MLO 5 Values

This outcome demonstrates the interdisciplinarity of the major, especially through its emphasis on ethics and respect for science. Students weigh evidence, tolerate ambiguity, act ethically and reflect other values underpinning psychology. Outcomes include understanding the need for ethical behavior, tolerance of ambiguity, demonstration of skepticism and intellectual curiosity, attunement to scientific evidence, civic responsibility and respect for human diversity.

Ethical or Unethical?

Accomplished Course for Values
• PSY 100 Introduction to Psychology
•PSY 302 Research Methods
• PSY 350 Social Psychology

To the conclusion of the MLOs, in this point of my college career I have gained sufficient knowledge in the context of Psychology. Due to this outcome I have demonstrated the interdisciplinary of this major, especially through its emphasis on ethics and respect of science. Granted that, this leads to the final MLO which consist of the understanding of the values in psychology. To get a better sense of this MLO I was enrolled in three different courses that paved the way for me to the understanding of the values. The courses I enrolled that helped me with understanding were Psychology 100, Psychology 302 Research Methods and Psychology 350 Social Psychology. These courses were able to challenge me in addressing the scientific study of behavior and mental process through the exploration of major theories and concepts, methods and research findings in the field of psychology. In psychology 100 we covered various subfields such as biological bases of behavior, perception, cognition, learning, emotion and motivation, development, personality, social psychology, psychological disorders and therapies, and the application of psychology to contemporary social issues. On the other hand, Psychology 302 research methods covered the basis of understanding previous research and the differentiating on what is ethical and unethical in conducting our own experiment. Lastly, Psychology 350 emphasized in the understanding of social psychology as a scientific area in the discipline of psychology that help me seek an understanding of how people feel, think, and behave in social situations through the introduction of theories, research methods and seminal findings of social psychology. The purpose of this essay is to elaborate on my completion of MLO 5 as I weigh evidence, tolerance towards ambiguity, the ability to act ethically and reflect on other values underpinning psychology. This essay will take a closer look at the Stanford Prison experiment in correlation to the codes of ethics and general principles and concluding the study in differentiating whether or not the study was ethical or unethical.
The Stanford Prison Experiment’s objective was to study the behavioral and psychological consequences of becoming a prisoner or a guard. Philip Zimbardo sought out to investigate the outcomes and effects of when good people are placed into an evil environment. He did this by designing a simulated prison that was made up of twenty four male volunteers. Of the twenty four volunteers, ten were prisoners and eleven were guards. The others were placed on standby as backups. All of the applicants in the study were first tested and cleared for all/any physical and mental effects, prior to being selected. They were then all observed through audio, interviews, recordings, surveys, and questionnaires.
The variables under examination in this study were the prisoners and the guards. All subjects were examined and studied under close surveillance and examination. The prisoners were under constant surveillance twenty-four hours daily. The guards on the other hand were able to return and carry on with their daily lives, after completing their daily hourly shift.
The independent variables were the assigned roles of being a guard versus being a prisoner. The dependent variables were the alterations and changes in behaviors of the subjects. It is also important to note that Philip Zimbardo himself took on the role of being the superintendent of the prison. The prisoners and guards were all closely measured with interviews, surveillance cameras, audiotapes, and surveys. The subjects were later debriefed, when the experiment was forced to come to an end.
In addition, Dr. Zimbardo stated his believes in the Stanford Prison Documentary film viewed in all three courses, that the behavior in the prison systems could be explained using situational attribution. He notes that it is the conditions themselves that influence and persuade one’s social roles. The prison system itself is thought to be the origin of prison violence and destructive behaviors, for those involved in the prison system. It is believed that the prisoner or guards’ behavior was based on the expectations on how one thought they should behave. They were simply role playing societies stereotypes of guard and prisoner. Zimbardo was investigating his hypothesis if situational influences could in fact transform individuals who are placed into evil settings.
