January 14, 2025 - 16:54
Recent investigations by a French science historian have shed new light on the notorious Stanford prison experiment, revealing significant flaws in its methodology that have long been overlooked. The historian's research indicates that the so-called "guards" in the experiment were not merely participants but were actually coached to exhibit brutal behavior. This revelation raises critical questions about the ethical standards of psychological experiments and the implications of the findings that have influenced both academic and popular perceptions of human behavior.
Initially conducted in 1971 by psychologist Philip Zimbardo, the experiment aimed to study the psychological effects of perceived power by simulating a prison environment. However, the new findings suggest that the results may have been biased by the intentional instigation of aggression among participants. Despite these shortcomings, the experiment continues to be cited in discussions about authority, conformity, and moral judgment. The historian's work, now accessible in English, challenges the narrative surrounding the experiment and calls for a reevaluation of its legacy in the field of psychology.
