of the roles of 'prisoners' and 'guards' or is it solely based on the
individual's personality. What made this study so dangerous is the face that almost everything felt so
real, the guards looked real, the prisoners looked real and they both played the part that they were
assigned to. The guards were asked to do whatever it takes to ensure that the law was kept, without
any physical violence (Zimbardo, 1973). It was concluded that individuals will easily assume the ...
The guards were told to do whatever they wanted and this frustrated the prisoners because of how
they had abused their authority. The scientists should have tried to control the experiment a little
better. Rather than telling the guards to do whatever they wanted, they should have given them
specific tasks to complete. The media could not have prevented this because they were not allowed
to be involved and they could not fix the damage that was already done. The public could have
protested against the harsh treatment of the participants and demanded compensation c them.
However, they were probably already bound in a contract and thy did receive money for their
participation. The best thing for us to do is have a third party manage these experiments and they
should be approved by an official Research Organization before thy can proceed with the

Obedience plays a major role in today's lifestyle and is an extremely important aspect of our society.
Individuals believe that obeying has positive outcomes, and disobeying has negative outcomes.
Philip G. Zimbardo, author of "The Stanford Prison Experiment", held an experiment at the Stanford
College to study the behavior in prison situations. Another experiment was held at Yale University
by Stanley Milgram, author of "Perlis to Obedience." These experiments have proven to show the
change in behavior occurs in many situations. There is evidence that people conform to the role that
they are appointed to. Participants in both experiments had a tough time adjusting to the idea of
what was happening but continued until the end. Once the studies ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Nevertheless, what most individuals don't realize is that disobeying can sometimes be a good thing
for themselves. Consequently, obedience takes over without thought making one do things they
usually wouldn't do. The best example of Milgram's experiment is the Holocaust, making one follow
extreme orders or doing actions that are inhumane. By testing normal everyday people information
recorded can help the psychologist determine if one will fall under the commands of a stronger
power. With many tests over the years, it has been noticed that people do change behavioral attitudes
when placed in different settings. Also, the series of experiments was to see if an individual would
kill an unknown human if commanded by an authoritative figure. Human beings can become blind
to the idea of the actions they are doing just to stay obedient. A number of experiments have been
put to the test providing information, but one of the most famous and remembered will be by
Stanley

Effects Of The Stanford Prison Experiment
="The line between good and evil is permeable and almost anyone can be induced to cross it when
pressured by situational forces" (Zimbardo). In August of 1971, psychology professor Philip
Zimbardo conducted the Stanford prison experiment, which was funded by the U.S military to
investigate the causes of dissension between military guards and prisoners. As the experiment
commenced participants, college students, adapted to their roles in the prison far beyond the
expectations of Zimbardo. Authoritarian measures were enforced harshly to those who were the
prisoners, with some even going as far as to subject prisoners to psychological torture. On the other
hand, while the guards acted violently and aggressively, many of the prisoners accepted ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Both experiments concluded that people were not necessarily evil, or even sought out evil actions,
but were products of situational circumstances. And in some instances genuinely believed they were
doing good, even when the actions they committed could be looked at as villainous. Just as
psychology analyzes the morality of humans and ways of behavior as does art, creating fictitious
examples of human nature pulled from past experiences and literature is no exception. The
complexity of ethics is conveyed in the intricate acts and plots of the characters in the novels and
stories people read in day to day life. Good and evil, are terms that in many instances are relative
and interchangeable, for some actions the end may justify the means, evil acts may be done in the
name of a good cause, furthermore there are instances where acts may seem cold, or inherently
wrong, but are done for the protection of oneself or others around them, lastly some acts we deem as
positive or negative, but in reality they are just accidents or

A Report On The Stanford Prison Experiment
A Report on the Stanford Prison Experiment of 1971 I. Introduction: This report on the Stanford
Prison Experiment will define the ethical issues related to prisoner treatment and prison culture in a
mock scenario created 1971. The findings of this study define the inclination towards corruption and
riotous behavior within the overarching relationship between guard and the prisoners. In a short
period of time,. The prisoners became hostile and sought to start a riot in order to free themselves
from abuses of the prison guards. In some instances, the issue of role–playing limited to reality of
the event, but the ethical issues related to issue of prison corruption became evident in the study. The
Stanford Prison Experiment provided some important aspects on how good people can became
violent lawbreakers within the orison system. In essence, the ethical and experimental conditions of
the Stanford Prison experiment define the corrupting culture of prisons in American society during
the early 1970s. II. Description and Purpose of the Experiment The Stanford Prison Experiment was
designed to allow 24 participants (college students) to be arrested in a mock police state scenario
without any charges being brought against them. The participants were hooded and put into a prison
cellblock with other mock prisoners. The purpose of the experiment was to see how non–criminals
would be affected by the prison culture and the oversight of prison guards. Philip G. Zimbardo
(2004)

The Stanford Prison Experiment
Zimbardo Research Paper
Leslie Massey
PSYCH/620
01/22/2015
Professor Sharon McNelly
Zimbardo Research Paper The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study conducted in 1971 by Dr.
Phillip Zimbardo. According to Dr. Steve Taylor (2007), "It's probably the best known psychological
study of all time." (Classic Studies in Psychology, 2007). Zimbardo stated that the point was to see
what would happen if he put "really good people in a bad place" (Dr. Zimbardo, 2007). He did this
during a time were most college students were protesting for peace and were against anything
authoritarian. The experiment contained both positive and negative aspects; which will be discussed
further in this paper.
Value of the Study The value of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
He knew this because he had created that precise set of circumstances and witnessed the
transformation. (p. 5)
Zimbardo was experienced in this type of transformation because of his Stanford Prison Experiment.
It is possible that peer pressure, threats, and fear of retribution can cause someone to do something
that they would normally not do. All aspects of a situation and extenuating circumstances should be
considered before judgment is reached. The Stanford Prison Experiment showed the world this facet
of human behavior.
Value to Humanity as a Whole
The value of the Stanford Prison Experiment in relation to humanity as a whole by showing how
circumstances can completely change a person and what he or she is willing to do. It shows that
humans can be influenced to the extent that their innate character traits can be manipulated. It also
shows that power and authority can change the behavior of naturally good people. That it can turn
some people into someone who will do anything to maintain the feeling of power. This experiment
has allowed psychologist a new view on human behavior and how easy it is to manipulate.
Problems and Ethical Concerns There were many problems and ethical concerns when it comes to
this experiment. Herbert (2007) "Indeed, the student guards were so inhumane and sadistic that the
experiment had to be shut down early, and it is now used as a case

