Jozlin Diaz-Patterson October 19 November 07, 2011 PCS 101 B: Public Speaking

Title: General Purpose: To inform about an event Specific Purpose: To inform my audience about the Stanford Prison Experiment. Pattern of Organization: Topical Pattern

I. Introduction: On August 17th 1971, there was a rather strange event brewing in Palo Alto, California. Police sirens broke the usual silence of the sleepy town as they searched throughout the area for nine criminals, all of whom were wanted for the same crimes: Burglary and Armed Robbery. Each man was swiftly located, and subsequently apprehended, at each of their homes. They were all charged and had their Miranda Rights read to them. All of this before being brought to the local police station for processing and finally dropping them off in the newly established Stanford County Prison. Strictly by the book, right? The situation isn't as simple as it first appears, however. For one, despite all of the arrests being within the same town in rapid succession, the story was never published in any media outlet, the men who were arrested were all of college age and the prison itself didn't seem to exist on any map of the town. What had just occurred was the first step in one of the most infamous behavioral studies in the field of psychology. The study was called, the Stanford Prison Experiment. (SPE) Thesis: To show to you what SPE was, to discuss its findings and explain how the project came to an end.

(Transition: First, allow me to explain what the project was, and how it started.) II. Body: A) The SPE was an experiment in human behavior, where a team of 24 volunteers, each split between two separate roles, prisoners and guards, acted out in a mock prison environment. 1. Headed by Stanford University Psychology professor Philip Zimbardo. 2. Quote Philip Zimbardo from The Menace Within: The study was focused originally on how individuals adapt to being in a relatively powerless situation. i. a prison atmosphere perfect for creating powerlessness ii. focus was on the prisoner characters iii. Quote Zimbardo from The Menace Within: I was interested in the prisoners and was not really interested in the guards. 3. Took place within the basement of Stanford U's Psych. Building. i. Renovations were done in order to look like a real prison. (Transition: Now that we know what the experiment was, let's talk about its results.)

B) Both parties became engrossed in the roles they were assigned, and many developed pathological behaviors as early as day two, which escalated over the course of the experiment. 1. Guards had all the power in the environment i. Quote from Dave Eschelman from Menace Within: When you have little or no supervision as to what you're doing, and no one steps in and says, "Hey, you can't do this"things just keep escalating. 2. The guards dehumanized the prisoners i. Quote from Menace Within: [] half the study's participants [The Prisoners] endured cruel and dehumanizing abuse at the hands of their peers. At various times,

they were taunted, stripped naked, deprived of sleep and forced to use plastic buckets as toilets. 3. The prisoners became passive and depressed i. they had no real control over their situation ii. 5 prisoners left the project because of severe pathological behavior iii. Quote from American Scientist: In less than 36 hours, one had to be released because of extreme depression, disorganized thinking, uncontrollable crying and fits of rage. Over the next three days, three more prisoners were let go because they exhibited similar symptoms of anxiety. A fifth prisoner was discharged when he developed a psychosomatic rash over his entire body [] C) The SPE ended prematurely for two specific reasons. 1. Safety of volunteers i. Quote from Nuremburg Code: The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. ii. The prisoners suffered both physically and mentally. 2. Zimbardo didn't end the project once the results were obtained. i. Quote from BBC News: Once a prisoner broke down we had proved the point that situations can have a powerful impact - so I didn't end it when I should have. ii. Prisoners could have suffered more severely if the project continued. III. Conclusion:

Works Cited:
Zimbardo, Philip G.The Lucifer Effect, Understanding How Good P e o p l e Tu r n E v i l . R a n d o m H o u s e I n c , 2 0 0 9 . P r i n t . Zimbardo, P. G., Maslach, C., & Haney, C. (2000). Reflections on the Stanford Prison Experiment: Genesis, transformations, consequences. Zimbardo, Philip. "Stanford Prison Experiment: A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment Conducted at Stanford U n i v e r s i t y. " N . p . , 2 0 1 1 . We b . 4 N o v 2 0 1 1 . < h t t p : / / w w w. p r i s o n e x p . o r g / > . Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182.. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949 Ratnesar, Romesh. "The Menace Within." Stanford Magazine. 2011: 1. Web. 4 Nov. 2011. <http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2011/julaug/features/spe.ht ml>. Leithead, Alastair. "Stanford Prison Experiment Continues to Shock."BBC News, San Francisco. 17 August 2011: 1. Web. 5 Nov. 2011. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14564182>. Levine, Robert. "The evil that men do." American Scientist 95.5 (2007): 440+. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Nov. 2011.