BBC Prison Study (Reicher & Haslam, 2006) Early Days and Conflict

The BBC Prison Study (known as The Experiment) was a series broadcast on BBC in 2002. Produced by Steve Reicher and Alex Haslam, The Experiment involved 15 men (each selected at random to be either “prisoner” or guard) staying for 8 days in a simulated prison and explored the social and psychological consequences of putting people in groups of unequal power. Moreover it examines when people accept inequality and when they challenge it. Stages of the experiment included early days, conflict, order, rebellion and tyranny.

Early Days

The day prior to the experiment, the guards meet with the psychologists to discuss the layout of the prison as well as the resources at their disposal and are told to create rules to make the prison work.The guards are then taken to the prison via blacked out cars the following day and change into uniform. The prisoners arrive shortly after in blacked out cars and are told to shower, change into their prison uniform, hand over their clothes and valuable possessions and have their heads shaved. No complaints were raised until several minutes after the prisoners had entered their three-man cells as they realised the reality of their inferior status. Further complaints were expressed about the quality of food and cigarettes. The prisoners were then ordered to line up and listen to an announcement from an experimenter regarding a promotion. Opinions are divided in terms of whether or not they want to be promoted. Reicher and Haslam used the promotion as a way of explaining social identity theory (when the disadvantaged think that they can advance to a higher-status position through their individual efforts, they will fail to act as a group, instead working individually within the system rather than work together against the system.) Both prisoners and guards are disunited with some of the participants wanting to distant themselves from their roles in the experiment. Some of the guards are uncomfortable with the amount of power and luxuries they have and who they may become if they let those factors control them. They are especially uncomfortable about the amount and quality of food they get in comparison with the prisoners’ so offer prisoners their leftovers only to be rejected and humiliated. The prisoners then see the guards as a weak unit.

Conflict

According to social identity theory, by stating that after this one promotion there will be no more, a situation will be produced where the participants should begin to identify with their group and to act as a group. After failing to receive the promotion, certain prisoners begin to plot ways of undermining the guards’ authority such as mocking them and drawing a Hitler moustache and a swastika on a photo of one of the guards. The guards seem unaware of the plots being formed by the prisoners behind their backs. One guard in particular acts as if everyone is equal which infuriates the prisoners as it covers up the differences between the two groups and further emphasises the guards’ weak grasp on power. A plan by the prisoners is later put into action, showing the prisoners working as a unit while the guards undermine each other. With the guards’ disunity, the prisoners win.

Unlike the results from the Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo, 1973), Reicher and Haslam’s findings were published in leading academic journals, leading to a number of publications on tyranny, stress and leadership and cast further doubt on Zimbardo’s general conclusions. Zimbardo’s study focussed more on what happens when a powerful authority figure (Zimbardo and his briefing to the guards) imposes tyranny whereas Reicher and Haslam’s study focussed on what happens when you leave people to deal with inequality on their own as well as how they can end up creating tyranny for themselves. They question the notion that people slip mindlessly into role and the idea that the dynamics of evil are in any way banal. Their research also points to the importance of leadership in the emergence of tyranny of the form displayed by Zimbardo when briefing guards in the Stanford Prison Experiment. “Looking at these dynamics, 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  process  —  the normalization  of  evil  — is  far  from  banal.  Our theories of it should no longer be either.” (Reicher & Haslam, 2007)