The Murder Case Of Stanford White
In the early 1900s, the murder case of Stanford White would shock the world and would soon be
named the "crime of the Century. Stanford White was an up and coming architect during the late
1800's, he was especially gaining fame in New York City after forming the "Mckee, Mead and
White" company with other architects. One of his many accomplishments was the building of the
Madison Square Garden Tower in 1890. Meanwhile in Philadelphia, 14 year old Florence (a.k.a.
Evelyn) Nesbit was gaining fame as a model after beginning discovered by a local artist. This led
her to gain connections to huge modeling companies, all wanting her to pose for them. After
collecting some money Florence, her mother and her brother Howard, to New York City in ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In 1902, Evelyn was introduced to illustrator John Barrymore. They had a blossoming romance that
was soon shut down by White and Mrs. Nesbit. Barrymore had even proposed to Evelyn but she
rejected him due to his low salary. After her small "relationship" with John Barrymore, she met the
rich railroad man known as Harry Thaw. Thaw and White were already rivals so as a way to get
back at White he began to pursuing Evelyn by showering her with gifts and money. He proposed to
Evelyn multiple times but was rejected because she had been warned by Stanford, of Thaw's mental
conditions and of his drug abuse. Another factor causing her to neglect his proposals was she
wouldn't marry him without confessing her past affair. After Evelyn recovered from a surgery that
some believed as an abortion surgery in 1902, Harry invited Mrs. Nesbit and Evelyn on a trip across
Europe. Halfway through the trip, Mrs. Nesbit returns back to the U.S., leaving Harry and Evelyn
alone in Europe. Harry once again continues to propose to Evelyn but becomes an frusturated as he
is rejected once again. When she finally confesses her past sexual affair with White, he blames Mrs.
Nesbit for not taking good care of her daughter. While they stayed at a castle in Austria, Harry
would physically abuse Evelyn and then apologize right after. When rumors spread that Evelyn and
Harry got married in Europe, Thaw's family was furious at the news and called Harry to return

Theories Of The Stanford Prison Experiment
3. What did we learn from the Stanford Prison Experiment? Include issues of ethics and
methodology? Can the findings be generalised beyond this experiment? Background + Introduction:
What was the Stanford Prison experiment, give details as to what the experiment was: The Stanford
Prison Experiment was conceived by Phillip Zimbardo with the aim of the Experiment being to
observe and analyse the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or a prison guard. The
experiment was funded by the United States Office of Naval Research who wanted to study anti–
social behaviour (SPE website) 24 individuals were chosen for the experiment, all of them college
age males. The individuals were assigned the role of prisoner or guard at random. With the aid ...
Zimbardo confessed that this dual role was detrimental to the experiment and subjected him to the
conformity effect that Could the results of the experiment be applied meaningfully outside of the
experiment? BBC prison experiment. The BBC prison experiment was conducted in response to
Zimbardo's experiment and set out to examine the consequences of dividing men into groups of
prisoners and guards (BBCPrisonStudy.org.) The BBC experiment's results were contrary to those of
Zimbardo's experiment. Zimbardo's experiment believed that people would conform to an idea of
what a group should be while in the BBC determined that a person's willingness to adhere to a role
when they make the role part of their social identity. The ability to reconcile a role with one's social
identity is determined by different factors. (BBCPrison Study.org) For the guards in this study, they
were reluctant to identify with their roles as guards due to accountability. There was the possibility
that they would face negative repercussions from their peers and from individuals outside the
experiment if they adhered to their roles. (BBCPrisonStudy.org

The Stanford Prison Experiment : Stanford University
On the morning of August 17, 1971, ten men were arrested from their homes in the Palo Alto area,
each with charges of burglary and theft. They were taken to the local police station where they were
booked, fingerprinted, blindfolded, and transported to the Stanford Prison – also known as the
Psychology department at Stanford University. Not even Philip Zimbardo, the psychologist behind
the experiment that would shape the field of psychology for years to come, could have predicted the
behaviors and events that followed.
Philip Zimbardo was born on March 23, 1938, in New York City. He studied at Brooklyn College
and graduated in 1954 with majors in sociology, anthropology, and psychology(Maslach). Human
behavior was always a mystery to Philip Zimbardo, and he pursued these fields with hopes of one
day understanding it. In 1968, Zimbardo accepted a job at Stanford University as a professor of
psychology. He spent most of his career researching how and why people transform in certain
situations so that they behave in unexpected ways. In 1970, Zimbardo started designing an
experiment to determine what the result would be when one group of people were given authority
over another group of less powerful, dependent people. This would later be known as the Stanford
Prison Experiment (Maslach).
As stated in Philip Zimbardo's published theory, the hypothesis his experiment was centered around
was:
The assignment of the roles of "guards" or "prisoners"

