Zimbardo (1973) did discuss for future experiments the use of a neutral person that would observe the experiment, not be involved and would call it quits if things got out of hand. This is a good idea, however safe guards would be needed just in case this person became pulled into the experiment. There would need to be clear definitions of what meant that the experiment was getting out of hand. I wonder if Zimbardo could have gotten a taste of the effects of a situation like this, by having something similar, but on a smaller scale. In stead of giving no instruction for behavior, at least having some limitations, for example, no beating the prisoners. The chain around the ankle and using ID numbers instead of names seems to be at least a little more acceptable (Carnahan, 2007).

In order to obtain these exact results, I do not know if a more ethical experiment would result the same. I cannot think of how this experiment could be carried out ethically, but I am only one person. I have faith that at team of individuals could design an experiment like this, but ethical. Online, I looked up Milgram's experiment. It said it took place in the 1960's, and that Milgram wrote a book discussing the experiment in 1974....

Was it not in circulation sooner? If it was, how did Zimbardo gain approval for this study? I understand no one was aware and could have accurately predicted the intensity of this experiment as well as the effects, but I would have thought that after Milgram's experiment a greater degree of skepticism would have been present (Xavier, 2008).
Overall, according to many of the standards mentioned above, the experiment could not have been conducted. There is now more scrutiny regarding experiments of this nature. Furthermore, as the information age continues to evolve, society overall will quickly apprehend and halt many of these experiments from occurring.