standford
•Download as ODP, PDF•
1 like•658 views
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a psychological study conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo that aimed to investigate the psychological effects of perceived power and roles. For the study, volunteers were randomly assigned to be either prisoners or guards in a mock prison located in the basement of the Stanford psychology building. The experiment unfolded quickly, with guards enforcing authoritarian control over the prisoners through intimidation and humiliation. By the third day, prisoners began emotionally breaking down and losing their identity, while guards increased abusive tactics. The experiment was abruptly ended after only six days due to the levels of psychological cruelty and emotional distress observed in the prisoners. Zimbardo concluded that situational forces and roles can strongly influence human behavior.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
Naughty Horror [The mirror - Part I]
Since past times the human being is fascinated by horror stories and urban legends!
Watch every 4th week of each month, an original horror story in 6 episodes (Monday to Saturday)!
Know the history of Sofia with a surprising and original outcome!
Favourite Horror movies
The document summarizes several of the author's favorite horror movies, including Paranormal Activity 2 about a family who sets up security cameras to capture sinister events in their home, My Soul to Take about a serial killer stalking children who share his birthday, and Devil about a group trapped in an elevator with the Devil amongst them. It also mentions SAW 7 about survivors seeking help from a fellow survivor with dark secrets, and The 4th Kind involving disappearances in Alaska and accusations of a federal cover up.
Beth emily cooper imdb temp
Detective Inspector Johnson investigates the disappearance and murders of four young people in the English marshes. The 135-minute thriller was directed by Ben Crisp and stars Abigail Woodcroft, Alfred Harvey, and Jason Digby. Mr. Peterson is the suspected killer who disposes of bodies in the marshlands, but little does DI Johnson know that danger is closer than he thinks as he still struggles with the unsolved murder of his wife two years prior.
Stanford Prison Study
This document provides an overview of the Stanford Prison Experiment, which studied the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. It describes how volunteers were selected and the prison environment was constructed. Within days, the guards became sadistic and prisoners depressed. The experiment had to end early due to the negative effects on participants. It aimed to test how people respond in situations of power and powerlessness.
Zimbardo Analysis Project
The document summarizes Philip Zimbardo's infamous Stanford prison experiment from 1971. In the experiment, volunteer students were randomly assigned to be prisoners or guards in a mock prison setup in the basement of the Stanford psychology building. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but had to be stopped after only six days because things had spiraled out of control. Both the prisoners and guards had begun to take on their roles too seriously, with guards exhibiting increasingly authoritarian and abusive behavior and prisoners showing signs of extreme stress and emotional breakdown. While the experiment yielded important insights into group dynamics and conformity, it violated ethical standards in subjecting participants to psychological harm without their full consent.
Curious incident book trailer
The document is a book trailer that summarizes a mystery novel set in modern-day Swindon, England. The protagonist is Christopher John Francis Boone, a boy with Asperger's who uses his unique perspective to solve a mystery when he discovers his neighbor's dog savagely killed. While his father and the police warn him to leave it alone, Christopher decides to investigate further. There is no movie adaptation yet but a successful stage play of the novel.
Ingles critica john doe
John Doe is found injured with no memory in the streets of Exeter, England. He is taken to the hospital where he is cared for by Nurse Angela and Doctor Cox. During his recovery, a television program airs about a woman named Mary who was murdered by her boyfriend John Robert. Susan Peters, the TV producer, comes to interview John Doe when she suspects he may be John Robert. However, Doctor Cox recognizes John Doe as actually being John Robert when he sees him on TV. John Doe is then revealed to be the murderer John Robert and the police rush to capture him before he can harm Nurse Angela.
Day 4 Wwii
The document presents 6 moral dilemmas that concentration camp inmates faced during the Holocaust: 1) Leaving a young, weak son behind to attempt an escape. 2) Warning leaders about a friend's plan to commit suicide and endanger others. 3) Obtaining needed medicine from an SS officer through unwanted sexual acts. 4) Killing an informer who spies for the SS. 5) Replacing names on a death list to save essential members. 6) Killing a newborn baby to save its mother from being sent to the ovens. Each scenario asks what choice the inmate should make in that terrible situation.
Recommended
Naughty Horror [The mirror - Part I]
Since past times the human being is fascinated by horror stories and urban legends!
Watch every 4th week of each month, an original horror story in 6 episodes (Monday to Saturday)!
Know the history of Sofia with a surprising and original outcome!
Favourite Horror movies
The document summarizes several of the author's favorite horror movies, including Paranormal Activity 2 about a family who sets up security cameras to capture sinister events in their home, My Soul to Take about a serial killer stalking children who share his birthday, and Devil about a group trapped in an elevator with the Devil amongst them. It also mentions SAW 7 about survivors seeking help from a fellow survivor with dark secrets, and The 4th Kind involving disappearances in Alaska and accusations of a federal cover up.
Beth emily cooper imdb temp
Detective Inspector Johnson investigates the disappearance and murders of four young people in the English marshes. The 135-minute thriller was directed by Ben Crisp and stars Abigail Woodcroft, Alfred Harvey, and Jason Digby. Mr. Peterson is the suspected killer who disposes of bodies in the marshlands, but little does DI Johnson know that danger is closer than he thinks as he still struggles with the unsolved murder of his wife two years prior.
Stanford Prison Study
This document provides an overview of the Stanford Prison Experiment, which studied the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. It describes how volunteers were selected and the prison environment was constructed. Within days, the guards became sadistic and prisoners depressed. The experiment had to end early due to the negative effects on participants. It aimed to test how people respond in situations of power and powerlessness.
Zimbardo Analysis Project
The document summarizes Philip Zimbardo's infamous Stanford prison experiment from 1971. In the experiment, volunteer students were randomly assigned to be prisoners or guards in a mock prison setup in the basement of the Stanford psychology building. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but had to be stopped after only six days because things had spiraled out of control. Both the prisoners and guards had begun to take on their roles too seriously, with guards exhibiting increasingly authoritarian and abusive behavior and prisoners showing signs of extreme stress and emotional breakdown. While the experiment yielded important insights into group dynamics and conformity, it violated ethical standards in subjecting participants to psychological harm without their full consent.
Curious incident book trailer
The document is a book trailer that summarizes a mystery novel set in modern-day Swindon, England. The protagonist is Christopher John Francis Boone, a boy with Asperger's who uses his unique perspective to solve a mystery when he discovers his neighbor's dog savagely killed. While his father and the police warn him to leave it alone, Christopher decides to investigate further. There is no movie adaptation yet but a successful stage play of the novel.