Stanford Prison Experiment Essay
Junior Research Paper, Stanford Prison Experiment "If men define situations as real, they are real in
their consequences." This small sentence known as the Thomas Theorem carries a lot of meaning in
the context of our subjects. The idea of the Thomas Theorem states that if we perceive something to
be reality, it will determine how the way we act and think in the situation (Alleydog). The Stanford
Prison Experiment is seen in history as one of the most significant psychological experiments of it's
time, and the Abu Ghraib Scandal which happened 30 years later became famous for many of the
same reasons. Because of the way this experiment was conducted and the way the real life prison
was run, with little control and no intervention in how ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Philip Zimbardo ended the experiment on the grounds that the behavior of the guards was escalating
to a point where it was ethically wrong to treat a person this way, as well as the way the guards
broke so many of the initial rules (Zimbardo). The guards misused their power by using it to
humiliate and abuse the prisoners. Because of the way this experiment was cut short, data was
limited, but this does not mean that what was collected is not useful or helpful. The audio, video,
and rating scales of the individuals' moods were all collected and compiled as the experiment
progressed. The data recorded showed that guards and prisoners adjusted easily to their given roles,
treating the situation very seriously and realistically. One of the men, Dave Eshelman, who was
placed as a guard was interviewed about his time in the prison. In this quote he talks about taking up
the role of a guard, and how it affected his mind and the experiment personally:
"What came over me was not an accident. It was planned. I set out with a definite plan in mind, to
try to force the action, force something to happen, so that the researchers would have something to
work with... I was kind of running my own experiment in there, by saying, "How far can I push
these things and how much

This short clip called "The Power of the situation" goes into depth of the Stanford's prison
experiment. It first goes into explaining how people can be impacted if given certain attributes
which later results in different behaviors. The video explains in which how it was possible for Hitler
to become dictator and have so many people under his control. Kurt Lewen and his research team
found that dictators changed people's behaviors when they were given uniforms because it gave
them a new identity. They did an experiment by setting three groups of boy with 3 different leaders
and leadership styles to see what the resulting effects of each were. The three leadership style were
autocratic, laissez–faire, and democratic. The boys under the autocratic ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In a visual judgment experiment, people who were asked which line was longer chose the wrong
answer because it was the majority answer chosen. This showed how people chose conformity over
wrong judgment. Other experiments mentioned to prove that social situation in fact control an
individual's behavior are Milgram's experiment which showed people were obedient to authority.
Finally, the Stanford prison experiment demonstrated the fundamental attribution error where
situational conditions are under looked while attributed causes of behavior to personal factors are
more focused on. In this experiment, there were two groups of random chosen people to fulfill the
character as a "prisoner" or "guard" and taken to a simulated jail. They wore the uniform and
eventually changed their behavior to feel exactly like the role they were supposed to act because the
environment of the situation was just that powerful. Each group lost what the objectivity of the
experiment was because they were so sunk into their role; therefore, the experiment was called off
on the 6th day of their two–experiment. This study demonstrated that even normal and good people
have the potential to show evil

The Stanford Prison Experiment At Stanford University
I. Introduction:
Imagine that the year is 1971, and you are a male college student at Stanford University in
California. Like most college kids, you are strapped for cash, so you begin to seek a part time job.
You see an ad for a psychology study that pays $15 per day posted in the local newspaper, and
decide to submit an application. Little do you know at the time, that the study you are applying for
will become known worldwide and create such an impact that it remains relevant over 44 years later.
This infamous study is known today as the Stanford Prison Experiment. The experiment was led by
psychology professor Dr. Philip Zimbardo along with his team of researchers in the basement of the
psychology building at Stanford University. Today, I am going to speak about why the experiment
was conducted, what occurred during the experiment, and the ethical implications that resulted
because of this notorious study.
II. Why the Experiment Was Conducted:
I will begin by explaining why the Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted. Dr. Philip Zimbardo
and his research team sought to examine the effect that social institutions and certain situations have
on an individual's behavior. According to the American Psychological Association, a situation–
centered approach to studying human behavior, "focuses on factors external to the person"
(American Psychological Association). More specifically, Zimbardo wanted to study how quickly an
individual would conform to the role of prisoner or

Charlie Parrish Mrs. Gumina English III, Hr. 4 18 March 2015 Introduction The Stanford Prison
experiment was conducted in 1971, during the summer, at Stanford University. The mastermind
behind the experiment was Philip G. Zimbardo, a psychologist and a professor at Stanford
University. To help closely simulate a prison environment they called upon an expert. "Our study of
prison life began, then, with an average group of healthy, intelligent, middle class males" (Zimbardo
4). With this group of middle class males they were then split into two groups, guards and prisoners.
Once at the prison the environment became harsh. "There were no windows or clocks to judge the
passage of time, which later resulted in some time–distorting experiences" (Zimbardo 6). The prison
environment, the harsh ruling of the guards, and the stress being in jail took a tole on the prisoners.
As Zimbardo once said, "We wanted to see what the psychological effects were of becoming a
prisoner or prison guard" (4). It was not only the prisoners that paid the price of being forced into
prison life. Many of the guards went through psychological change. "Most of the guards found it
difficult to believe that they had behaved in the brutalizing ways they had. Many said they hadn't
known this side of them existed or that they were capable of such things" (McLeod 4). Why do
humans readily conform to the specific roles they are assigned? The prisoners and the prison guards
both fall victim to this. The Stanford

