Sociology and psychology go hand in hand in some aspects and this can be seen explicitly in the experiments zimbardo’s Stanford Prison, and Milgram’s study on obedience. These experements, although unethical, provide a clear glimpse into a human’s obedience toward authority and conforming into social roles.
Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison was an experiments by Philip G. Zembardo to see if and how readily people would conform to the roles given to them in a guard and prisoner setting. The experiment was kept as real as possible by going so far as to have the participents arrested, booked, and transported to a mock prison build in the Stanford psychology building’s basement. In aditon to the arrest they were stiped naked, relieved of their possesions, delouced, and given a set of prison cloths with only a number to symbolize them, and had a chain tied around their anckle to remind them of their captivity. Ultimately the participandtss began to conform the …show more content…
First by the great length they went to presever the realism and second how they would allow an experiment that was ethicaly wrong and could cause serious mental damage to the participants without any real safeguards. I don’t belive that this experiment will be replicated today because of the obvious ethical delema, but if it was replicated I belive that the results would end up beign similar. The reason for this being that commonly when a peron is given a status of power they behave differently than they would in the opposite position of power and the strong ruling over the weak is a common theme in our culture. One semi recent example of this experiment happened in in 2003 at Abu Ghraib prison where prisoners were trated in remarkably similar ways to what happended in the standard prison experiment. The similarity of these two situatuions range from the dehumanation that occurred in both prisons to the lack of restraint when punishing the