On 5 May 2007 Chris Green wrote in relation to the discussion on http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2007/05/what_sort_of_person_.html
> This might be reassuring to people who don't want to believe that > anyone can be influenced by the environment to become sadistic. Thanks, Chris, for drawing attention to this material. The following seem to offer a wider perspective than that usually seen from Zimbardo's work and articles (though I don't profess to have followed this closely). Quote from S.A. Haslam and S. Reicher (p.621): "Arendt, Milgram, and Zimbardo played a critical part in taking us beyond reductionist explanations of tyranny as a simple product of pathological individuals. But now, their reductionist explanations of tyranny as a simple product of pathological situationsthe banality-of-evil hypothesisseem equally untenable. Instead, the case is emerging for an interactionist understanding that sees the social psychology of individual tyrants and collective tyranny as interdependent and mutually reinforcing. "[...] it is true that evil can become normal and indeed normative in groups and hence can end up appearing banal. However, the development of these norms and of their appeal is a long and intricate process. This processthe normalization of evilis far from banal. Our theories of it should no longer be either." http://crimepsychblog.com/?p=1493 Reference : Haslam, S. A. & Reicher, S. (2007). Beyond the Banality of Evil: Three Dynamics of an Interactionist Social Psychology of Tyranny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33(5):615-622 http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/615 Carnahan and McFarland critique the situationist account of the Stanford prison experiment by arguing that understanding extreme action requires consideration of individual characteristics and the interaction between person and situation. Haslam and Reicher develop this argument in two ways. First, they reappraise historical and psychological evidence that supports the broader "banality of evil" thesisthe idea that ordinary people commit atrocities without awareness, care, or choice. Counter to this thesis, they show that perpetrators act thoughtfully, creatively, and with conviction. Second, drawing from this evidence and the BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] Prison Study, they make the case for an interactionist approach to tyranny that explains how people are (a) initially drawn to extreme and oppressive groups, (b) transformed by membership in those groups, and (c) able to gain influence over others and hence normalize oppression. These dynamics can make evil appear banal but are far from banal themselves. See also: Carnahan, T. & McFarland, S. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: Could Participant Self-Selection Have Led to the Cruelty? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33(5):603-614 http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/603 The authors investigated whether students who selectively volunteer for a study of prison life possess dispositions associated with behaving abusively. Students were recruited for a psychological study of prison life using a virtually identical newspaper ad as used in the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE; Haney, Banks & Zimbardo, 1973) or for a psychological study, an identical ad minus the words of prison life. Volunteers for the prison study scored significantly higher on measures of the abuse-related dispositions of aggressiveness, authoritarianism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, and social dominance and lower on empathy and altruism, two qualities inversely related to aggressive abuse. Although implications for the SPE remain a matter of conjecture, an interpretation in terms of person-situation interactionism rather than a strict situationist account is indicated by these findings. Implications for interpreting the abusiveness of American military guards at Abu Ghraib Prison also are discussed. Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London http://www.esterson.org/ ------------------------------------------------ Sat, 05 May 2007 20:19:04 -0400 Author: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Fwd: What sort of person volunteers for a prison experiment?] > This might be reassuring to people who don't want to believe that anyone > can be influenced by the environment to become sadistic. > http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2007/05/what_sort_of_person_.html > On the other hand, it won't be of any comfort who want to believe that > the Stanford Prison Study has nothing to do with what happened at Abu > Graib. After all, if people who volunteer for prison studies score > higher on "aggressiveness, authoritarianism, Machiavellianism, > narcissism, and social dominance and lower on empathy and altruism," > imagine what people who volunteer for the army are like on these traits. > > Regards, > Chris --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