Abstract
Ethics in psychological research and testing is one of the most important issues today. The Stanford
Prison Experiment, conducted over 40 years ago, brought these ethical issues into the limelight and
remains one of the most controversial studies in the history of studying human behavior. This paper
aims to define ethics, describe risk/benefit ratio, provide a brief background on the Stanford Prison
Experiment, and evaluate the impact it has had on psychological research. The Stanford Prison
Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment probably tops a lot of lists when it comes to the issue of unethical
research. It cannot be replicated today due to its inability to meet the standards established by
numerous ethical codes, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Zimbardo and his colleagues aimed to study how participants would react when placed in a
simulated prison environment. Cherry (2010) quotes Zimbardo in an interview: ""Suppose you had
only kids who were normally healthy, psychologically and physically, and they knew they would be
going into a prison–like environment and that some of their civil rights would be sacrificed. Would
those good people, put in that bad, evil place–would their goodness triumph?"
The Participants The mock prison was set up in the Stanford University psychology building's
basement. From a larger group of 70 volunteers, a group of 24 undergraduate students were selected
to play the role of either prisoner or prison guard at a rate of $15 a day for a period of one to two
weeks. The selection of participants was based on the "no criminal background, lacked
psychological issues and had no major medical conditions" (Cherry, 2010).
The Setting and Procedures The mock prison included three 6' x 9' prison cells, each of which
housed three prisoners and three cots. The other rooms were assigned to prison guards and the
warden. One small space became the solitary confinement room, and another small space was
designated as the prison yard. The participants were randomly assigned to either the prisoner or
prison guard role.

Dr. Pilip Zimbardo is not an unknown name in the world of psychology. He graduated at Brooklyn
College in 1954 with majors in sociology, anthropology, and of course psychology. Zimbardo has
spent most of his career researching how and why people are transformed into certain situations so
that they behave in unexpected ways, such as when a good person commits an atrocious act, or an
intelligent person does something irrational. The Stanford Prison Experiment is Dr. Zimbardo's
'attempt to understand the process of transformation at work when good or ordinary people do bad
or evil things.' (Zimbardo 5). He wants to start with the question "what makes people go wrong?".
He looked at real people who were engaged in life's daily tasks, like doing their jobs. He sought to
understand the nature of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Zimbardo and others came to an agreement stating that it would be interesting to study how boys
would become socialized into the niche of police officers and what went into transforming a rookie
into a "good cop". He wanted to understand how it was possible for the personalities of these young
people to be so transformed in such a small amount of time that they could do these illogical deeds.
The Stanford Prison Experiment was designed to determine the results of when one group was
granted authority over another. Before starting the experiment Zimbardo and a group of coworkers
spent a few weeks cleaning out the basement of Stanford's Psychology Department to put in false
cell doors and the prisoners beds. They cleaned out a closet in the hall and labeled it the Hole, which
would serve as the "timeout" place for prisoners who

Allen Stanford 's Ponzi Scheme
Allen Stanford's Ponzi scheme is considered to be one of the top grossing Ponzi schemes that have
been at the forefront of white collar crime. As stated on the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission website, "a Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of
purported returns to earlier investors by the contribution of new investors that promises to generate
high returns with little or no risk" (Sec.gov). These schemes take advantage of people who put their
faith in the offender out of trust or any other personal reason and in the case of Allen Stanford it is
no different. Allen Stanford used his status that he had built throughout his life to take advantage of
many people through the use of Certificates of Deposit. His alpha male persona had built an empire
by defrauding individuals out of what has been reported up to $6 billion and some sources have
estimated up to $8 billion. This paper will discuss how Mr. Stanford went from king to prison in a
20 year span. Allen Stanford was born in Mexia, Texas to a lower middle class family. Stanford's
parents eventually divorced and he moved to Fort Worth, Texas. Tim Elfrink of the Broward/Palm
Beach New Times stated that people who knew Allen Stanford at a young age said that he was
always out to make a quick buck and he was well known for this. Some of his first ventures into
making money were selling firewood (Elfrink, 2009). Bob Wright, an acquaintance of Stanford's
from back in Mexia, Texas

The Stanford Prison Report
The doors were replaced with steel bars and the rooms (now cells) were secretly monitored. Video
cameras were put up in the hallways to monitor activity of the guards and prisoners. A closet was set
up to stimulate the idea of solitary confinement, it was referred to as "the hole". Clocks were
removed so the passage of time would be unknown. The prisoners were arrested, taken to the jail
(Stanford) and greeted by a person resembling a warden. The prisoners were searched and sprayed
down with water to humiliate and degrade them, which would establish a dominance in the guards.
Real prisoners often feel humiliated and emasculated so to create that feeling the mock prisoners
were given dresses to wear as their uniform this made them act and ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
A determining characteristic for a leader is the ability to make decisions. This is comparable to
fundamental attribution error because it can relate to internal characteristics instead of situational
factors. The three different types of leaders he proposed were autocratic, democratic, and laissez–
faire. An autocratic leader is the only person involved in decision making and is best in a situation
that does not require a lot of input. Democratic leaders include other people in the process of the
decision and they have the ability to sway decisions. Laissez–faire has little input from a leader and
allows the people to have their own input entirely. Lewin believed democratic was the best
possibility for a successful community. He came to the conclusion that autocratic extremes would
cause anarchy, wheres with laissez–faire people would not commit to decisions. Only certain
characteristics can determine which leader a person would be. Autocratic leaders are aggressive with
their ideals much like the Zimbardo prison study aggressive leaders are able to control other people
by asserting authority. Democratic is a more creative persona and although it relies on others
opinions it is still an authoritative figure that can influence decisions. Laissez–faire is a nonchalant
and casual leader. They are still considered an authoritative figure because they can acquire
resources and report decisions. Different styles