Ingles critica john doe
John Doe is found injured with no memory in the streets of Exeter, England. He is taken to the hospital where he is cared for by Nurse Angela and Doctor Cox. During his recovery, a television program airs about a woman named Mary who was murdered by her boyfriend John Robert. Susan Peters, the TV producer, comes to interview John Doe when she suspects he may be John Robert. However, Doctor Cox recognizes John Doe as actually being John Robert when he sees him on TV. John Doe is then revealed to be the murderer John Robert and the police rush to capture him before he can harm Nurse Angela.
Day 4 Wwii
The document presents 6 moral dilemmas that concentration camp inmates faced during the Holocaust: 1) Leaving a young, weak son behind to attempt an escape. 2) Warning leaders about a friend's plan to commit suicide and endanger others. 3) Obtaining needed medicine from an SS officer through unwanted sexual acts. 4) Killing an informer who spies for the SS. 5) Replacing names on a death list to save essential members. 6) Killing a newborn baby to save its mother from being sent to the ovens. Each scenario asks what choice the inmate should make in that terrible situation.
The stanford prison experiment ppt
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study conducted in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo that investigated the psychological effects of perceived power and roles on participants. 24 male college students were randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners in a mock prison set up in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford University. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but was stopped after only six days as the guards began to exhibit increasingly cruel behavior towards the prisoners, including physical and emotional abuse. The findings supported the situational hypothesis that the prison environment itself was the primary cause of the escalating brutality rather than any dispositional traits of the individuals involved. The experiment raised serious ethical issues around informed consent and protecting participants from psychological harm.
Rebellion TranscriptClassic Studies in Psychology2Rebellio.docx
Rebellion Transcript
Classic Studies in Psychology
2
Rebellion Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Guard 1, Guard 2, Prisoner 1, Prisoner 2, Prisoners
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: But the next day, on the morning of the next day, the prisoners rebelled. And what the guards did, they came to me and said, “The prisoners are rebelling. What are we going to do?” I said, “It's your prison, whatever you want. I will do it, but you've got to tell me.” And they said, “We have to treat force with force,” so they broke down the doors --
GUARD 1: (Indiscernible) take your bed (Indiscernible).
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: -- stripped the prisoners naked, dragged them out. Some of them, they tied up their feet. They put them in solitary confinement which is a tiny little hole in the closet oh, about this big and dark, and they said, “At this point, everything but breathing air is a privilege. Food is a privilege. Clothes are a privilege. Having a bed is a privilege.” And so the guards began to say, “Here are the new rules. And the new rules are you are dangerous and we are going to treat you as such.” And then, it began to escalate. Each day, the level of abuse, aggression, violence against prisoners got more and more extreme.
And so the guards changed to become more dominant, and, you see, it's all about power. It's the whole institution that empowers the guards who are the representative of this institution called prison to do whatever is necessary to prevent prisoners from escaping, maintain law and order.
GUARD 2: Keep going. Once I was blind.
PRISONER 1: (Singing) Once, I was blind.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: The way -- the direction it took was having them engage in ever more humiliating tasks, cleaning toilet bowls out with their bare hands, taking their blankets and putting them in dirt with nettles, and the prisoner had to spend hours taking the nettles out if they wanted to, you know, sleep. And it's essentially saying, “We have the power to create a totally arbitrary, mindless environment, and that's the environment you have to live in.”
So some of the prisoners are now crushed. And in 36 hours, the first kid has an emotional breakdown meaning crying, screaming, irrational thinking.
PRISONER 2: I've got to go to a doctor, anything. I want out! I want out now! Goddamnit!
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: And we have to release him. In 5 days, we had to release five of the prisoners because the situation was so overwhelming.
What about the kids who didn't break down? They became zombies, zombies in the sense that they became almost all mindlessly obedient. Whatever the guards would say, they did. Do this, they did. “Do 10 pushups. Do 20 pushups. Step on him while he's doing pushups. Tell him he's a bastard.”
PRISONERS: Prisoner 819 did a bad thing. Prisoner 819 did a bad thing.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: It was horrifying to see the kids break down. It was even more horrifying to see these other kids just become mindlessly obedient.
PRISONERS: Because of what pr.
TranscriptsClassic Studies in Psychology216. Stanford Pris.docx
Transcripts
Classic Studies in Psychology
2
16. Stanford Prison Experiment Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Steve Taylor, Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Male
(Music)
DR. STEVE TAYLOR: If you go to Google and type in the word "Experiment," one of the first things you'll see is the Stanford Prison Experiment. It's probably the best known psychological study of all time.
It all began in West Coast America on a summer's day back in 1971, when college students grew their hair long, protested against their government, were pro-peace and totally anti-authority, or so we thought until Philip Zimbardo.
(Music)
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: So the Stanford Prison Study very simply is an attempt to see what happens when you put really good people in a bad place.
We put an ad in the city newspaper, wanted students for study of prison life lasting up to 2 weeks. We're going to pay you $15 a day. This is back in 1971. It's pretty good money, and we picked 75 volunteers, gave them a battery of psychological tests, and we picked two dozen who in all dimensions were normal and healthy to begin with. And then we did what is critical for all research. We randomly assigned half of them to the role of playing guards or the role of playing prisoners. It's literally like flipping a coin.
And then what we did is we told the guards, “Come down a day early,” and we had them pick their own uniform. We had them help set up the prison so they'd feel like it was their prison, and the prisoners were coming into their place. The prisoners, we simply said, “Wait at home in the dormitories.” Well, what we didn't tell them, which is a little bit of the deception of omission, is that they were arrested by the city police.
MALE: Right there, they took me out the door. They put my hands against the car. It was a real cop car. It was a real policeman that took me to the police station, the basement of the police station.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: I had told the policeman to put a blindfold on the prisoners. Since they had never been arrested, they didn't know that doesn't happen. The reason for the blindfold is my assistants would come, put them in our car, bring them down to our prison, and they'd be in our prison now blindfolded. The guards would strip them naked, delouse them, pretending that they were lice. It's kind of a degradation ritual. And after the first day, I was about to end it because nothing was happening.
[End of audio]
From “Classic Studies in Psychology.” Copyright 2012 by Films Media Group. All rights reserved. Adapted with permission.
17. Rebellion Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Guard 1, Guard 2, Prisoner 1, Prisoner 2, Prisoners
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: But the next day, on the morning of the next day, the prisoners rebelled. And what the guards did, they came to me and said, “The prisoners are rebelling. What are we going to do?” I said, “It's your prison, whatever you want. I will do it, but you've got to tell me.” And they said, “We have to treat force with for ...
The role of “ ROLE” in our life. (Zimbardo Experiment)
the experiment is about Deindividuation. it's called The stanford prison experiment done by Philip Zimbardo.
