Warning: the following blog contains spoilers!
In psychology, I am learning about the Stanford Prison experiment. This experiment, conducted by Zimbardo et al in 1971, saw twelve volunteers be assigned to the roles of either prisoner or prison guard. The experiment was carried out to observe conformity to social roles. The six prison guards were instructed to enforce a series of rules that the prisoners had to follow. For example, the prisoners had to eat three meals a day. As expected, the prisoners rebelled on the second day of the experiment, as they disagreed with the guards and their rules. The experiment was scheduled to last two weeks. Due to an outbreak of physical violence and abuse, and three people leaving the experiment early due to psychotic breakdowns, the experiment was stopped after six days.
The newspaper advertisement for the experiment
A film was made in 2011 entitled ‘The Experiment’ depicting the Stanford prison experiment. The film roughly followed the events of the real experiment, however does include some fictitious events whilst excluding others that actually happened.
I was upset that in the film, the participants arrived at the mock prison via a prison bus, which they awaited together. I would have preferred it if here, the film had stayed true to the actual experiment. Within the real experiment, the participants who were assigned the role of prisoner were arrested by local police in their homes. This was an important part of the experiment, as it humiliated the participants in front of their neighbourhoods, hence making the experience more realistic. However, it did show the initial relationship between the two main characters (played by Adrien Brody and Forest Whitaker), which I feel did enhance the excitement of the film.
Another aspect of the film that I felt was unrealistic was the inclusion of a participant who suffered from severe diabetes. The participant was visibly ill, however had written that he did not need insulin as he desperately needed the money the experiment offered. A prison guard who felt empathetic for the prisoner broke the rules of the experiment and left the premises for a short while to obtain the insulin from the prisoner’s bag. He was punished for this by the other guards by being demoted to a prisoner (another fictitious event). At the end of the film, the participant was badly beaten and consequently died. I felt that this aspect of the film was unrealistic, as although Zimbardo allowed some brutal violence, I find it hard to believe a psychologist would allow someone to die to obtain the best results.
If I had directed the film, I would have included the removal of three prisoner participants after four days due to psychological disturbance. In the experiment, they replaced this prisoner with another person, who wanted to start more uprisings and who was confused as to why the other prisoners were so subdued. I feel that this would have made an interesting plot line in the film, however it could have interfered with the story of the protagonist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0jYx8nwjFQ
In conclusion, though there were parts of the film I disagreed with, the film was entertaining and mentally simulating. It leads me to further question the ethics of the experiment. I feel that the experiment was unethical as many participants suffered severe mental and physical trauma, and that the results obtained from the experiment did not outweigh the ethical concerns.
Photos: experiment ad http://stanforddaily.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AL.013015.prison.jpg , film poster http://resizing.flixster.com/2IUG4tV8KSXl1JNcCWvrW65ijVE=/540×804/dkpu1ddg7pbsk.cloudfront.net/movie/11/15/32/11153242_ori.jpg ,
isntsciencewonderful 
