Final answer:
In the Stanford Prison Experiment, roles of prisoners and guards were assigned randomly to study the psychological effects of prison life. The experiment revealed the strong influence of social roles on behavior but was criticized both ethically and methodologically.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the classic Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip Zimbardo, participants were assigned roles through random procedures. The purpose was to study the psychological effects of prison life. It found that participants quickly conformed to their assigned roles, with some guards becoming extremely abusive, which led to the early termination of the experiment after only six days. This occurred despite the participants being emotionally stable and healthy male college students before the experiment began.
The random assignment was crucial to prevent any bias that might stem from assigning participants to roles based on their personalities or behaviors. Otherwise, it could be argued that the results were due to these pre-existing differences rather than the power of the assigned roles. The subsequent behaviors demonstrated the influence of social roles, norms, and scripts on human behavior.
The study's legacy is multifaceted, reflecting on human psychology and the ethics of experimental design. While it provides insight into the influence of perceived power and authority, it also serves as a cautionary tale about ethical considerations in research and the importance of safeguarding participants' well-being.