The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE), led by psychologist Philip Zimbardo in 1971, became one of the most controversial and widely discussed psychological studies of all time. Conducted at Stanford University, the experiment simulated a prison environment, dividing 24 student volunteers into “guards” and “prisoners.” The results were shocking, leading to early termination after just six days instead of the planned two weeks.
1. Transformation of Guards and Prisoners
One of the most significant aspects of the experiment was the rapid transformation of participants into their roles. Many of the students who played guards became brutal and sadistic, while the prisoners experienced extreme stress, confusion, and a loss of identity. Zimbardo himself observed this shift, noting:
“Within hours, some guards began to harass prisoners. They behaved in a brutal and sadistic manner, apparently enjoying it. Other guards joined in, and other prisoners were also tormented.”
The guards’ cruelty escalated quickly. They dehumanized the prisoners, using psychological abuse such as sleep deprivation, humiliation, and forcing prisoners into uncomfortable positions for extended periods. One prisoner recalled how the guards would taunt them, saying:
“You’re a nobody. You’re less than nothing.”
Meanwhile, the prisoners felt intense emotional and physical discomfort. One participant who played a prisoner said:
“It felt like I was losing who I was. They made us believe we had no power.”
The public reaction at the time also highlighted the shocking brutality. Newspapers described the guards as turning into “barbaric monsters.” In one article from the time, it was noted:
“What started as a simple experiment turned into a nightmare, exposing how quickly a human can turn cruel when given absolute power.”
2. Breakdown of Prisoners
The mental strain on the prisoners was immense. Some broke down emotionally within the first few days, and several begged to be released. Zimbardo described the mental breakdown of one prisoner, who was referred to as “Prisoner 8612”, saying:
“After 36 hours, Prisoner 8612 began suffering from acute emotional disturbance, disorganized thinking, uncontrollable crying, and rage.”
The prisoners began to identify with their roles so much that they felt powerless to escape the situation, even though they could have asked to leave at any time. Their psychological distress showed how quickly individuals could descend into helplessness when stripped of personal autonomy.
3. The Power of Authority
The guards, who were given little instruction other than to maintain order, created their own harsh rules and used their power arbitrarily. Zimbardo later reflected on this saying:
“The guards’ aggression was not an aberration but a natural consequence of being in a position of authority in a dehumanizing environment.”
What made the situation even more disturbing was the escalation of the guards’ cruelty. They grew more inventive with their punishments, including forcing prisoners to clean toilets with their bare hands, conducting “counts” in the middle of the night, and issuing meaningless, degrading tasks.
The Stanford Prison Experiment starkly demonstrated how quickly people can turn brutal and cruel when placed in positions of unchecked power, a theme explored in both psychology and literature. In situations where normal social constraints are removed or authority is granted without oversight, individuals can exhibit disturbing behaviors that seem at odds with their usual character. These behaviors emerge when people are placed in environments that foster anonymity, power imbalances, and dehumanization.
One of the most famous literary examples that mirrors this descent into savagery is William Golding’s “Lord of the Flies”. In the novel, a group of British schoolboys is stranded on a deserted island without adult supervision. Initially, they attempt to establish a democratic system of rules and order. However, as the story progresses, the veneer of civilization fades, and many of the boys give in to their primal instincts. They become violent, and their behavior devolves into chaos, culminating in the murder of two of their peers. Golding wrote:
“Maybe there is a beast… maybe it’s only us.”
This line highlights a central theme of the novel: that the potential for evil exists in all humans and can surface under the right conditions. When societal norms and laws disappear, individuals may lose their moral compass, and unchecked power can bring out the darkest aspects of human nature.
The Stanford Prison Experiment echoes this concept. In a controlled environment, ordinary college students quickly adopted their roles as either brutal guards or submissive prisoners. The guards, much like the boys in “Lord of the Flies,” began to act cruelly once they felt anonymous and untouchable. Zimbardo observed:
“When people are deindividuated, they do things they would not do otherwise. They lose their sense of individual responsibility and morality.”
Similarly, historical events such as the Abu Ghraib prison scandal demonstrate how environments that encourage dehumanization and a lack of accountability can lead to horrific abuses. In 2003, U.S. military personnel were found to have committed severe abuses against Iraqi prisoners, including physical and psychological torture. The soldiers involved were ordinary individuals who, when placed in an environment where they felt immune from consequences, began to act in brutal ways that shocked the world. This real-world example aligns with the lessons of both the Stanford Prison Experiment and Golding’s novel.
In such situations, when people feel part of a group or institution that condones violent or dehumanizing behavior, their actions can spiral out of control. As Hannah Arendt famously noted in her analysis of the Nazi regime, the concept of the “banality of evil” suggests that ordinary people can commit terrible atrocities when they are in systems that normalize or justify their actions. Individuals can be swept into brutal behavior simply by conforming to the environment around them, even when such behavior goes against their core values.
In all of these examples—the Stanford Prison Experiment, “Lord of the Flies,” Abu Ghraib, and even historical atrocities—what emerges is the chilling realization that under the right conditions, ordinary people can become capable of extraordinary cruelty. As Golding powerfully illustrates, the “beast” is not an external force but something that lies within us, waiting for the right circumstances to be unleashed.
4. Conclusion of the Experiment
The experiment was terminated after six days due to the alarming behavior of both the guards and prisoners. Zimbardo, who was acting as the prison superintendent, only realized the extreme nature of the situation when an outsider, his colleague Christina Maslach, visited and expressed horror at what she saw. She confronted Zimbardo, asking him:
“What you are doing to those boys is terrible. How could you not see it?”
Her comments shocked Zimbardo into realizing how deeply the experiment had spiraled out of control.
The conclusion of the experiment is a powerful commentary on human nature. It demonstrated how social roles and situational factors can drastically affect behavior. Zimbardo argued that normal people could commit atrocious acts when placed in positions of power or when subjected to oppressive environments.
5. Ethical Backlash
After the experiment, the public and the psychological community condemned the study’s ethical violations. In response to the brutality that unfolded, many called for stricter regulations on human experimentation. One prominent psychologist at the time noted:
“This study crosses ethical boundaries that cannot be ignored. It shows the dangers of what happens when people are not held accountable for their actions in research.”
The Stanford Prison Experiment has since been used to discuss themes like conformity, authority, and morality. The findings have been compared to real-world events like the abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib during the Iraq War, reinforcing the study’s disturbing relevance.
In summary, the SPE revealed the dark side of human nature and how easily ordinary people can fall into brutal behaviors under the right conditions. As Zimbardo concluded:
“The line between good and evil is permeable and almost anyone can be induced to cross it when pressured by situational forces.”
