Was the Stanford Prison Experiment Ethical?

The Stanford Prison Experiment was not ethical for several reasons. The overarching reason is that it gave humans unbridled permission to harm other humans. The prisoners were harmed in a way that was beyond their control, and in a way that compromised their dignity and safety as human beings without their permission.

The facts of the experiment are now history. Dr. Phillip Zimbardo, a psychologist, recruited graduate students to participate in an experiment looking at the reactions of people in a mock jail environment. Specifically he was examining the interaction between prisoners and guards, and how quickly these people conformed to their assigned roles.

The guards were very cruel and the experiment went horribly badly, I believe, because the way it was conducted was not ethical. It created conditions in which the worst of the human spirit could rear its ugly head.

Zimbardo told the guards to wield authority over the prisoners. I think this gave them a charge to be harsh. It made Zimbardo a key player in his own experiment, unduly influencing the outcome of its results.

The experiment was also not monitored by anyone who could watch for the safety of the prisoners. There was no one to hold the guards in check because Zimbardo was watching to see how far they would go with their cruelty, and if the prisoners would endure it.

As difficult as this experiment was, it serves to remind us that any social experiment is not worth the harming of others. Experiments of our world must be conducted wisely and with accountability.