Groups- Obedience_Stanford Prison
Philip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment in 1971 to study the behaviors of people in a simulated prison environment. 24 male college students were selected and randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but had to be stopped after only six days. Both the "guards" and "prisoners" had quickly adapted their behaviors to fully embrace their artificial roles, with guards becoming increasingly cruel and prisoners descending into emotional distress. The experiment demonstrated how situational forces can override individual personality traits and lead ordinary people to act in extreme, sometimes abusive ways when given situational power over others.
Byline PHILIP G. ZIMBARDOBy the 1970s, psychologists had .docx
Byline: PHILIP G. ZIMBARDO
By the 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social- psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior -- personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing -- directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were caught up in the mental constraints of cognitive dissonance -- the discomfort from holding two conflicting thoughts -- and were unable to cut bait even though it was the only rational strategy to save lives and face. Those examples, however, with their different personalities, political agendas, and motives, complicated any simple conceptual attempt to understand what went wrong in these situations.
I decided that what was needed was to create a situation in a controlled experimental setting in which we could array on one side a host of variables, such as role-playing, coercive rules, power differentials, anonymity, group dynamics, and dehumanization. On the other side, we lined up a collection of the "best and brightest" of young college men in coll ...
Pamela Dollar Stanford Prison Experiment 1971
The Stanford prison experiment was a study conducted in 1971 that examined the psychological effects of assigning college students to play the roles of prisoners and guards in a mock prison. The experiment quickly spiraled out of control as the participants adapted too strongly to their roles. The guards began to exhibit sadistic behavior and abuse their power over the prisoners. The experiment was ended after only 6 days instead of the planned 2 weeks due to the unethical treatment of prisoners and risks to their psychological well-being. The results demonstrated how situational roles and environments can strongly influence human behavior rather than individual personality traits alone.
Stanford Prison Experiment Analysis
The document discusses similarities between The Lord of the Flies novel and the Stanford Prison Experiment film, noting they both show how important power can be in desperate times and how it can change a person. It provides background on the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo at Stanford University, which investigated the psychological effects of roles as prisoners and guards. Throughout, the document examines how both the novel and experiment demonstrate that it is human nature to abuse power when given the opportunity.
The stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study in the 1970s that investigated the psychological effects of perceived authority and social roles. In the study, researchers recruited college students to take on roles of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison. The experiment rapidly escalated as the guards enforced authoritarian control over the prisoners through humiliation, punishment, and isolation. Within days, prisoners began suffering emotional breakdowns while the guards enforced their power with escalating cruelty and abuse. The experiment was ended early when a graduate student observed its negative psychological impacts had made it unethical to continue.
The stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study in the 1970s that investigated the psychological effects of perceived authority and social roles. In the study, researchers recruited college students to take on roles of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison. The experiment quickly spiraled out of control as the guards enforced authoritarian rules and punished prisoners, while the prisoners began suffering from emotional distress. The study had to be ended early due to one prisoner having an emotional breakdown. The researchers realized they had lost control of the situation and ethical boundaries had been crossed.
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1:
The Stanford University Prison Experiment: Structure, Behavior, and Results
Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford University Prison Experiment could be described as a system whose systemic properties enabled the behaviors of the system's actors, leading to disturbing results.
Analyze the situation. What were the key elements of the system? How did the system operate? Why did the participants behave as they did? What lessons can be learned from this experiment about systems in relation to management?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
Be six pages in length.
Be formatted according to the APA
Include at least seven scholarly or peer-reviewed articles.
Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007).
Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of situation (Links to an external site.)
.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(
30), B6.
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people su.
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1:
The Stanford University Prison Experiment: Structure, Behavior, and Results
Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford University Prison Experiment could be described as a system whose systemic properties enabled the behaviors of the system's actors, leading to disturbing results.
Analyze the situation. What were the key elements of the system? How did the system operate? Why did the participants behave as they did? What lessons can be learned from this experiment about systems in relation to management?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
Be six pages in length.
Be formatted according to the APA
Include at least seven scholarly or peer-reviewed articles.
Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007).
Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of situation (Links to an external site.)
.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(
30), B6.
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people su.
Chapter 8 “ Stanley Milgram and the Shock Machine” (1).pdf
Stanley Milgram conducted controversial experiments in the 1960s where participants believed they were administering electric shocks to another person for incorrect answers on a memory test. In reality, no shocks were given. Surprisingly, 65% of participants continued administering shocks up to the maximum of 450 volts. Milgram's experiments showed that ordinary people could be made to inflict harm through blind obedience to authority figures, and helped explain how atrocities like the Holocaust could occur. However, later analysis found that Milgram may have pressured and coerced participants, and doubts were raised about whether participants truly believed the shocks were real.
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C
Option #1:
Stanford University Prison Experiment: Causality, Controlling Patterns, and Growth Mode
Revisit Philip Zimbardo's (1971) Stanford University Prison Experiment. Analyze the experiment in terms of causality, controlling patterns, and its growth mode.
What lessons can be learned from this experiment that can be generalized to business social systems, such as organizational design/organizational structures?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
· Be 5 pages in length.
· Be formatted according to APA
· Include at least five scholarly or peer-reviewed articles
· Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation
~~~~~~~~
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were ...
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C.docx
Option #1:
Stanford University Prison Experiment: Causality, Controlling Patterns, and Growth Mode
Revisit Philip Zimbardo's (1971) Stanford University Prison Experiment. Analyze the experiment in terms of causality, controlling patterns, and its growth mode.
What lessons can be learned from this experiment that can be generalized to business social systems, such as organizational design/organizational structures?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
· Be 5 pages in length.
· Be formatted according to APA
· Include at least five scholarly or peer-reviewed articles
· Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation
~~~~~~~~
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were .
Zimbardo's Experiment : The Stanford Prison Experiment
The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was an attempt to investigate the psychological effects of perceived 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.
Prison experiment zimbaredo jordan carer
The document summarizes key aspects of the Stanford Prison Experiment. Participants were selected through newspaper ads and screened for psychological and medical issues. 24 students were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners. The fake prison was created in the basement with cells and a yard area. Prisoners wore uniforms without underclothes and had ID numbers instead of names. Guards had no training and created their own rules. On the second day, prisoners rebelled but were put down forcefully by guards who began harsher treatment like solitary confinement and withholding of privileges. A rumored escape plot increased tensions but did not actually occur. The experiment was cancelled after only 6 days due to concerns about the treatment of prisoners.
The Milgram Experimentby Saul McLeod published 2007Milgram sel.docx
The Milgram Experiment
by Saul McLeod published 2007
Milgram selected participants for his experiment by newspaper advertising for male participants to take part in a study of learning at Yale University. The procedure was that the participant was paired with another person and they drew lots to find out who would be the ‘learner’ and who would be the ‘teacher’. The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the teacher, and the learner was one of Milgram’s confederates (pretending to be a real participant).