Stanford Prison Experiment Essay
Groupthink can be defined as a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in
which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in irrational decision–making. In
1971, twenty–four psychologically stable men took part in a trial known as The Stanford Prison
Experiment. The purpose of the experiment was to prove that an individual's perception of their own
power is heavily influenced by social context and societal expectations of their role. The men
involved in the experiment were assigned either the role of a prisoner or a guard to represent
positions in society, both with power and without. More specifically, the conductors of The Stanford
Prison Experiment focused on analyzing the different behavioral ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The guard attempted to hide this situation from the people running the experiment because of them
"being too soft on the prisoners." Another guard, not aware he was being observed, paced around the
"yard" while the prisoners slept, watching his "captives" and aggressively hitting them with his
nightstick. A majority of the prisoners still involved in the experiment started to accept the loss of
their identities and the abusive treatment they received, because of the belief that they "deserved it."
The guards formed a corrupt but unified team that used their power to inspire fear and complete
control over the prisoners. The prisoners, in response, became mentally compromised and developed
depression, feelings of helplessness, and feelings of psychosis. Detrimental psychological effects
and corrupt decision–making are noticeable outcomes of groupthink situations, and in The Stanford
Prison Experiment, both of these factors were found as a result of the experiment. In fact, the
presence of these detrimental factors forced the experiment to be concluded before schedule: after
six days instead of two weeks. The decision–making processes of the guards were skewed and
crooked. This is due to the roles the guards were told to play in addition to the group situation the
guards found themselves in. Many guards acted under the impression of a "false unanimity" present
within their group, and saw this as justification for their inhumane and

Summary Of The Stanford Prison Experiment
1 . Introduction
In 1971, Dr Zimbardo created a make–shift prison in the basement of Stanford University where
students were subjected to various kinds of unethical treatments under the premise of scientific or
psychological validity (Shuttleworth, 2008). The aim of this experiment was to investigate the
psychological effects with becoming either a prisoner or a guard in a simulated condition (Zollman,
2012). This study became known as the Stanford Prison Experiment. This assignment will explore
the concept, findings, significance and criticisms of this experiment.
2. The Concept
The Stanford Prison Experiment was created as a way to investigate whether people would change
to conform to roles assigned to them in a simulated environment. Dr Philip Zimbardo was interested
to find out whether prison brutality was due to people having underlying sadistic tendencies or
whether people's personalities are altered by the prison environment itself (McLeod, 2008). This
research concept was supported by the American Office of Naval Research (Haney, Banks &
Zimbardo 1973)
2.1. The Researchers ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At the time of this experiment, Dr Zimbardo was a professor at Stanford University and had done
important work in areas of dehumanization, criminal behaviour and criminal justice systems.
Zimbardo was a classmate of Stanley Milgram, who is well known for his famous obedience
experiment (Milgram, 1974), and Zimbardo wanted to further Milgram's research on the impact of
situational variables on human behaviour. (McLeod, 2008). His research team consisted of graduate
assistants Craig Haney, Curtis Banks and David Jaffe as well as an ex–convict primary consultant
named Carlo

If I was in charge of an experiment like the Stanford Prison Experiment, I think that I would have
conducted something like that. I don't see any moral reasoning why not to, all the participants were
voluntary and there was nothing illegal being conducted and extremely valuable data has been
extracted from it so I do not see the point of steering clear of this type of experiment. I think a good
follow on study might have been a roll reversal, would the inmates have taken a different approach
to the guard duties knowing how they were treated while inmates or would they have acted even
more aggressive?
If you put me in the guard role, I don't think that I would have been abusive like a lot of the guards
turned out to be. In my regular job I am in a position of authority but I don't feel like I abuse my
powers to the extent like the guards were doing in the video. I just don't have that Alpha type of
dominating personality that seemed to be a characteristic among the guards, I don't think that means
I wouldn't be able to do the job, but I think I would not have been as demeaning towards the
inmates. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
With some of the things that they were saying and putting there hands on the inmates and abusing
them, it seemed that the inmates showed a lot of composure with how they handled themselves. If
this were a real prison system and I had a five year sentence, I think that I could take it because there
really isn't another option that to endure it or commit suicide, which to me isn't really an option

The Stanford Prison Experiment was an experiment to see if normal people would change their
behavior in a role–play as a prisoner or a prison guard. The experiment was conducted by Dr.Philip
Zimbardo in 1973 at Stanford University and caused numerous amount of trauma to both prisoners
and prison guards in their role–playing position which forced Dr. Zimbardo to officially terminate
the experiment six days after it was introduced. Due to the cruel aggressive behaviors from the
guards, the experiment led to a question, "Do "normal" people have the capability of behaving
badly?" The answer to that question is that most likely an individual who behaves normally will
have the capability of expressing evil behavior due to the environment they are ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Their supreme power of authority began within the first–two days of the experiment, guards began
to act and behave aggressively towards the prisoners for not obeying their orders and assigned
physical punishments such as doing push–ups while being stepped on or cleaning their toilet buckets
out with their bare hands. Prisoners began to have an emotional breakdown and developed a
psychosomatic rash. These types of punishments that were being ordered by the guards clearly
shows that the guards have a lack of limitation of punishments and can punish prisoners whenever
and wherever they want and nobody can tell them that they can't do to the prisoners. Basically, the
prisoners were treated like objects instead of human

The Stanford Prison Experiment ( Spe )
Prisons in the United States have been labeled as places where cruel and unusual punishments occur
and are rightfully labeled as such; not because of the demeanor of certain group of people, but
because of the specific situation and scenarios these people are in. The Stanford Prison Experiment
(SPE) was set up to help understand the development and growth of the norms based on certain
roles, labels and expectations in a simulated prison environment. This paper is going to explain and
describe the experiment Philip Zimbardo set up and how it relates to the real world in non–
experimental situations in regards with the controversy of prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib, Iraq.
Philip Zimbardo and the Stanford Prison Experiment
Philip Zimbardo was born on March 23, 1933, in New York City, New York. Born to the parents of
former Sicilian immigrants. Zimbardo would grow up and study at Brooklyn College and
completing BA in the studies of psychology, anthropology, and sociology in 1954. He would soon
study at Yale where he would receive his M.A. (M.S.) in 1955 and Ph.D. in 1959 both in
psychology. Philip would soon become a professor at Stanford University in 1968, where he will
hold his infamous experiment in three years.
Zimbardo was offered a government grant from the United States Office of Naval Research to help
understand the importance of the effects of certain environments; this is what would be known as
the Stanford Prison Experiment. The experiment was setup in such a way