Random assignment was important to the design of this study because Zimbardo wanted to attest that the roles were assigned and given merely by chance. There was no precise motive or reason to why one was given the role of a guard or to why one was chosen as prisoner. The roles were assigned and determined the day before the experiment went underway. Zimbardo did this to confirm that it was the situation itself that would alter one’s behavior and not the characteristics of the individual.
The screening procedures were important to this design because Zimbardo wanted to rule out effects of personality characteristics. Those that suffered from psychological abnormalities, medical disabilities, or had had a history of crime or drug use were not candidates for this particular experiment. All twenty-four males chosen were healthy, normal, intelligent, middle class, educated college students, and were from various regions of the United States. Zimbardo emphasizes that the males manipulated in the Stanford Prison Experiment were all normal and healthy in every way possible. This was important to Zimbardo and to the psychologists because they wanted the males to be able to rebound quickly back to the position of mental and physical health, after being taken out of the simulated prison. They wanted the subjects to be able to continue to lead normal and healthy lives. It is of significance to note that at the start of the experiment, there were no psychological differences between the guards and that of the prisoners.
Philip Zimbardo and his team of psychologists were astonished at the significant concluding results from the Stanford Prison Experiment. Although the sample size was small, twenty one, the findings were immense. Zimbardo and his team of psychologists did not expect such profound results. All participants, including Zimbardo himself, could not distinguish simulation from reality. The experiment became real to them and all members fell into the assigned roles. The influences were compelling and for some life changing.
The independent variable, the assigned roles of prisoner and guard, became the individual. The prisoners no longer referred to themselves by characteristics, names, social class, background, or by their values. This became evident during the interviews, when the prisoners identified themselves by their issued prisoner number and not by name. Zimbardo also offered some prisoners to be released early and they had firmly refused. The participants chose to continue with the planned fourteen day experiment for the full pay. The guards also fell into their given roles. This was apparent when the levels of abuse were observed. It was no longer an assigned role to the guards; it was now a chosen behavior being executed. There was only one rule given by Zimbardo; no physical harm. The guards took it into their own best interest to follow orders in not using physical harm but with executing psychological abuse instead.
After being interviewed and debriefed in the Stanford Prison Documentary film, the subjects admitted to shame and disbelief to the observed behavior. They could not believe that they acted as they did and it felt like they were a completely different person. The participants admitted and had strong beliefs that they do not think that they could survive a real life prison sentence. It was agreed that although they suffered during the study, they learned a great deal about themselves and about other human beings. The experiment showed them what they themselves are capable of and what they could handle. The situation itself changed the subjects; they themselves did not change.
As a result, it was of mass significance that five prisoners during the experiment had to be released due to exhibiting various symptoms of psychopathology due to high levels of abuse, after less than a week. There were some prisoners that were released, after the first and second day of the experiment. These prisoners were released for their personal safety because they displayed psychological distress. Some prisoners displayed distress with screams, refusal to eat, barricading themselves inside their cells, isolating themselves, and would tear off their own clothing. The prisoners shared that they were depressed, angry, bored, frustrated, frightened, and felt hopeless and powerless. Philip Zimbardo did not expect powerful results as these in such a short amount of time. As noted earlier, the experiment was originally planned to be carried out for a full fourteen days, instead of the six. It is with significance that all subjects were chosen to participate after extensive preliminary diagnostic interviews and psychological tests. They were all treated the same at the start but the end results was the behaviors that they chose to partake in.
Results to this study implies, that people who have been incarcerated for decades, would not be able to recover or they would not be able to lead a normal and healthy life. If “normal” people could not survive a simulated prison for fourteen days; how could others who have suffered physical or mental abuse, a history with drugs or violence, psychological problems, or have had prior crime records survive? Being in the prison for decades could cause one to have a negative outlook on life and may cause negative and hostile behaviors and characteristics. The subjects that participated in the Stanford Prison Experiment describe the psychological experience by having an internalized “uncontrollable rage.”