The learner (a confederate called Mr. Wallace) was taken into a room and had electrodes attached to his arms, and the teacher and researcher went into a room next door that contained an electric shock generator and a row of switches marked from 15 volts (Slight Shock) to 375 volts (Danger: Severe Shock) to 450 volts (XXX).
Milgram's Experiment
Procedure:
At the beginning of the experiment, each participant was introduced to another participant, who was actually a confederate of the experimenter (Milgram). They drew straws to determine their roles – learner or teacher – although this was fixed and the confederate was always the learner. There was also an “experimenter” dressed in a grey lab coat, played by an actor (not Milgram).
Two rooms in the Yale Interaction Laboratory were used - one for the learner (with an electric chair) and another for the teacher and experimenter with an electric shock generator.
The “learner” (Mr. Wallace) was strapped to a chair with electrodes. After he has learned a list of word pairs given him to learn, the "teacher" tests him by naming a word and asking the learner to recall its partner/pair from a list of four possible choices.
The teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake, increasing the level of shock each time. There were 30 switches on the shock generator marked from 15 volts (slight shock) to 450 (danger – severe shock).
The learner gave mainly wrong answers (on purpose) and for each of these the teacher gave him an electric shock. When the teacher refused to administer a shock the experimenter was to give a series of orders / prods to ensure they continued. There were 4 prods and if one was not obeyed then the experimenter (Mr. Williams) read out the next prod, and so on.
Prod 1: please continue.
Prod 2: the experiment requires you to continue.
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue.
Prod 4: you have no other choice but to continue.
Results:
65% of all the participants (teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts. Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study. All he did was alter the situation (IV) to see how this affected obedience (DV).
Conclusion:
Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being. Obedience to authority is ingrained in us all from the way.
Digital Marketing Trends in 2024 | Guide for Staying Ahead
https://www.wask.co/ebooks/digital-marketing-trends-in-2024
Feeling lost in the digital marketing whirlwind of 2024? Technology is changing, consumer habits are evolving, and staying ahead of the curve feels like a never-ending pursuit. This e-book is your compass. Dive into actionable insights to handle the complexities of modern marketing. From hyper-personalization to the power of user-generated content, learn how to build long-term relationships with your audience and unlock the secrets to success in the ever-shifting digital landscape.
Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing.pdf
Read Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing to gain insights on AI adoption in the manufacturing industry, such as:
1. How quickly AI is being implemented in manufacturing.
2. Which barriers stand in the way of AI adoption.
3. How data quality and governance form the backbone of AI.
4. Organizational processes and structures that may inhibit effective AI adoption.
6. Ideas and approaches to help build your organization's AI strategy.
dbms calicut university B. sc Cs 4th sem.pdf
Its a seminar ppt on database management system using sql
Fueling AI with Great Data with Airbyte Webinar
This talk will focus on how to collect data from a variety of sources, leveraging this data for RAG and other GenAI use cases, and finally charting your course to productionalization.
More Related Content
Similar to standford
The stanford prison experiment ppt
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study conducted in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo that investigated the psychological effects of perceived power and roles on participants. 24 male college students were randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners in a mock prison set up in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford University. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but was stopped after only six days as the guards began to exhibit increasingly cruel behavior towards the prisoners, including physical and emotional abuse. The findings supported the situational hypothesis that the prison environment itself was the primary cause of the escalating brutality rather than any dispositional traits of the individuals involved. The experiment raised serious ethical issues around informed consent and protecting participants from psychological harm.
Rebellion TranscriptClassic Studies in Psychology2Rebellio.docx
Rebellion Transcript
Classic Studies in Psychology
2
Rebellion Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Guard 1, Guard 2, Prisoner 1, Prisoner 2, Prisoners
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: But the next day, on the morning of the next day, the prisoners rebelled. And what the guards did, they came to me and said, “The prisoners are rebelling. What are we going to do?” I said, “It's your prison, whatever you want. I will do it, but you've got to tell me.” And they said, “We have to treat force with force,” so they broke down the doors --
GUARD 1: (Indiscernible) take your bed (Indiscernible).
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: -- stripped the prisoners naked, dragged them out. Some of them, they tied up their feet. They put them in solitary confinement which is a tiny little hole in the closet oh, about this big and dark, and they said, “At this point, everything but breathing air is a privilege. Food is a privilege. Clothes are a privilege. Having a bed is a privilege.” And so the guards began to say, “Here are the new rules. And the new rules are you are dangerous and we are going to treat you as such.” And then, it began to escalate. Each day, the level of abuse, aggression, violence against prisoners got more and more extreme.
And so the guards changed to become more dominant, and, you see, it's all about power. It's the whole institution that empowers the guards who are the representative of this institution called prison to do whatever is necessary to prevent prisoners from escaping, maintain law and order.
GUARD 2: Keep going. Once I was blind.
PRISONER 1: (Singing) Once, I was blind.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: The way -- the direction it took was having them engage in ever more humiliating tasks, cleaning toilet bowls out with their bare hands, taking their blankets and putting them in dirt with nettles, and the prisoner had to spend hours taking the nettles out if they wanted to, you know, sleep. And it's essentially saying, “We have the power to create a totally arbitrary, mindless environment, and that's the environment you have to live in.”
So some of the prisoners are now crushed. And in 36 hours, the first kid has an emotional breakdown meaning crying, screaming, irrational thinking.
PRISONER 2: I've got to go to a doctor, anything. I want out! I want out now! Goddamnit!
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: And we have to release him. In 5 days, we had to release five of the prisoners because the situation was so overwhelming.
What about the kids who didn't break down? They became zombies, zombies in the sense that they became almost all mindlessly obedient. Whatever the guards would say, they did. Do this, they did. “Do 10 pushups. Do 20 pushups. Step on him while he's doing pushups. Tell him he's a bastard.”
PRISONERS: Prisoner 819 did a bad thing. Prisoner 819 did a bad thing.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: It was horrifying to see the kids break down. It was even more horrifying to see these other kids just become mindlessly obedient.
PRISONERS: Because of what pr.
TranscriptsClassic Studies in Psychology216. Stanford Pris.docx
Transcripts
Classic Studies in Psychology
2
16. Stanford Prison Experiment Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Steve Taylor, Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Male
(Music)
DR. STEVE TAYLOR: If you go to Google and type in the word "Experiment," one of the first things you'll see is the Stanford Prison Experiment. It's probably the best known psychological study of all time.
It all began in West Coast America on a summer's day back in 1971, when college students grew their hair long, protested against their government, were pro-peace and totally anti-authority, or so we thought until Philip Zimbardo.
(Music)
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: So the Stanford Prison Study very simply is an attempt to see what happens when you put really good people in a bad place.