Stanford Financial Group Corporate Scandal
Stanford Financial Group Corporate Scandal
Authors: Brian Bailey, Gina Hallman, Matthew Kazor,
ShaVonne Robinson, Daryl Wertz, and Devin Williams
Date: Week 5 Tuesday 22nd January 2013
1–2. In February of 2009, the Antigua/Texas based global financial group (made up several
subsidiaries owned by the same owner) owned by R. Allen Stanford was charged with scamming
their customers by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Stanford Financial Group was charged
with fraud when deceptively selling consumers $8 billion dollars in deposit certificates. According
to The Money Alert, "A certificate of deposit, or CD, is a type of low–risk investment that many
people use when they want a small return on their investment without having ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The Houston Texas, firm and subsidiaries were involved in a huge Ponzi con artist scheme which
resulted in 20 years of stealing over $7 billion international dollars. The end result was $17,000
supposed investors turned victims in the U.S. and other locations within the Americas. Davis in
particular was originally on the cusp of having to serve 110 years, shortening his sentence because
he as the second in charge he was able to provide a copious amount of priceless data against
Stanford who's end sentence was 110 years.
5. There were several sanctions levied against the corporation: (1) James M. Davis, CFO of Stanford
International Bank (SIB) and Houston–based Stanford Financial Group, was sentenced today to five
years in prison for his role in helping Robert Allen Stanford perpetrate a fraud scheme involving SIB
and for conspiring to obstruct a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation into
SIB. (2) Personal money judgment of $1 billion. (3) Stanford and Holt are currently serving 110
years and three years in prison, respectively. (4) Lopez and Kuhrt are in federal custody and await
sentencing, scheduled for February 14, 2013.
6. Our thoughts on the sanctions for Allen Stanford were fair enough and taken very seriously.
Stanford was sentenced to 110 years in prison with a one billion dollar fine. However, the sanctions
for James Davis are not severe enough. Conversely,

The Stanford Prison Project
The Stanford Prison Project In the summer of 1971 at Stanford University psychologist Phillip
Zimbardo conducted a behavioral experiment meant to simulate a prison. This experiment was
supposed to study the behaviors both guards and prisoners go through by using student volunteers to
play the parts. This experiment, conducted in the basement of a Stanford University building, began
to take on a life of its own and has since gone down in infamy. This paper will look into the person
responsible for this experiment, how it was conducted and the outcome of the infamous study. Philip
Zimbardo is currently a well–known and highly regarded psychologist who received his Ph.D. from
Yale. He has over 50 years of experience teaching psychology at many schools including the Naval
Post–graduate School, Yale and Stanford University (Zimbardo,2015). Among his other accolades
Dr. Zimbardo has been published over 400 times and served as the president of both the American
Psychological Association and the Western Psychological Association (Zimbardo,2015). In 1971
Phillip Zimbardo was a professor at Stanford University wanting to learn more about behavior
between authority figures and regular people in a prison environment.
To conduct his research Zimbardo created the Stanford Prison Project which was inspired by the
Milgram obedience study. The results of the Milgram obedience study concluded that when regular
ordinary people were encouraged by those in an authority position over

The Stanford Experiment : The Infamous Stanford Prison...
The Infamous Stanford Prison Experiment
Imagine waking up, reading the local Sunday newspaper, and coming across an advertisement that
offered fifteen dollars a day to any male college student that was willing to participate in a study at
Stanford University for three weeks (Dunning). Close to seventy broke college boys hustled their
way to Stanford for an interview with the professor who was leading the experiment, Philip
Zimbardo. An interview was conducted to determine whether the boys were healthy, mentally and
physically. Only twenty–four of the seventy men were chosen though, only to be test subjects in a
study that would look further into the psychological effects of prison life. Making the ones who
weren't fit for the study, essentially lucky (Zimbardo).
The year was 1971 and no one was ready for the results that the study, known as the Stanford Prison
Experiment would conduct (Whitbourne). A test subject's fate was determined by the flip of a coin,
twelve prison guards and twelve prisoners (Zimbardo). Now that Zimbardo knew he had test
subjects, he assembled a team to begin construction of the "Stanford County Jail." With the help of a
former imprisoned convict, the prison was built to be as realistic as possible. Zimbardo said, "The
Prison was constructed by boarding up each end of a corridor in the basement of Stanford's
psychology department building (Zimbardo). That corridor was the 'yard' and was the only outside
place where prisoners would

Reaction Paper: Ethics I reviewed the YouTube Video titled Stanford Prison Experiment; this
experiment was very daunting to me since I worked as a Correctional Officer for over 3 years at
James T. Vaughn Correctional Center. In my opinion, the experiment did not correctly portray what
prison life is like and therefore could not obtain the proper results. For starters, Correctional Officers
are trained and have standard operating procedures that they must abide by. There are bad officers
that take being in a controlling situation too far and those officers are dangerous to everyone
including the other staff.
Ethics
Several ethical considerations should have taken place prior to the approval of the experiment. First,
a thorough psychological

