Critique of Philip G. Zimbardo's "The Stanford Prison Experiment".

One of the many sadistic endeavors that took place in the prison was called the "count"(315). The count was used to make sure the prisoners could recite their ID numbers and the rules of the prison. At first, the count was performed 3 times a day for 10 minutes each time. But as the study progressed, the guards increased the duration of the count to "seemingly interminable several hours"(315). Guards became more bored and prisoners became more depressed. The end result was nothing more than a barbaric, sadistic, "perverted symbiotic relationship"(316) between the guards and prisoners. In fact, five prisoners were released due to "disorganized thinking, uncontrollable crying and fits of rage."(319) The experiment was getting so out of hand that even the warden himself, Zimbardo, acknowledges that he could easily "turn off [his] sensitivity and concern for others"(320).

Zimbardo sees the experiment as a "combination of realism and symbolism...fused to create a vivid illusion of imprisonment"(318). Yes, the experiment delves into the social terror that undermines prisons worldwide, but does that mean we are to rely solely on Zimbardo's facts? By far the most shocking revelation is that Zimbardo took part in the experiment himself! To scientifically set up and do research on a study is the task Zimbardo embarks on. But being part of ones own study is a recipe for adversity. Not only is Zimbardo exposed to the dark sadism that takes place, but the role-playing that each participant so remarkably slipped into also has a vast impact on his mindset to the point of obsession. He himself states that the "assigned roles...guide, shape and...control our freedom of thought and action."(318)

Zimbardo's further assessment is highly debatable. He claims that a year after the experiment ended, group reunions were held and the subjects used in the experiment had gained much self-knowledge and virtually no mental anguish. But can we be certain that this is true? The "incessant pacing, uncontrollable weeping, depression, hostility, fights"(323) that the prisoners endured is quite the mental check, and is something that doesn't easily fade away.

Zimbardo's experiment goes lengths in relating the process by which prisoners lose their rights, freedom, and privacy, while guards gain social supremacy by controlling and laying down the law on the "prisoners". But in my opinion, Zimbardo's credibility is far from where it should be. His willingness to partake in his own experiment was detrimental to his study. It is my evaluation that his "year-long follow-up"(323) on his participants is far from the truth. While Zimbardo's experiment had some interesting implications, he is wrong to think that it would bear no mental effect on his participants. Without some concrete evidence, the deepest, darkest secrets of the Stanford Prison Experiment will never be revealed.

Word Count: 687

Work Cited

Zimbardo, Philip G. "The Stanford Prison Experiment" Rpt. in Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. Can. ed. Ed. Lawrence Behrens and others. Toronto: Longman, 2003, 312-25.