With the general overview of the Stanford Prison elaborated in all three courses, I was able to make my distinction of this experiment. I concluded through the Codes of Ethics and General Principle that this study and research could not be conducted in the full two weeks and could not be carried out today due to it being considered unethical and harmful. This experiment has been described as damaging, destructive, cruel, brutal, heartless, atrocious, appalling, sadistic, and inhumane. Due to the description of this experiment given by a plethora of researchers and humanitarians the following Codes of Ethics were violated; Standard 2.01a, 2.01c, Boundaries of Competence, Standard 3.04, Avoiding Harm, Standard 3.05, Multiple Roles (Phillip Zimbarado functioning in two roles in charge of experiment and participating as warden,) Standard 3.08, exploitative relationships, Standard 3.06, conflict of interest (Phillip Zimbarado functioning in two roles in charge of experiment and participating as warden,) Standard 8.02a informed consent to research, Standard 8:04 client/patient, students and subordinate research participants, Standard 8.07a & 8.07b deception in research and lastly Standard 8.08a, b , c debriefing. The most important rule of psychologists is to never harm or bring harm to individuals. Unlike the Stanford Prison Experiment, all experiments and studies need to be ethical and need to have positive outcomes.
In conclusion, the various understanding of ethics and the respect for human taught through these courses I was able to correlate to implications of today’s world. The implications I made to the real world of this study are relevant to the everyday individual; as this experiment could be used as a metaphor of what it means to be a prisoner and a guard. The experiment examined what one will do to willingly give up their freedom and rights. The situations that an individual is placed in affects them more than one may realize. Due to the power of the situation in this experiment was highly effective; in the way that due to the situation and the roles the participants were given they acted accordingly in an uncouth manner. Individuals are faced with authoritative roles on a daily basis. Human beings encounter rules and roles through everyone that they come across. Zimbardo gives examples of this in his analogy of power in relationships. He gives examples of a husband and wife, parents and their children, doctors and the patients, and teachers and their students.
The real world implications of this study were that it was a reality to the participants. It was on the second day that the participants believed that they were indeed prisoner or guard. The participants may have been role-playing on day one of the study, but as the days continued the behaviors became internalized. Zimbardo along with the subjects could no longer differentiate between the role-playing and the sense of self. It is thought that, if they were not under constant surveillance, they could and would have gone completely out of control.
This study tells us that the majority of prison guards, at some point of their career, do/may get caught up with the power given to them by the state. A guard passing background checks, psychological tests, behavioral tests, and physical tests does not indicate that he/she will not display abusive and controlling behavior towards prisoners. Guards could internally display feelings and behaviors of an enjoyed empowerment over other individuals. This study also implies that although guards may not use physical actions or threats against prisoners, they may have a tendency to resort to the use of psychological tactics instead. This may indicate that the guards of our prisons could be utilizing showers, meals, phone calls, family visits, and one’s clothing as either a privilege or as a form of punishment. The guards may be consumed and changed by feelings of domination with the given power over other human beings. Even if the guards themselves does not abuse their power; he/she may be a witness to these explained measures.
This study also shows the prisoners implications and viewpoints. It is highly possible for prisoners to lose themselves and their identity in the prison system. The prisoners began not to define themselves as an individual but as solely prisoners. They could lose their identity and conform to either being submissive or to being rebellious. A prisoner may also become passive, unable to cope with their confinement, or may feel helpless due to their situation. The prison system is believed to bring out the evil of human beings. Philip Zimbardo hopes that this study could and should be used to promote prison reform.
Provided the above elaborative information on the importance of values in psychology through the experiment of Dr. Phillip Zimbardo “The Stanford Prison Experiment,” I was able to apply all my skills learned throughout my expedition to mastering Psychology. Our class assignments such as synthesizing research, film discussions and application of Codes of ethics I was able to enhance my knowledge of understanding the need for ethical behavior, tolerance towards ambiguity, demonstrated skepticism and intellectual curiosity, provide scientific evidence, civic responsibility and respect for human diversity. Proving evidence in my approach towards the Stanford Prison Experiment showed adequate accomplishment and knowledge of MLO 5 Values.