Editing Stanford prison experiment (section)

== Interpretation and reproducibility of results ==

According to Zimbardo's interpretation of the SPE, it demonstrated that the simulated-prison situation, rather than individual [[personality psychology|personality traits]], caused the participants' behavior. Using this [[situational attribution]], the results are compatible with those of the [[Milgram experiment]], where participants complied with orders to administer seemingly dangerous and potentially lethal [[electric shock]]s to a [[shill]].<ref name="NewYorker">{{Cite magazine |url=https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/the-real-lesson-of-the-stanford-prison-experiment |title=The Real Lesson of the Stanford Prison Experiment |last= Konnikova |first=Maria |magazine=The New Yorker |quote=Occasionally, disputes between prisoner and guards got out of hand, violating an explicit injunction against physical force that both prisoners and guards had read prior to enrolling in the study. When the "superintendent" and "warden" overlooked these incidents, the message to the guards was clear: all is well; keep going as you are. The participants knew that an audience was watching, and so a lack of feedback could be read as tacit approval. And the sense of being watched may also have encouraged them to perform.  |date=June 12, 2015 |access-date=July 12, 2018}}</ref> Others have posited that the guards assumed aggressive roles due to encouragement from researchers rather than conforming to the situation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Haslam |first1=S. Alexander |last2=Reicher |first2=Stephen D. |last3=Van Bavel |first3=Jay J. |date=October 2019 |title=Rethinking the nature of cruelty: The role of identity leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment. |url=http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/amp0000443 |journal=American Psychologist |language=en |volume=74 |issue=7 |pages=809–822 |doi=10.1037/amp0000443 |pmid=31380665 |hdl=10023/18565 |s2cid=199436917 |issn=1935-990X|hdl-access=free }}</ref>

Conclusions and observations drawn by the experimenters were largely [[Subjectivity|subjective]] and [[anecdotal evidence|anecdotal]], and the experiment is practically impossible for other researchers to [[reproducibility|reproduce]] accurately. In 1973, [[Erich Fromm]] argued, as only a third of the guards displayed sadistic behaviors, SPE is more accurately an example of how a situation cannot influence a person's behavior.<ref name="auto2" /> He states that there were generalizations in the experiment's results and argued that the personality of an individual does affect behavior when imprisoned. This ran counter to the study's conclusion that the prison situation itself controls the individual's behavior. Fromm also argued that the methods employed to screen participants could not determine the amount of sadism in the subjects.<ref>{{Cite news|date=December 28, 2014|title=1971: Philip Zimbardo, Stanford Prison Experiment – precursor for Abu Ghraib torture|language=en-US|work=AHRP|url=http://ahrp.org/1971-stanford-prison-experiment-conducted-by-philip-zimbardo-was-an-exercise-that-unleashed-unprovoked-violence-and-a-predilection-for-abuse-bordering-on-torture/|access-date=March 31, 2018}}</ref>

The experiment has also been used{{By whom|date=January 2022}} to illustrate [[cognitive dissonance theory]] and the power of [[authority]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=What Is The Cognitive Dissonance Theory Of The Stanford... |url=https://www.ipl.org/essay/What-Is-The-Cognitive-Dissonance-Theory-Of-F3UJTR74AJP6#:~:text=The%20Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment%20conducted,to%20shape%20an%20individual%27s%20behavior.&text=This%20experiment%20has%20been%20used,and%20the%20power%20of%20authority.|access-date=August 19, 2021|website=www.ipl.org}}</ref>

=== BBC prison study ===
Psychologists [[Alex Haslam]] and [[Steve Reicher]] conducted the BBC Prison Study in 2002 to examine Zimbardo's themes of tyranny and resistance, and they published the results in 2006.<ref>{{cite web|title=Welcome to the official site for the BBC Prison Study|url=http://www.bbcprisonstudy.org|website=bbcprisonstudy.org}}</ref> It was a partial replication of the SPE performed with the assistance of the [[BBC]], which broadcast a documentary series about the SPE called ''[[The Experiment]]''.

As in the SPE, there was a makeshift prison, and all participants were male. Unlike the SPE's invitation to participate, Haslam and Reicher advertised their study as a university-backed social science experiment to be shown by television. Guards were not instructed on how to behave, only to figure out how to manage a prison.<ref name="auto" /> Those selected as prisoners were instructed to daily complete a questionnaire. Both prisoners and guards in this study wore microphones on their shirts, and cameras followed all participants' actions.<ref name="auto" />

Their results and conclusions differed from Zimbardo's and resulted in a number of publications concerning tyranny, [[stress (biology)|stress]], and leadership. The results were published in major academic journals such as ''[[British Journal of Social Psychology]]'', ''[[Journal of Applied Psychology]]'', ''[[Social Psychology Quarterly]]'', and ''[[Personality and Social Psychology Review]]''. The BBC Prison Study has now been taught as a core study on the UK [[A-level]] [[Psychology]] OCR syllabus.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Glavin |first=Chris |date=2019-04-13 |title=Similar Studies to the Stanford Prison Experiment {{!}} K12 Academics |url=https://www.k12academics.com/Education%20Scandals%20and%20Controversies/Academic%20Scandals/Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment/similar-studies-st |access-date=2022-11-16 |website=www.k12academics.com |language=en}}</ref>

While Haslam and Reicher's procedure was not a direct replication of Zimbardo's, their study casts further doubt on the generality of his conclusions. Specifically, it questions the notion that people slip mindlessly into roles. Their research also indicates the importance of leadership in the emergence of tyranny, such as the type displayed by Zimbardo when briefing guards in the Stanford experiment.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":5" />

Zimbardo initially regarded Haslam and Reicher's study as a reality show as both prisoner and guard knew they were being televised and probably over-acted in their role for the purpose of entertaining watchers of the documentary. He felt that there were definite similarities to reality shows; prisoners had a confessional to describe their feelings, and there were contests for the prisoners. Despite its dissimilarities, Zimbardo believes the results of the BBC study replicated his own in that the participants were affected by the situation.<ref name="auto" /> In 2018, Zimbardo, Reicher, and Haslam issued a joint statement<ref>{{cite web|last1=Haney|first1=C.|last2=Haslam|first2=A|last3=Reicher|last4=Zimbardo|first4=P.|date=2018|title=Consensus statement on the Stanford Prison Experiment and BBC Prison Study|url=https://static1.squarespace.com/static/557a07d5e4b05fe7bf112c19/t/5b84796f352f53d4e6a1ee86/1535408496256/ConsensusStatement.pdf|access-date=November 9, 2021}}</ref> asserting that both experiments were valid. They also agreed that behaviors observed in all participants could have been caused by more than the situation. They urged people to continue research into toxic behaviors, arguing that their studies were unique and need replications to demonstrate reliability and significance.