Social Roles In The Stanford Experiment
Research Paper
The stanford experiment was a study of how social roles can influence our behavior. It was a
simulation that was held at Stanford University, California in 1971. Individuals were randomly
chosen to play the role of a "prisoner" or a "guard". Philip Zimbardo's theory was to know if having
a social role can influence our behavior. Once he began the experiment he proved that that people do
change their behavior when assigned to a social role, his experiment was a success to all those who
opposed.
Philip Zimbardo's experiment on prison life demonstrated how quickly an individual can dissolve
their own identity to fit into the social roles expected of them (UK Essays). Those assigned to play
the role of guard were given sticks and sunglasses; those assigned to play the prisoner role were
arrested by the Palo Alto police department, deloused, forced to wear chains and prison garments,
and transported to the basement of the Stanford psychology department, which had been converted
into a makeshift jail. Several of the guards became progressively more sadistic, particularly at night
when they thought the cameras were off, despite being picked by chance out of the same pool as the
prisoner ("Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment") Psychologist World. The prisoners were
humiliated and embarrassed by the guards. The guards were cruel and even made the prisoners do
menial tasks. They made the prisoners clean the toilet bowls with their bare hands rather than
providing

Response to Stanford Experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment happened because it was a breakdown of their rights,ways of
thinking, and physical humiliation. They sabotaged their way of thinking. The feeling and how the
place was set up made it feel like it was real and that they were in a real prison. In the movie the
guys really were in into the feel of their location and they were planning to escape it like a real
prison ,and in the end when the guy told them that they were able to leave that the experiment and
they shocked and just stood there. The guards really enforced the feel to the whole setting they were
being really harsh to them and the way the spoke to them like they were nothing. I mean, it was an
experiment, and they really didn't have to be harsh since we're all humans. The parole board was
really strict and when the people were really broken down by the torture and were pleading to be
late go they told them " Do you think a person like you should be allowed in the streets." They didn't
let them leave when they were supposed to be let go. Also, when they had visiting day, they told
them not to say anything about what happened in the "prison". ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
They made the wear dresses which is not appropriate for men. They were like oversized shirts. The
made the do things that were unnecessary and mean. For example they made one of the "prisoners "
make his bed several times when it looked fine. They also made them do other things that I won't
mention but it was mean and humiliating to those guys. The "correctional officers" told the guy to
do many push up and different exercises for not doing what they were told. In the movie it showed
how to one of the prisoners they made him do pushups and they made the other prisoners sit on him
and he couldn't do them because they were heavy . All of that was done to him just for not saying
something that he didn't want to say because he didn't use

Essay on Stanford Auditing Case
Allen Stanford was, at one point, a successful entrepreneur whose investment company's accounts
totaled in the billions. The aforementioned keyword is 'was.' As CEO of Stanford Financial Group,
Stanford essentially ran a massive Ponzi scheme; he issued certificates of deposit at an offshore
bank that he controlled and illegally used the investors' funds. These CD's were appealing to
investors due to their high returns of nearly twice the average rate of return of investments in U.S.
banks. Investors were led to believe that these CD's had such high returns because they were being
invested in corporate stocks, real estate, hedge funds, and precious metals (BusinessWeek). The SEC
eventually uncovered Stanford's fraud in 2008. Stanford was ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
BDO failed in its responsibilities to act independently and in the best interests of investors.
According to Rule 101 of the AICPA's Code of Professional Conduct, auditor independence is
impaired if during the time of the engagement, the auditor "had or was committed to acquire any
direct or material indirect financial interest in the client." During BDO's audit engagements, BDO
also took part in Stanford's Task Force. The complaint filed against BDO alleged that, "A key
initiative for the Stanford Task Force – fully known to BDO USA – was to amend Antigua's Money
Laundering (Prevention) Act to ensure that "fraud" and "false accounting" did not fall under the
Act's prescribed list of violations." By participating in the Stanford–funded Task Force and assisting
in weakening Antiguan–banking laws, BDO had an indirect financial interest in Stanford Financial
Group, thus violating the independence guideline.
By disregarding guidelines addressing audit evidence for investments in securities, BDO violated
PCAOB's Section 332. This section outlines audit evidence and audit risk regarding investments in
securities. An auditor is responsible for addressing existence, completeness, rights and obligation,
valuation, and presentation (PCAOB). Auditors for

Realism In The Stanford Experiment
In the 1970s, Philip Zimbardo had done a sequence of studies establishing the power of groups. The
Stanford Experiment is one of the well–known and eye–catching experiments in history. The goal of
the experiment was to ascertain how hard really it was to get upright people to follow in order to
torment another person. He found out that in the experiment, it was uncomplicated he only needed
to manipulate those people who said they won't harm others into doing so (Zimbardo, p. 128). As
discussed in class people learned that psychologist also found out that the research participants were
most likely to obey authority figures even knowing that they are hurting others. Philip Zimbardo had
to close down his experiments as the project went out of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Zimbardo was an active participant in the experiment he was basically the warden instead of being
an observer, he was shaping the experiment in a way. In the documentary that was viewed in class, it
was noticeable that the participants were all men. The sample is relatively narrowed down it is rather
small in comparison a bit biased in a way. If there were women in the study the way things would
have been different. The men would have behaved differently the result maybe would have been
different. The result of the experiment is very astonishing as it surpasses what Zimbardo intended to.
Particularly about the participant's behaviour before and during the experiment, the prisoners began
behaving like one and associated themselves with the numbers they were given (Zimbardo, p. 130).
It was amazing how quick their behaviour and thinking change in a matter of time. It was not even a
whole week. The other surprise was when one of the guards who was using the shades started acting
more violently when he started using them. The "prisoners" was treated unfairly and abused they
forgot that they were just people volunteering for the study, they could have just said something to
Zimbardo and they could have left without putting themselves in a difficult situation. Though the
people that suffered depression was let

Research: The Stanford Prison Experiment
This research is also known as The Stanford Prison experiment; it was the study of the physical
effects of becoming the person and person guard. This experiment was conducted in the Stanford
University on August 14, 1971, by a team of researcher led by psychological professor Philip
Zimbardo using college students. The main purpose of this whole study was to understand the
development of the effect of roles of rebel and social expectations in stimulated prison environment.
Professor Zimbardo then set an experiment by making 12 student as the prisoners and 12 as to play
the role of prison guard. But as soon as the experiment started after few hours the station for the
prisoners become difficult because of the abusive behavior of the prison

