Background and purpose of the Haney et al. (1973) study

The study conducted by Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo in 1973 aimed to investigate the psychological effects of prison environments on behaviour. At the time, prisons were failing to rehabilitate inmates or deter crime, with high recidivism rates reported in the USA. Additionally, numerous reports of inhumane treatment in prisons raised concerns on humanitarian grounds. This research sought to explore whether these conditions were due to the inherent nature of individuals (dispositional hypothesis) or the prison environment itself (situational hypothesis).

Reasons for conducting a simulated prison study

• Failure of real prisons - Despite improvements in physical conditions, prisons did not reduce reoffending, with recidivism rates exceeding 75% in the USA.
• Humanitarian issues - Reports of atrocities in prisons highlighted the need to understand the causes of such mistreatment.
• Dispositional vs. situational debate - The dispositional hypothesis suggested that prison behaviour stemmed from the personal characteristics of inmates and guards, while the situational hypothesis argued that the social structure and conditions of prisons were the primary influence.
• Need for controlled observation - Direct observation in real prisons mixed the effects of the environment with the long-term traits of inmates and guards, making it difficult to isolate causes. A simulated setting allowed for separation of these factors.

Research methodology and design of the simulated prison experiment

The Haney et al. (1973) study was designed as a laboratory experiment to mimic real prison conditions as closely as possible while maintaining control over variables. This approach enabled the researchers to test the situational hypothesis by observing behaviour in a controlled, artificial environment.

Structure of the experimental design

• Type of study - Laboratory experiment with a naturalistic setup to replicate prison life.
• Independent variable (IV) - The role assigned to participants, either as a prisoner or a guard.
• Dependent variable (DV) - The resulting behaviour and psychological responses of participants.
• Design method - Independent measures design, where participants were assigned to one of two distinct groups (prisoners or guards) with no overlap.

Details of the participants and setting

The study carefully selected participants to ensure they were representative of a stable, non-antisocial population. The physical setup was crafted to resemble a prison environment, enhancing the realism of the experiment.

Characteristics of the participants

• Selection process - From 75 respondents to a newspaper advertisement seeking participants for a study on "prison life", 24 males were chosen based on stability, maturity, and lack of antisocial tendencies.
• Background - Participants were healthy, male college students from the Stanford area, predominantly middle-class and Caucasian, with one participant of Asian descent.
• Group assignment - Randomly allocated to roles of either prisoner or guard, resulting in 10 prisoners and 11 guards after some dropouts.
• Lack of prior connection - Participants did not know each other beforehand, preventing pre-existing relationships from influencing behaviour.

Features of the simulated prison environment

• Location - Constructed in a 35-foot section of a basement corridor within Stanford University's Psychology building.
• Cell design - Included three small cells, each measuring six by nine feet, with steel-barred, black-painted doors, and equipped with basic cots, mattresses, sheets, and pillows.
• Solitary confinement - A small, unlit closet (two by two by seven feet) was used for isolation purposes.
• Monitoring facilities - An observation screen and video recording equipment were positioned behind the main area, referred to as the "yard".

Key procedures and role instructions

The experiment involved detailed procedures to simulate the prison experience, including specific instructions for each role and distinct uniforms to reinforce group identities. Operational rules governed the daily routines of participants.

Operational rules of the experiment

• Duration and confinement - Prisoners were required to remain in the mock prison 24 hours a day, with three assigned to each cell. Guards worked in teams of three on eight-hour shifts, only present in the prison during their shifts.
• Compensation - All participants signed contracts agreeing to a payment of $15 per day for a duration of up to two weeks.

Role instructions and uniforms

• Instructions for guards - Guards were tasked with maintaining reasonable order but were explicitly instructed not to use physical punishment.
• Instructions for prisoners - Prisoners were given no specific behavioural instructions beyond following the rules set by guards.
• Prisoner uniforms - Designed to strip individuality and induce humiliation, consisting of loose muslin smocks with ID numbers, nylon stocking caps, no underwear, rubber sandals, and an ankle chain.
• Guard uniforms - Intended to project authority, featuring khaki outfits, reflective sunglasses, wooden batons, and whistles to convey a military-like presence.

Induction process for prisoners

• Arrest simulation - Prisoners were unexpectedly arrested at their homes by local police in Palo Alto, charged with mock offences such as theft or robbery, and informed of their rights.
• Processing - Taken to a police station for formal processing, then blindfolded and transported to the simulated prison.
• Arrival procedure - Upon reaching the prison, they were stripped, subjected to a mock "delousing" process, forced to stand naked temporarily, and then issued their uniforms and assigned numbers instead of names.

Findings and conclusions from the study

The experiment yielded significant insights into how prison-like environments influence behaviour, revealing extreme psychological reactions among participants. It was terminated earlier than planned due to the severity of these effects.

Key observations and outcomes

• Early termination - The study was halted after just six days due to severe pathological reactions among participants.
• Behavioural dynamics - Interactions between guards and prisoners grew increasingly hostile and negative over time.
• Prisoner responses - Prisoners became passive and submissive, with five released early due to intense emotional distress. The remaining prisoners expressed relief when the experiment ended. Approximately 90% of their conversations revolved around immediate prison conditions.
• Guard responses - Guards adopted active, dominant roles, with some volunteering for unpaid extra hours and showing punctuality. Many were distressed when the experiment concluded, indicating attachment to their authority.
• Psychological effects on prisoners - Prisoners exhibited what was termed "pathological prisoner syndrome", characterised by depression or excessive obedience resulting from loss of personal identity and arbitrary control by guards.
• Psychological effects on guards - Guards developed a "pathology of power", deriving enjoyment from their authority and often misusing it by redefining prisoner rights as privileges to be earned through obedience.

Conclusions drawn from the experiment

• Impact of environment - The prison setting itself was found to have a profound negative effect on interpersonal relationships and individual behaviour.
• Support for situational hypothesis - The observed behaviours were attributed to situational factors rather than inherent personal traits, challenging the dispositional hypothesis.
• Pathological outcomes - Incarceration in such conditions can lead to severe psychological conditions, including pathological prisoner syndrome in inmates and a pathology of power in guards.
• Individual variations - Differences in how participants coped with the unfamiliar and oppressive environment highlighted the role of personal resilience and adaptability in such settings.