What the Stanford prison experiment really tells us about tyrants

[Disir]

....Zimbardo’s experiment was supposed to last two weeks but was cut short just six days later, after a string of mental breakdowns, an outbreak of sadism and a hunger strike.

Now, the Stanford prison experiment's central conclusion, the so-called Lucifer effect — that when placed in toxic situations, good people will inevitably turn bad — has been challenged by a University of Queensland (UQ) researcher.

Professor Alex Haslam from the UQ School of Psychology says recently digitised tapes from the experiment call into question the study's original conclusions.
What the Stanford prison experiment really tells us about tyrants

That's an interesting article on an update.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It's been a little while since I've revisted this as well as the Milgram experiments but everyone should read up and familiarize themselves with both

The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, men from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a "learner." These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.[2]

The experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of men would fully obey the instructions, albeit reluctantly. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[3]

The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University,[4] three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the popular contemporary question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"[5] The experiment was repeated many times around the globe, with fairly consistent results.[6]

Milgram experiment - Wikipedia​

 

[2aguy]

....Zimbardo’s experiment was supposed to last two weeks but was cut short just six days later, after a string of mental breakdowns, an outbreak of sadism and a hunger strike.

Now, the Stanford prison experiment's central conclusion, the so-called Lucifer effect — that when placed in toxic situations, good people will inevitably turn bad — has been challenged by a University of Queensland (UQ) researcher.

Professor Alex Haslam from the UQ School of Psychology says recently digitised tapes from the experiment call into question the study's original conclusions.
What the Stanford prison experiment really tells us about tyrants

That's an interesting article on an update.

The Stanford experiment was fake...... it was just revealed a few weeks ago that the "inmates" were having fun, knowing that they couldn't be hurt, and that the "guards" were encouraged to be mean to the inmates.... by the guy in charge of the research...

It was a hoax all the way around...

 

[2aguy]

....Zimbardo’s experiment was supposed to last two weeks but was cut short just six days later, after a string of mental breakdowns, an outbreak of sadism and a hunger strike.

Now, the Stanford prison experiment's central conclusion, the so-called Lucifer effect — that when placed in toxic situations, good people will inevitably turn bad — has been challenged by a University of Queensland (UQ) researcher.

Professor Alex Haslam from the UQ School of Psychology says recently digitised tapes from the experiment call into question the study's original conclusions.
What the Stanford prison experiment really tells us about tyrants

That's an interesting article on an update.

the Stanford Experiment was a hoax.....

The Stanford Prison Experiment was massively influential. We just learned it was a fraud.

A new exposé published by Medium based on previously unpublished recordings of Philip Zimbardo, the Stanford psychologist who ran the study, and interviews with his participants, offers convincing evidence that the guards in the experiment were coached to be cruel.

It also shows that the experiment’s most memorable moment — of a prisoner descending into a screaming fit, proclaiming, “I’m burning up inside!” — was the result of the prisoner acting. “I took it as a kind of an improv exercise,” one of the guards told reporter Ben Blum. “I believed that I was doing what the researchers wanted me to do.”

 

[2aguy]

It's been a little while since I've revisted this as well as the Milgram experiments but everyone should read up and familiarize themselves with both

The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, men from a diverse range of occupations with varying levels of education, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Participants were led to believe that they were assisting an unrelated experiment, in which they had to administer electric shocks to a "learner." These fake electric shocks gradually increased to levels that would have been fatal had they been real.[2]

The experiment found, unexpectedly, that a very high proportion of men would fully obey the instructions, albeit reluctantly. Milgram first described his research in a 1963 article in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[3]

The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University,[4] three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the popular contemporary question: "Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?"[5] The experiment was repeated many times around the globe, with fairly consistent results.[6]

Milgram experiment - Wikipedia​

Yeah...this was fake too....

Did Stanley Milgram's Famous Obedience Experiments Prove Anything?

Perry heard Milgram’s experimenter improvising, roaming further and further off script, coaxing or, depending on your point of view, coercing participants into continuing. Inconsistency in the standards meant that the line between obedience and disobedience was shifting from subject to subject, and from variation to variation—and that the famous 65 percent compliance rate had less to do with human nature than with arbitrary semantic distinctions.

The wrinkles in Milgram’s research kept revealing themselves. Perhaps most damningly, after Perry tracked down one of Milgram’s research analysts, she found reason to believe that most of his subjects had actually seen through the deception. They knew, in other words, that they were taking part in a low-stakes charade.

 

[strollingbones]

poor guy its all fake unless it has to do with guns

 

[2aguy]

poor guy its all fake unless it has to do with guns

Hey, dumb shit...did you read the articles......?

Try reading the links, you will post with more intelligence...