Stanford Prison Experiment Analysis
The Lord of the Flies book is very similar to the movie, Stanford Prison Experiment. The book is
about some kids surviving a plane crash and living on a stranded island. The boys find themselves
without any parents or anyone in charge, so they find themselves a chief, leading to drama and many
conflicts. Throughout the many conflicts, William Golding, author of the novel, shows how
important power can be in desperate times and how it can change a person within time of being in
command. Characters like Ralph, Jack, and Piggy represent the types of people when it comes to
power. The film, The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), was a huge attempt to investigate the
psychological effects of anticipated power, focusing on the struggle between prisoners and prison
officers. It was conducted at Stanford University between August 14–20, 1971, by a research group
led by psychology professor, Philip Zimbardo. It is clear in both Golding's novel and Zimbardo's
experiment that it is human nature to abuse one's power.
Throughout the story, power is a great factor in the book, as it is in the Stanford experiment. In The
Lord of the Flies, Ralph was the high chief as Zimbardo was the high president of the experiment.
Ralph had all the great qualities to be a good leader except one, which was to have the intellect to
come up with ideas for all the kids. Without having the smarts, Ralph struggled to brainstorm ideas
for the group to survive on the island. Although Piggy, another character

Zimbardo Stanford Prison Experiment
In 1971, Stanford professor and psychologist Philip Zimbardo, arranged and conducted an
experiment with the intention of gaining a better understanding of the development of norms and the
effects of roles, labels, and social expectations in a simulated prison environment. However, what
professor Zimbardo was not expecting, was just how much insight this study would provide into the
psychology of individuals and social groups, as well as, the aggressiveness of human nature.
Participants in the study had responded to newspaper advertisements in the Palo Alto Times and the
Stanford Daily, which offered $15/day to male college students for a study on the psychology of
imprisonment. It is important to note that all volunteers in the experiment were ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
This humiliation and minimization of individuality then continued with the issuing of a smock and
stocking cap, as well as chained feet, for a uniform. The prison environment was recreated with no
clocks, no view of the outside world, and minimal sensory stimulation, also adding to the feelings of
anxiety and confusion. Guards were given no specific instruction in how to behave and were instead
told they were free, within limits, to do anything necessary to maintain order. All guards were
dressed in identical uniforms and carried a whistle around their neck, a billy club borrowed from the
police, and mirrored sunglasses. This prevented anyone from seeing their eyes or reading their
emotions, and thus helped to further promote their anonymity, as well as creating a strongly unified
and defined authority. The situation quickly escalated as the guards began to quickly assert this
authority over the prisoners and the prisoners easily joined together against their common enemy to
rebel. Once the guards again maintained order, all prisoners were stripped naked and lost their

Stanford Prison Experiment Unethical
Imagine a world without adults or authority. Where there is no guidance to save people from turning
into barbaric beasts. In the Lord of the Flies by William Golding, the story begins with kids being
stranded on an island without anything and drifting away from human nurture to human nature,
where there is deep chaos and ends up with two big children dead. Even though, this storyline seems
unrealistic and out of this world, it happened in a real life experiment under the supervision of Philip
G. Zimbardo. The Stanford Prison Experiment is known as "the most unethical study" in history,
due to the events that occurred that resulted in complete change of people's behavior. By learning
about the Stanford Prison Experiment, one can learn about the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In this book, we see the good person is Simon, he tries to maintain the peace and then when he is
killed all peace is gone, and the island goes into anarchy. Likewise, in the prison experiment, the
good guards who did favors for the prisoners but also were fair and listened to the other guards were
the peacemakers, which lost their mind and conformed like the other guards. In addition, we see a
request for guidance before the state of nature. In the Lord of the Flies, Ralph and piggy requested a
"sign" from the "grown–up[s]" (Golding 92). In the prison experiment, the guards asked "what do
we do" and were responded to by "it's your prison", while given a "warning about physical abuse"
(Dreifus 1). The guards then went to do psychological punishment followed by physical abuse as
punishments. In the end, after the anarchy is stopped there is regret that occurs. In the Lord of the
Flies, the kids cried in front of the British officer, for the fact that they killed Simon and Piggy. In
the prison experiment, the guards were disappointed in their behavior, but still were sad that they
lost all the

The Stanford Prison Study
The aim of the Stanford Prison experiment was to investigate how readily people would conform to
the roles of guard and prisoner in a role–playing exercise that simulated prison life. In 1971, Philip
Zimbardo, the leader of the experiment, converted a basement of the Stanford University
psychology building into a simulated prison. He advertised for students to play the roles of prisoners
and guards for a fortnight. Subjects were randomly assigned to play the role of "prisoner" or
"guard". Those assigned to play the role of guard were given batons and special sunglasses, making
eye contact with prisoners impossible. However, we learnt that "The study created more new
questions than it answered, about the amorality and darkness that inhabits the human psyche."
(Shuttleworth, no date). It's interesting to note that even though Zimbardo picked only students with
no psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse, conditions in
the mock prison were so dreadful that one of the prisoners was authorised to be realised after just 36
hours due to bursts of screaming, crying and anger. There was a huge lack of informed consent
during ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They recreated the original ad, and then ran a separate ad omitting the phrase "prison life." They
found that the people who responded to the two ads scored differently on a set of psychological
tests. Those who thought that they would be participating in a prison study had significantly higher
levels of aggressiveness, authoritarianism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, and social dominance, and
they scored lower on measures of empathy and altruism" ((Konnikova,

Why I Chose To Attend Stanford University

More Related Content

More from Amanda Hengel (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Why I Chose To Attend Stanford University