ACCORDING TO THE THREE PRINCIPLES IN THE BELMONT REPORT, WAS THE STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED IN AN ETHICAL OR NONETHICAL MANNER? Aich, Soham Dr. Philip George Zimbardo performed the Stanford Prison experiment, a notorious experiment that violates various ethical protocols in the Belmont Report. Ethical consideration in research is vital to society to keep people safe when experiments are performed on them. Stanford Prison experiment's purpose is to simulate a prison to evaluate if prisoners with good morale change in a hostile environment over two weeks. This experiment is unethical (morally wrong) and brutal hence this experiment discontinues on the sixth day of the experiment. The Belmont Report is created to ensure that the experiment is ethical, so researchers do not exploit human subjects involved in it. Using the Belmont Report's principles: 'Respect for persons,' 'Beneficence', and 'Justice,' to judge if the Standford prison experiment is ethical. Respect for persons includes how participants did not give explicit consent or did not know about the experiment—e.g., Stanford prison participants did not know the purpose of the experiment. Beneficence incorporates events where the researcher did/did not harm the participants in the Stanford prison experiment—e.g., waking Stanford prison participants in the middle of the night and degrading them cause psychological harm to all the participants. Justice includes that the results are available to everyone, and diverse participants that benefit from the experiment should be chosen—e.g., Only white university males are chosen for the Stanford prison experiment. (Philip, 2022) Using the first principle of the Belmont Report, Respect for persons, to judge the Stanford prison experiment's ethics. Respect for a person means that experiments that include human subjects should ask for consent and clearly explain the experiment's purpose, potential risks, and benefits. Every participant in this research signed a "very vague consent form", says Zimbardo. (Philip, 2022) (Konnikova, 2015) The reason Zimbardo deliberately keeps the consent form vague is that the guards and prisoners do not have a set mindset to behave well with peers or not misuse power. Using consent forms in this study is ethical but not explicitly telling the purpose of the experiment is unethical because unawareness of the experiment confused the participants. Plus, not explicitly stating the purpose of the research caused the participants to unwillingly perform menial tasks—e.g., cleaning toilets with bare hands, malnutrition food, forcing "stripping, shaving heads and other abuse", stated prisoner 8612, an engineering student who participated in the experiment. (Philip, 2022) Forcing participants to perform these tasks without mentioning these tasks before the experiment is unethical and violates Respect for persons. Most participants assumed they could leave the experiment, but Zimbardo put mental pressure to keep them from continuing it. Prisoner 8612 explained that the primary prison consultant "chided him for being so weak". (Philip, 2022) This violates Respect for persons as prisoner 8612 is being pressurized to continue at the test. This shows that the Stanford prison experiment is unethical as it violates the Belmont Report's principle, Respect for prison. The following Belmont Report principle is Beneficence, which determines if the Stanford prison experiment is ethical. Beneficence means that an experiment is ethical if the subject does not get any physical/psychological harm during the experiment. Zimbardo recounted in an interview, "more than 70 applicants answered our ad and were given diagnostic interviews and personality tests to eliminate candidates with psychological problems, medical disabilities, or a history of crime or drug abuse." (Philip, 2022) (Konnikova, 2015) Critically choosing participants with a strong mindset and good morale is ethical because Zimbardo understands that participants in the experiment must tolerate severe mental pressure. Zimbardo, who poses as the prison warden, ignores the harsh behaviour of the jail guards throughout the experiment until doctoral student Christina Maslach expresses concerns about the circumstances in the simulated prison and the morality of continuing the experiment. (Cherry, 2021) Showing that Zimbardo took the role of prison superintendent; hence not overviewing the experiment causes Zimbardo to make bad choices—e.g., ignoring rude behaviours demonstrates that the experiment is unethical by violating Beneficence. Zimbardo threatens "all the guards that they would not get paid if any prisoner leaves or escapes". (BBC inc., 2002) Zimbardo turns decent morale guards into sadistic beasts by threatening not to pay them if any prisoner escapes or leaves is unethical because Zimbardo invokes the guards to harm the prison. This shows that the Stanford prison experiment is unethical as it violates the second principle of the Belmont Report, Beneficence. The last Belmont Report principle is Justice, which is used to judge whether the Stanford prison study is ethical. Justice means that the research is available for everyone, and the participants chosen for the research should be the most beneficial demographic from the experiment. This investigation has been a "staple in textbooks, articles, psychology classes, and even movies," said psychosocial rehabilitation specialist Kendra Cherry. (Cherry, 2021) Zimbardo pays all the university students as compensation for their time and effort. (BBC inc., 2002) Choosing to pay university students is ethical as average university students need money to continue studying hence one of the most beneficial demographics. Zimbardo's findings are available for everyone, showing that the experiment is ethical as the experiment supports Respect. The only specific demographic chosen is "white university males", as cited by a BBC critic in a documentary about this experiment. (BBC inc., 2002) This is unethical because other races or genders will react differently, so the result is unreliable and violates Justice by only choosing a specific demographic. This shows that the Stanford prison experiment is unethical as it violates the final principle of the Belmont Report, Justice. Stanford prison experiment has participants forced to perform menial tasks without their consent, violating Respect for persons. Zimbardo ignores all rude behaviours like stripping, shaving heads and other abuse in the Stanford prison experiment, violating Beneficence. Stanford prison experiment's participants are from a specific demographic, white middle-class male university students violating Justice. It is critical to consider ethical considerations and adhere to Belmont Report to preserve study participants' dignity, rights, and wellbeing. According to the three principles in the Belmont Report, the Stanford prison experiment is conducted unethically. References BBC inc., 2002. Psychology: The Stanford Prison Experiment. [Online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4txhN13y6A [Accessed 11 May 2022]. Cherry, K., 2021. The Stanford Prison Experiment. [Online] Available at: https://www.verywellmind.com/the-stanford-prison-experiment-2794995 [Accessed 2 June 2022]. Konnikova, M., 2015. The New Yorker. [Online] Available at: https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/the-real-lesson-of-the-stanfordprison-experiment [Accessed 21 June 2022]. Philip, Z., 2022. THE STORY: AN OVERVIEW OF THE EXPERIMENT. [Online] Available at: https://www.prisonexp.org/arrival [Accessed 24 May 2022].
