- Is a persons belief about the opportunity of movement between groups ( permeability - if this is low it is said that there is greater value and respect shown between group members)
- is a persons belief about the legitimacy of the group inequalities(will members challenge status if they thought it to be unfair)
- Cognitive Alternative being available to group members (this occurs when lower status group members are made of possible alternatives in which they may be able to change their status,
Aims
♥ Reicher and Haslam wanted to create a social situation where by they could conduct a situation similar to that of Zimbardo's Stanford Prison Experiment they did this by :
- Looking at how a group of individuals of unequal power and privilege act with one another
- Developing practical and Ethical Guidelines for large scale social-psychology studies.
- Examining the impact of factors that affect group behaviour
- Analysing the factors that lead individuals to identify with their group members,
Procedure
♥ Reicher and Haslam decided to do this study in the style of an experimental case study ( this is because it wasnt quite and experiment, however there was still IV's involved although the research consisted fully of intensive observation of one group of people.
♥ R and H had control over almost every aspect of the social situation.
♥A repeated measures design is used which meant that all participants went through all experimental conditions ( for a more thorough explanation of repeated measures design click here)
♥ this situational prison was situated in the BBC Studios in London and was aimed to function for 10 days where by the participants were divided into prisoners(10) and guards (5)
Participants
♥ There was an initial pool of 332 participants which were self selected from a newspaper article which was put in the national paper. The researchers wanted to study a group of diverse applicants through; age, race, social class. Unstable applicants were withdrawn from the study via a 3 stage screening process. At each stage the participants who are seen as unstable were removed.
The Screening Process
The participants went through the initial Psychometric Tests
- Participants were being tested on Social Variables (such as their dominance, racism and authoritarianism ) and Clinical Variables (such as depression, paranoia and self esteem) - those with extreme levels of either variable were eliminated from the study
They then went through a full weekends Clinical Analysis carried out by a clinical psychologists at their home to ensure participants suitability.
Medical and Character referencing was the last screening process this is where participants history and past experiences were research including any criminal records/ police checks.
There was a few ways in which researchers made sure the selection process worked on different levels.
- Ethics were met by only allowing well adjusted participants to be included in the study
- The sample was representative of the populations as the results wanted to be generalised
- Diversity is available through the assured diversity if age , social class and ethnic background of all participants
- Gender Ethics were met through using a pure male sample to allow comparison to the SPE and also avoiding men and women in the same cell
- Also all Participants were matched on personality variables 10 were prisoners and 5 were guards the roles were randomly chosen
Guards Uniform And their demonstration of power over prisoners
- Guards (5) were taken to a hotel the night before the experiment was initiated and were told about the basic principles of what they were expected to do which was to keep prisoners in order, not to use any physical punishment and then guards were then told to come up with rules for the prison and punishments for the fail to comply with those rules.
- The Guards wore a uniform which consisted of a smart blue shirt, a tie, black trousers, black shoes and also wore keys.
- The way the guards demonstrated power was by the fact that because they owned and you could see the keys they were seen as having control over prisoners so having the power
- They generally had a better uniform to the prisoners and access to better food and snacks and drinks whenever they wanted and therefore accounted a position that would appeal to those in a lower position therefore the prisoners.
Prisoners Uniform
- The prisoners(9/10) wore a uniform which consisted of loose fitting orange trousers and t-shirt and flimsy sandals. The t shirt had 3 digits printed on them and also had their heads shaven upon arrival,
- Their diets were kept at a reasonable standard but were not anything compared to the guards meals and had basic ethical rights
Independent and Dependent Variables
The IV's were manipulated on certain days of the study, and the DV's were measured by social variables (such as sociological identification), organisational variables ( participants compliance with rules) -measured by self reports and also clinical variables ( levels of stress) measured by daily saliva swabs for a hormone called cortisol.
- 1st IV DAY 3: PERMEABILITY OF ROLES
What permeability means is basically the ability of movement between groups of people which ultimately is permeability is low increases groups identity.
Summary of the day; Guards (5) and prisoners (9) told promotion to guards was made possible due to miss assigned prisoners. As group boundaries are permeable between prisoner and guards there has been a lack of social identity as prisoners realise that they could be in a group with better standards of living so work as individuals rather than a group. after day three when the promotion of one prisoner takes place this was made impermeable this meant that prisoner and guard roles were reinforced and thus prisoners then built a strong identity between them, however there was low identity between guards as many of them did not want to be in their position.
