The results of the "Stanford Prison Experiment" are being widely applied as an explanation of the events at Abu Graihb. Frankly, I see the basis of this application as only a superficial extension of the standard "power of the situation" argument. Otherwise there are many differences between the two cases.
I am not, and have never been, impressed with the Stanford Prison Experiment *as an experiment.* The continued citation of this work seems to violate everything that we try to teach students in research methods classes. The procedure seems replete with the opportunity for subjects to pick up role-playing cues from the experimenters. The dependent measures are very loose and subject to selective attention by the experimenters. There has been no systematic replication and extension of the work by independent researchers. What is the theoretical and practical legacy of this work beyond a "power of the situation" demonstration?
Sure there is a great video and lots of attention-capturing anecdotes for sleepy undergrads. But aren't we trying to teach our students to be wary of basing conclusions using this type of information?
I invite psychology instructors to skip the textbook descriptions, to read the original article and decide whether its fame is due to good titillation or to good science.
Here is a link to the original article in pdf format:
http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/ijcp1973.pdf
Ken
--------------------------------------------------------------- Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu Appalachian State University Boone, NC 28608 USA ---------------------------------------------------------------
--- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