We put an ad in the city newspaper, wanted students for study of prison life lasting up to 2 weeks. We're going to pay you $15 a day. This is back in 1971. It's pretty good money, and we picked 75 volunteers, gave them a battery of psychological tests, and we picked two dozen who in all dimensions were normal and healthy to begin with. And then we did what is critical for all research. We randomly assigned half of them to the role of playing guards or the role of playing prisoners. It's literally like flipping a coin.
And then what we did is we told the guards, “Come down a day early,” and we had them pick their own uniform. We had them help set up the prison so they'd feel like it was their prison, and the prisoners were coming into their place. The prisoners, we simply said, “Wait at home in the dormitories.” Well, what we didn't tell them, which is a little bit of the deception of omission, is that they were arrested by the city police.
MALE: Right there, they took me out the door. They put my hands against the car. It was a real cop car. It was a real policeman that took me to the police station, the basement of the police station.
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: I had told the policeman to put a blindfold on the prisoners. Since they had never been arrested, they didn't know that doesn't happen. The reason for the blindfold is my assistants would come, put them in our car, bring them down to our prison, and they'd be in our prison now blindfolded. The guards would strip them naked, delouse them, pretending that they were lice. It's kind of a degradation ritual. And after the first day, I was about to end it because nothing was happening.
[End of audio]
From “Classic Studies in Psychology.” Copyright 2012 by Films Media Group. All rights reserved. Adapted with permission.
17. Rebellion Transcript
Speakers: Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Guard 1, Guard 2, Prisoner 1, Prisoner 2, Prisoners
DR. PHILIP ZIMBARDO: But the next day, on the morning of the next day, the prisoners rebelled. And what the guards did, they came to me and said, “The prisoners are rebelling. What are we going to do?” I said, “It's your prison, whatever you want. I will do it, but you've got to tell me.” And they said, “We have to treat force with for ...
The role of “ ROLE” in our life. (Zimbardo Experiment)
the experiment is about Deindividuation. it's called The stanford prison experiment done by Philip Zimbardo.
Groups- Obedience_Stanford Prison
Philip Zimbardo conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment in 1971 to study the behaviors of people in a simulated prison environment. 24 male college students were selected and randomly assigned to be either guards or prisoners. The experiment was intended to last two weeks but had to be stopped after only six days. Both the "guards" and "prisoners" had quickly adapted their behaviors to fully embrace their artificial roles, with guards becoming increasingly cruel and prisoners descending into emotional distress. The experiment demonstrated how situational forces can override individual personality traits and lead ordinary people to act in extreme, sometimes abusive ways when given situational power over others.
Byline PHILIP G. ZIMBARDOBy the 1970s, psychologists had .docx
Byline: PHILIP G. ZIMBARDO
By the 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social- psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior -- personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing -- directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were caught up in the mental constraints of cognitive dissonance -- the discomfort from holding two conflicting thoughts -- and were unable to cut bait even though it was the only rational strategy to save lives and face. Those examples, however, with their different personalities, political agendas, and motives, complicated any simple conceptual attempt to understand what went wrong in these situations.
I decided that what was needed was to create a situation in a controlled experimental setting in which we could array on one side a host of variables, such as role-playing, coercive rules, power differentials, anonymity, group dynamics, and dehumanization. On the other side, we lined up a collection of the "best and brightest" of young college men in coll ...
Pamela Dollar Stanford Prison Experiment 1971
The Stanford prison experiment was a study conducted in 1971 that examined the psychological effects of assigning college students to play the roles of prisoners and guards in a mock prison. The experiment quickly spiraled out of control as the participants adapted too strongly to their roles. The guards began to exhibit sadistic behavior and abuse their power over the prisoners. The experiment was ended after only 6 days instead of the planned 2 weeks due to the unethical treatment of prisoners and risks to their psychological well-being. The results demonstrated how situational roles and environments can strongly influence human behavior rather than individual personality traits alone.
Stanford Prison Experiment Analysis
The document discusses similarities between The Lord of the Flies novel and the Stanford Prison Experiment film, noting they both show how important power can be in desperate times and how it can change a person. It provides background on the Stanford Prison Experiment conducted in 1971 by Philip Zimbardo at Stanford University, which investigated the psychological effects of roles as prisoners and guards. Throughout, the document examines how both the novel and experiment demonstrate that it is human nature to abuse power when given the opportunity.
The stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study in the 1970s that investigated the psychological effects of perceived authority and social roles. In the study, researchers recruited college students to take on roles of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison. The experiment rapidly escalated as the guards enforced authoritarian control over the prisoners through humiliation, punishment, and isolation. Within days, prisoners began suffering emotional breakdowns while the guards enforced their power with escalating cruelty and abuse. The experiment was ended early when a graduate student observed its negative psychological impacts had made it unethical to continue.
The stanford prison experiment
The Stanford Prison Experiment was a study in the 1970s that investigated the psychological effects of perceived authority and social roles. In the study, researchers recruited college students to take on roles of either prisoners or guards in a mock prison. The experiment quickly spiraled out of control as the guards enforced authoritarian rules and punished prisoners, while the prisoners began suffering from emotional distress. The study had to be ended early due to one prisoner having an emotional breakdown. The researchers realized they had lost control of the situation and ethical boundaries had been crossed.
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1:
The Stanford University Prison Experiment: Structure, Behavior, and Results
Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford University Prison Experiment could be described as a system whose systemic properties enabled the behaviors of the system's actors, leading to disturbing results.
Analyze the situation. What were the key elements of the system? How did the system operate? Why did the participants behave as they did? What lessons can be learned from this experiment about systems in relation to management?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
Be six pages in length.
Be formatted according to the APA
Include at least seven scholarly or peer-reviewed articles.
Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007).
Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of situation (Links to an external site.)
.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(
30), B6.
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people su.
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1:
The Stanford University Prison Experiment: Structure, Behavior, and Results
Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford University Prison Experiment could be described as a system whose systemic properties enabled the behaviors of the system's actors, leading to disturbing results.
Analyze the situation. What were the key elements of the system? How did the system operate? Why did the participants behave as they did? What lessons can be learned from this experiment about systems in relation to management?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
Be six pages in length.
Be formatted according to the APA
Include at least seven scholarly or peer-reviewed articles.
Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007).
Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: A lesson in the power of situation (Links to an external site.)
.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(
30), B6.
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people su.
Chapter 8 “ Stanley Milgram and the Shock Machine” (1).pdf
Stanley Milgram conducted controversial experiments in the 1960s where participants believed they were administering electric shocks to another person for incorrect answers on a memory test. In reality, no shocks were given. Surprisingly, 65% of participants continued administering shocks up to the maximum of 450 volts. Milgram's experiments showed that ordinary people could be made to inflict harm through blind obedience to authority figures, and helped explain how atrocities like the Holocaust could occur. However, later analysis found that Milgram may have pressured and coerced participants, and doubts were raised about whether participants truly believed the shocks were real.
