03520nam a22004575i 4500001001800000003000900018005001700027007001500044008004100059020003700100024003500137050001600172072001600188072002300204072001500227100008900242245011800331250001800449264006900467300004300536336002600579337002600605338003600631347002400667505031500691520164001006650003002646650003702676650002902713650003002742650003602772650003102808710003402839773002602873776003602899776003602935856004602971912001403017912001403031999001703045978-3-031-49292-1DE-He21320251030112845.0cr nn 008mamaa240809s2024    sz |    s    |||| 0|eng d  a97830314929219978-3-031-49292-17 a10.1007/978-3-031-49292-12doi 4aHM1001-1281 7aJMH2bicssc 7aPSY0310002bisacsh 7aJMH2thema1 aLe Texier, Thibault.eauthor.4aut4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut98210310aInvestigating the Stanford Prison Experimenth[electronic resource] :bHistory of a Lie /cby Thibault Le Texier.  a1st ed. 2024. 1aCham :bSpringer Nature Switzerland :bImprint: Springer,c2024.  aXIV, 196 p. 4 illus.bonline resource.  atextbtxt2rdacontent  acomputerbc2rdamedia  aonline resourcebcr2rdacarrier  atext filebPDF2rda0 aIntroduction -- 1. Posterity -- 2. Pre-written Conclusions -- 3. Toyon Hall -- 4. Manipulations -- 5. The Situation -- 6. Variations on a Surrealist Situation -- 7. A Surrealist Situation – Continued -- 8. More Fiction than Science -- 9. Conclusion: Nothing to Save but the Truth -- Acknowledgments -- Notes.  aIn 1971, psychologist Philip Zimbardo ran the now famous Stanford prison experiment to show that prison could make normal people behave in pathological ways. Based on the first thorough investigation in the archives of the experiment and on interviews with about half of its participants, this book shows that the Stanford prison experiment is far from being scientific. In particular, the guards knew what results were expected from them, they were trained and supervised by the experimenters, and they were following a schedule and a set of rules written by the experimenters. The experimenters deceived the guards and made them believe they were not subjects. They also borrowed many elements from a previous student experiment without disclosing this information in their reports. The prisoners were not allowed to leave the experiment at will, and they were conditioned by the experimenters. The mock prison situation was unrealistic. Most participants did not forget they were participating in an experiment, and many responded to demand characteristics. The data was not collected properly. And the conclusions were pre-written according to non-academic aims. This book goes beyond the experiment to provide ample background and context, in order to understand how the experiment was planned, financed, recorded, and divulged in the press and within the academic. It discusses also the role played by Philip Zimbardo in the trial of one of the guards of Abu Ghraib, as well as the impact of mass media on science, the debates between personal psychology and social psychology, and the specific nature of cold war social science. 0aSocial psychology.959087 0aPsychology, Experimental.982104 0aSciencexHistory.96523214aSocial Psychology.95908724aExperimental Psychology.98210524aHistory of Science.9661012 aSpringerLink (Online service)0 tSpringer Nature eBook08iPrinted edition:z978303149291408iPrinted edition:z978303149293840uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49292-1  aZDB-2-SLS  aZDB-2-SXS  c62339d62339