Participants in the study did receive a psychological testing battery but in the study it is reported that scores were not known until the close of the experiment. This may mean that the aggressive behavior seen in the experiment was not due to the effect of the situation on the person, but rather the interaction of the person in the situation. Members of the study staff (minus Dr. Zimbardo, who has made a closet enterprise of his study) have attempted either to distance themselves from the experiment. The chief consultant on the project, Carlo Prescott, recently wrote to the Stanford Daily describing the shame he felt over his participation in the project, describing it as a "theatrical exercise." Other elements of concern in the study include the method of experimentation on human subjects. As we have previously noted, informed consent was inadequate for the degree of abuse and harassment the participants experienced. While the study only had a minimal risk involved, its outcomes were a part of the move toward investigational review board approval for all human subject experiments. The Stanford study appears to have been only minimally compliant in requirement for the assessment of risk-benefit criteria,...
(1973). Study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. Naval Research Reviews, 9, 1-17. Washington, DC: Office of Naval ResearchOur semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now