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C
Option #1:
Stanford University Prison Experiment: Causality, Controlling Patterns, and Growth Mode
Revisit Philip Zimbardo's (1971) Stanford University Prison Experiment. Analyze the experiment in terms of causality, controlling patterns, and its growth mode.
What lessons can be learned from this experiment that can be generalized to business social systems, such as organizational design/organizational structures?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
· Be 5 pages in length.
· Be formatted according to APA
· Include at least five scholarly or peer-reviewed articles
· Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation
~~~~~~~~
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were ...
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C.docx
Option #1:
Stanford University Prison Experiment: Causality, Controlling Patterns, and Growth Mode
Revisit Philip Zimbardo's (1971) Stanford University Prison Experiment. Analyze the experiment in terms of causality, controlling patterns, and its growth mode.
What lessons can be learned from this experiment that can be generalized to business social systems, such as organizational design/organizational structures?
Your well-written paper should meet the following requirements:
· Be 5 pages in length.
· Be formatted according to APA
· Include at least five scholarly or peer-reviewed articles
· Include a title page, section headers, introduction, conclusion, and references page.
Reference:
Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: a Lesson in the Power of Situation
~~~~~~~~
BY THE 1970s, psychologists had done a series of studies establishing the social power of groups. They showed, for example, that groups of strangers could persuade people to believe statements that were obviously false. Psychologists had also found that research participants were often willing to obey authority figures even when doing so violated their personal beliefs. The Yale studies by Stanley Milgram in 1963 demonstrated that a majority of ordinary citizens would continually shock an innocent man, even up to near-lethal levels, if commanded to do so by someone acting as an authority. The "authority" figure in this case was merely a high-school biology teacher who wore a lab coat and acted in an official manner. The majority of people shocked their victims over and over again despite increasingly desperate pleas to stop.
In my own work, I wanted to explore the fictional notion from William Golding's Lord of the Flies about the power of anonymity to unleash violent behavior. In one experiment from 1969, female students who were made to feel anonymous and given permission for aggression became significantly more hostile than students with their identities intact. Those and a host of other social-psychological studies were showing that human nature was more pliable than previously imagined and more responsive to situational pressures than we cared to acknowledge. In sum, these studies challenged the sacrosanct view that inner determinants of behavior--personality traits, morality, and religious upbringing--directed good people down righteous paths.
Missing from the body of social-science research at the time was the direct confrontation of good versus evil, of good people pitted against the forces inherent in bad situations. It was evident from everyday life that smart people made dumb decisions when they were engaged in mindless groupthink, as in the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion by the smart guys in President John F. Kennedy's cabinet. It was also clear that smart people surrounding President Richard M. Nixon, like Henry A. Kissinger and Robert S. McNamara, escalated the Vietnam War when they knew, and later admitted, it was not winnable. They were .
Zimbardo's Experiment : The Stanford Prison Experiment
The Stanford prison experiment (SPE) was an attempt to investigate the psychological effects of perceived 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.
Prison experiment zimbaredo jordan carer
The document summarizes key aspects of the Stanford Prison Experiment. Participants were selected through newspaper ads and screened for psychological and medical issues. 24 students were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners. The fake prison was created in the basement with cells and a yard area. Prisoners wore uniforms without underclothes and had ID numbers instead of names. Guards had no training and created their own rules. On the second day, prisoners rebelled but were put down forcefully by guards who began harsher treatment like solitary confinement and withholding of privileges. A rumored escape plot increased tensions but did not actually occur. The experiment was cancelled after only 6 days due to concerns about the treatment of prisoners.
The Milgram Experimentby Saul McLeod published 2007Milgram sel.docx
The Milgram Experiment
by Saul McLeod published 2007
Milgram selected participants for his experiment by newspaper advertising for male participants to take part in a study of learning at Yale University. The procedure was that the participant was paired with another person and they drew lots to find out who would be the ‘learner’ and who would be the ‘teacher’. The draw was fixed so that the participant was always the teacher, and the learner was one of Milgram’s confederates (pretending to be a real participant).
The learner (a confederate called Mr. Wallace) was taken into a room and had electrodes attached to his arms, and the teacher and researcher went into a room next door that contained an electric shock generator and a row of switches marked from 15 volts (Slight Shock) to 375 volts (Danger: Severe Shock) to 450 volts (XXX).
Milgram's Experiment
Procedure:
At the beginning of the experiment, each participant was introduced to another participant, who was actually a confederate of the experimenter (Milgram). They drew straws to determine their roles – learner or teacher – although this was fixed and the confederate was always the learner. There was also an “experimenter” dressed in a grey lab coat, played by an actor (not Milgram).
Two rooms in the Yale Interaction Laboratory were used - one for the learner (with an electric chair) and another for the teacher and experimenter with an electric shock generator.
The “learner” (Mr. Wallace) was strapped to a chair with electrodes. After he has learned a list of word pairs given him to learn, the "teacher" tests him by naming a word and asking the learner to recall its partner/pair from a list of four possible choices.
The teacher is told to administer an electric shock every time the learner makes a mistake, increasing the level of shock each time. There were 30 switches on the shock generator marked from 15 volts (slight shock) to 450 (danger – severe shock).
The learner gave mainly wrong answers (on purpose) and for each of these the teacher gave him an electric shock. When the teacher refused to administer a shock the experimenter was to give a series of orders / prods to ensure they continued. There were 4 prods and if one was not obeyed then the experimenter (Mr. Williams) read out the next prod, and so on.
Prod 1: please continue.
Prod 2: the experiment requires you to continue.
Prod 3: It is absolutely essential that you continue.
Prod 4: you have no other choice but to continue.
Results:
65% of all the participants (teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts. Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study. All he did was alter the situation (IV) to see how this affected obedience (DV).
Conclusion:
Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being. Obedience to authority is ingrained in us all from the way.