- 2nd IV DAY 6 : LEGITIMACY OF ROLES( cognitive alternitives when TU prisoner was withdrawn)
This is where participants would question the division of the groups division .
3 days after promotion took place day 6, participants were informed that there was now no difference between prisoners and guards but changing groups back to the original ones chosen would be impractical on that same day the TU prisoner was remove from the study to check that participants actually took a cognitive alternative. Guards remained with their anti- confrontational approach which worked for everyone apart from the cell 2 inmates that night 3 prisoners escaped and guards showed levels of stress. Therefore those prisoners that separated had raised their group identity and separated from guards which created confrontation, which therefore increased rivalry between the prisoners which made three of the prisoners broke out due to their strong identification. Guards therefore became more unified and prisoners became more separated.
- 3rd IV DAY 5-7: COGNITIVE ALTERNATIVES
A Cognitive Alternative is basically an alternative way of thinking .
a TRADE UNION OFFICIAL got introduced to the prison as the final 10th prisoner and became one of the most respected and feared prisoners.which reduced the conflict between prisoner and guard. Prisoner and guards questioned their roles however prisoners acknowledged that they have rights within their group but questioned the acceptability of their conditions. All guards at this point had equal status but you could see leaders of the group developing, with the socially identified group as prisoners they cooperated well as a group, and created a commune which worked initially until 3 dissenters decided that the commune system wasn't for them, they broke out of the cell on the night of day 6, and prisoners who were one of strongest leader decided that they wanted to introduce a new much harsher regime which due to ethical reasons did not go ahead and the experiment was stopped on day six,
Findings and Criticisms
- Guards failed to identify with each other, this is because although the high status created a desirable role not all members wanted to be guards so felt uncomfortable with the given power hence low social identity as all members had different views and values.
- Prisoners were mostly compliant at the start of experiment as wanted to move up to guard position however after permeability of roles was demolished they unified together as a group, this is because at the beginning they wanted to work up to being a guard as there was more benefit from this role however after this became impermeable prisoners decided to work together to change their position.
- Guards failed to work together and disagreed about their role within the prison as not all guards have had the same level of authoritarianism in their personality in which members with low authoritarianism struggled to keep the system reinforced, and also alone time was spent separately which meant that they couldn't really identify with one another,
- when all participants were informed that no differences in group characteristics were present prisoners overthrew guards and their relationship was destroyed a new self governing commune was established by the majority of the prisoners and staff but deserters didn't like it as didn't really see a point it the running off it ,
- After the breakdown of the commune a mixed group of original guards and prisoners decided to impose a new regime with harsher rules and punishment so the prison could have run the way it should have been run from the start .
Criticisms
- Procedure was standardised and happened in a controlled environment. However the procedure lacked in ecological validity and demand characteristics was present
- Daily psychometric and cortisol tests allowed to know for real if participants began to be effected by the study which was an improvement from Zimbardos study and allowed full detailed explanations to be carried out. However withdrawal could have been difficult to achieve as the prisoners were locked in cells, if new regime was to continue similar situation could have happened to SPE if continued, also the nature of the experiment was seen as degrading to participants.
- self selected sample was a good things as the screening process allowed participants who were strong enough to withstand the study through . Males were used to allow comparison to SPE, also there was a range of age, social class and ethnic background which is something that the SPE didn't have. However there was a small sample size which meant the results were low on reliability and also couldn't be generalised to women.
- Both Qualitative and Quantitative data was recorded, Qualitative data was filmed on 24 hour surveillance which meant that behaviours couldn't be missed and also along side quantitative data it helped us to establish a cause and effect relationship and allowed easy comparison between groups. However participants weren't given responses as to why they chose the answers they chose in the self-rating scale which meant that their though wasn't expressed and also as it is an observational method observers are likely to be subjective so a number of observers must be present to increase inter-rater reliability.
- Overall the study accomplished their aims which has allowed large scale studies to be performed ethically, results were easily comparable to the SPE and allowed to see that there was other variables effecting how they identify with their role they don't automatically get on with the role like what Zimbardo thought, On the other hand as the study was committed in artificial settings it lacked in ecological validity and therefore reliability and also as the study didn't go through till the end it cant project reliable results