Similar to standford (18)
Rebellion TranscriptClassic Studies in Psychology2Rebellio.docx
Rebellion TranscriptClassic Studies in Psychology2Rebellio.docx
TranscriptsClassic Studies in Psychology216. Stanford Pris.docx
TranscriptsClassic Studies in Psychology216. Stanford Pris.docx
The role of “ ROLE” in our life. (Zimbardo Experiment)
The role of “ ROLE” in our life. (Zimbardo Experiment)
Byline PHILIP G. ZIMBARDOBy the 1970s, psychologists had .docx
Byline PHILIP G. ZIMBARDOBy the 1970s, psychologists had .docx
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Option #1The Stanford University Prison Experiment Structu.docx
Chapter 8 “ Stanley Milgram and the Shock Machine” (1).pdf
Chapter 8 “ Stanley Milgram and the Shock Machine” (1).pdf
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C.docx
Option #1 Stanford University Prison Experiment Causality, C.docx
Zimbardo's Experiment : The Stanford Prison Experiment
Zimbardo's Experiment : The Stanford Prison Experiment
The Milgram Experimentby Saul McLeod published 2007Milgram sel.docx
The Milgram Experimentby Saul McLeod published 2007Milgram sel.docx
Recently uploaded
Digital Marketing Trends in 2024 | Guide for Staying Ahead
https://www.wask.co/ebooks/digital-marketing-trends-in-2024
Feeling lost in the digital marketing whirlwind of 2024? Technology is changing, consumer habits are evolving, and staying ahead of the curve feels like a never-ending pursuit. This e-book is your compass. Dive into actionable insights to handle the complexities of modern marketing. From hyper-personalization to the power of user-generated content, learn how to build long-term relationships with your audience and unlock the secrets to success in the ever-shifting digital landscape.
Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing.pdf
Read Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing to gain insights on AI adoption in the manufacturing industry, such as:
1. How quickly AI is being implemented in manufacturing.
2. Which barriers stand in the way of AI adoption.
3. How data quality and governance form the backbone of AI.
4. Organizational processes and structures that may inhibit effective AI adoption.
6. Ideas and approaches to help build your organization's AI strategy.
dbms calicut university B. sc Cs 4th sem.pdf
Its a seminar ppt on database management system using sql
Fueling AI with Great Data with Airbyte Webinar
This talk will focus on how to collect data from a variety of sources, leveraging this data for RAG and other GenAI use cases, and finally charting your course to productionalization.
AWS Cloud Cost Optimization Presentation.pptx
This presentation provides valuable insights into effective cost-saving techniques on AWS. Learn how to optimize your AWS resources by rightsizing, increasing elasticity, picking the right storage class, and choosing the best pricing model. Additionally, discover essential governance mechanisms to ensure continuous cost efficiency. Whether you are new to AWS or an experienced user, this presentation provides clear and practical tips to help you reduce your cloud costs and get the most out of your budget.
Salesforce Integration for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions A...
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on integration of Salesforce with Bonterra Impact Management.
Interested in deploying an integration with Salesforce for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
Your One-Stop Shop for Python Success: Top 10 US Python Development Providers
Simplify your search for a reliable Python development partner! This list presents the top 10 trusted US providers offering comprehensive Python development services, ensuring your project's success from conception to completion.
Best 20 SEO Techniques To Improve Website Visibility In SERP
Boost your website's visibility with proven SEO techniques! Our latest blog dives into essential strategies to enhance your online presence, increase traffic, and rank higher on search engines. From keyword optimization to quality content creation, learn how to make your site stand out in the crowded digital landscape. Discover actionable tips and expert insights to elevate your SEO game.
Unlock the Future of Search with MongoDB Atlas_ Vector Search Unleashed.pdf
Discover how MongoDB Atlas and vector search technology can revolutionize your application's search capabilities. This comprehensive presentation covers:
* What is Vector Search?
* Importance and benefits of vector search
* Practical use cases across various industries
* Step-by-step implementation guide
* Live demos with code snippets
* Enhancing LLM capabilities with vector search
* Best practices and optimization strategies
Perfect for developers, AI enthusiasts, and tech leaders. Learn how to leverage MongoDB Atlas to deliver highly relevant, context-aware search results, transforming your data retrieval process. Stay ahead in tech innovation and maximize the potential of your applications.
#MongoDB #VectorSearch #AI #SemanticSearch #TechInnovation #DataScience #LLM #MachineLearning #SearchTechnology
HCL Notes and Domino License Cost Reduction in the World of DLAU
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-and-domino-license-cost-reduction-in-the-world-of-dlau/
The introduction of DLAU and the CCB & CCX licensing model caused quite a stir in the HCL community. As a Notes and Domino customer, you may have faced challenges with unexpected user counts and license costs. You probably have questions on how this new licensing approach works and how to benefit from it. Most importantly, you likely have budget constraints and want to save money where possible. Don’t worry, we can help with all of this!
We’ll show you how to fix common misconfigurations that cause higher-than-expected user counts, and how to identify accounts which you can deactivate to save money. There are also frequent patterns that can cause unnecessary cost, like using a person document instead of a mail-in for shared mailboxes. We’ll provide examples and solutions for those as well. And naturally we’ll explain the new licensing model.
Join HCL Ambassador Marc Thomas in this webinar with a special guest appearance from Franz Walder. It will give you the tools and know-how to stay on top of what is going on with Domino licensing. You will be able lower your cost through an optimized configuration and keep it low going forward.
These topics will be covered
- Reducing license cost by finding and fixing misconfigurations and superfluous accounts
- How do CCB and CCX licenses really work?
- Understanding the DLAU tool and how to best utilize it
- Tips for common problem areas, like team mailboxes, functional/test users, etc
- Practical examples and best practices to implement right away
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAU
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-und-domino-lizenzkostenreduzierung-in-der-welt-von-dlau/
DLAU und die Lizenzen nach dem CCB- und CCX-Modell sind für viele in der HCL-Community seit letztem Jahr ein heißes Thema. Als Notes- oder Domino-Kunde haben Sie vielleicht mit unerwartet hohen Benutzerzahlen und Lizenzgebühren zu kämpfen. Sie fragen sich vielleicht, wie diese neue Art der Lizenzierung funktioniert und welchen Nutzen sie Ihnen bringt. Vor allem wollen Sie sicherlich Ihr Budget einhalten und Kosten sparen, wo immer möglich. Das verstehen wir und wir möchten Ihnen dabei helfen!
Wir erklären Ihnen, wie Sie häufige Konfigurationsprobleme lösen können, die dazu führen können, dass mehr Benutzer gezählt werden als nötig, und wie Sie überflüssige oder ungenutzte Konten identifizieren und entfernen können, um Geld zu sparen. Es gibt auch einige Ansätze, die zu unnötigen Ausgaben führen können, z. B. wenn ein Personendokument anstelle eines Mail-Ins für geteilte Mailboxen verwendet wird. Wir zeigen Ihnen solche Fälle und deren Lösungen. Und natürlich erklären wir Ihnen das neue Lizenzmodell.
Nehmen Sie an diesem Webinar teil, bei dem HCL-Ambassador Marc Thomas und Gastredner Franz Walder Ihnen diese neue Welt näherbringen. Es vermittelt Ihnen die Tools und das Know-how, um den Überblick zu bewahren. Sie werden in der Lage sein, Ihre Kosten durch eine optimierte Domino-Konfiguration zu reduzieren und auch in Zukunft gering zu halten.
Diese Themen werden behandelt
- Reduzierung der Lizenzkosten durch Auffinden und Beheben von Fehlkonfigurationen und überflüssigen Konten
- Wie funktionieren CCB- und CCX-Lizenzen wirklich?
- Verstehen des DLAU-Tools und wie man es am besten nutzt
- Tipps für häufige Problembereiche, wie z. B. Team-Postfächer, Funktions-/Testbenutzer usw.
- Praxisbeispiele und Best Practices zum sofortigen Umsetzen
Letter and Document Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Sol...
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on automated letter generation for Bonterra Impact Management using Google Workspace or Microsoft 365.
Interested in deploying letter generation automations for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
Artificial Intelligence for XMLDevelopment
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technologies, XML continues to play a vital role in structuring, storing, and transporting data across diverse systems. The recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) present new methodologies for enhancing XML development workflows, introducing efficiency, automation, and intelligent capabilities. This presentation will outline the scope and perspective of utilizing AI in XML development. The potential benefits and the possible pitfalls will be highlighted, providing a balanced view of the subject.
We will explore the capabilities of AI in understanding XML markup languages and autonomously creating structured XML content. Additionally, we will examine the capacity of AI to enrich plain text with appropriate XML markup. Practical examples and methodological guidelines will be provided to elucidate how AI can be effectively prompted to interpret and generate accurate XML markup.
Further emphasis will be placed on the role of AI in developing XSLT, or schemas such as XSD and Schematron. We will address the techniques and strategies adopted to create prompts for generating code, explaining code, or refactoring the code, and the results achieved.
The discussion will extend to how AI can be used to transform XML content. In particular, the focus will be on the use of AI XPath extension functions in XSLT, Schematron, Schematron Quick Fixes, or for XML content refactoring.
The presentation aims to deliver a comprehensive overview of AI usage in XML development, providing attendees with the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Whether you’re at the early stages of adopting AI or considering integrating it in advanced XML development, this presentation will cover all levels of expertise.
By highlighting the potential advantages and challenges of integrating AI with XML development tools and languages, the presentation seeks to inspire thoughtful conversation around the future of XML development. We’ll not only delve into the technical aspects of AI-powered XML development but also discuss practical implications and possible future directions.
System Design Case Study: Building a Scalable E-Commerce Platform - Hiike
This case study explores designing a scalable e-commerce platform, covering key requirements, system components, and best practices.
How to Interpret Trends in the Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart.pdf
A Mix Chart displays historical data of numbers in a graphical or tabular form. The Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart specifically shows the results of a sequence of numbers over different periods.
Azure API Management to expose backend services securely
How to use Azure API Management to expose backend service securely
Choosing The Best AWS Service For Your Website + API.pptx
Have you ever been confused by the myriad of choices offered by AWS for hosting a website or an API?
Lambda, Elastic Beanstalk, Lightsail, Amplify, S3 (and more!) can each host websites + APIs. But which one should we choose?
Which one is cheapest? Which one is fastest? Which one will scale to meet our needs?
Join me in this session as we dive into each AWS hosting service to determine which one is best for your scenario and explain why!
Recently uploaded (20)
Digital Marketing Trends in 2024 | Guide for Staying Ahead
Digital Marketing Trends in 2024 | Guide for Staying Ahead
Overcoming the PLG Trap: Lessons from Canva's Head of Sales & Head of EMEA Da...
Overcoming the PLG Trap: Lessons from Canva's Head of Sales & Head of EMEA Da...
Salesforce Integration for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions A...
Salesforce Integration for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions A...
Your One-Stop Shop for Python Success: Top 10 US Python Development Providers
Your One-Stop Shop for Python Success: Top 10 US Python Development Providers
Deep Dive: Getting Funded with Jason Jason Lemkin Founder & CEO @ SaaStr
Deep Dive: Getting Funded with Jason Jason Lemkin Founder & CEO @ SaaStr
Best 20 SEO Techniques To Improve Website Visibility In SERP
Best 20 SEO Techniques To Improve Website Visibility In SERP
Unlock the Future of Search with MongoDB Atlas_ Vector Search Unleashed.pdf
Unlock the Future of Search with MongoDB Atlas_ Vector Search Unleashed.pdf
HCL Notes and Domino License Cost Reduction in the World of DLAU
HCL Notes and Domino License Cost Reduction in the World of DLAU
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAU
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAU
Letter and Document Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Sol...
Letter and Document Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Sol...
System Design Case Study: Building a Scalable E-Commerce Platform - Hiike
System Design Case Study: Building a Scalable E-Commerce Platform - Hiike
How to Interpret Trends in the Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart.pdf
How to Interpret Trends in the Kalyan Rajdhani Mix Chart.pdf
Azure API Management to expose backend services securely
Azure API Management to expose backend services securely
Choosing The Best AWS Service For Your Website + API.pptx
Choosing The Best AWS Service For Your Website + API.pptx
Nordic Marketo Engage User Group_June 13_ 2024.pptx
Nordic Marketo Engage User Group_June 13_ 2024.pptx
standford
- 2. “Situational variables can exert powerful influences over human behavior – More so than we recognize or acknowledge” ~ Philip Zimbardo – Origins of experiment – How the experiment unfolded – What led to the abrupt ending
- 3. – 7o volunteers – Waiver signed – Professor Zimbardo assigned himself the role of prison superintendent
- 4. - Arrested by Palo Alto Police Department - Stripped, searched, and given nightgowns - Many “counts” and pushups Other than the guards disturbing the prisoners throughout the night it was relatively uneventful until morning...
- 5. On the second morning the prisoners retaliated Solidarity formed between the guards Prisoners began to distrust each other
- 6. “There was zero time for refleciton. We had to feed the prisoners three meals a day, deal with the prisoner breakdowns... By the third day I was sleeping in my office. I had become the superintendent of Stanford County Prison.” ~ Zimbardo, Stanford Magazine
- 7. Meanwhile, the abuse of the guards was continuing to escalate in the form of taking away toilet privileges, blindfolding, stripping, and physical activity. An actual priest came to talk to the prisoners. By this point the prisoners had lost their real identities and introduced themselves as their prison number. Prisoner 819 wanted a doctor instead of a priest. When they finally got him to come out and talk her broke down. “819 is a bad prisoner”
- 8. Parol Hearing 'If you were to be paroled, would you be willing to give back all of the money you have earned so far?' Most said yes
- 9. Zimbardo ended the experiment on the sixth day –Videotapes –Christina Maslach
- 10. Looking back... The newspaper ad began the whole thing. The five days of the study was filled with abuse, loss of identity, and emotional breakdowns Finally, the study ended on the sixth day after Zimbardo's girlfriend saw the cruelty.
- 11. “ Is permeable and almost anyone can be induced to cross it when pressured by situational forces” ~Philip Zimbardo