The pride and superiority you feel from having an unhealthier lifestyle than others is a short term gratification that will lead to long term detriments.
In the late 70s I took part in an experiment also set in a mock-prison environment, but unlike participants in the Stanford study, I did NOT consent to take part, nor was I EVER actually informed that events were not real. This experiment also differed significantly both in duration (15 years) and with its use of mock trials. In my opinion, they overdid it with the authenticity ... and I'm STILL waiting to be paid for my time.
@@Crick1952 I'm pretty sure he's talking about a 15 year prison sentence lol. There's subtle hints of sarcasm in the last few sentences, hence why I commented what I did after reading over it a couple of times
@@MasterOfKnowledge. I know, I'm referencing the fact that the 13th amendment *literally* allows slavery as long as it's imposed by the government aka a prison sentence
That is the point. If you read anything Zimbardo has written you know that he isn’t vile or evil. His research has a lot to say about “evil” and us/versus them thinking.
@@ErebuBat You're not wrong. Phil Zimbardo isn't evil. He just completely lacks any form of self awareness and refuses to look back on the Stanford events critically. He has done other research that is high quality and very well done, but until he's honest about what happened at Stanford, specifically the effect his personal loss of detachment had on influencing outcomes being the most important finding salvageable from that garbage fire, it'll always be a huge black mark on his reputation.
Hmmm.... And I was there thinking it sounds more like a very strange BDSM play party... Entering the co-worker of Zimbardo who had experience as 'master sadist'.... Yeah. Adds up. Still way to less latex to peek my interest.
Initially, the first experiment seems questionable and possibly unethical. Then you explain Zimbardo's experiment and it makes the first one seem like a perfectly ethical scenario to put someone through.
Psych 101 teaches you the unethical part was letting the prisoners go through that crap (and dont get me wrong I didn't know it was this bad from this video, with the gaslighting) but the real injustice was this hackjob of a professor peddling his nonsense to cause harm in society. Basically amounts to result fabrication and academic dishonesty! And the fact that he isn't punished and disowned by the Psych academia shows how much of a joke the Psych academia is, and a huge failure on Stanford's part
From a modern perspective, in my education the Miligram experiments were used as an example of excellent praxis for experiments that could be very stressful or potentially traumatic to the subjects. Specifically cited were his allowing the subject to meet the cohort afterward to demonstrate they were okay, as well as allowing the subject as much time as they needed to talk to both the cohort and the proctor to process what just happened. The other were his periodic (I don't know if KB missed this or it got cut, but Milgram followed up with his subjects multiple times) followups with subjects to gauge their long term mental health. As a side note- here we can see a major divergence between Milgram and Zimbardo, Milgram did not directly participate in his experiments for the most part, he had proctors who worked for him do it specifically so he wouldn't influence the results. One interesting statistic from the Milligram experiments is that 84% of participants were glad they participated and only 1% regretted their involvement in a retrospective survey he took. The takeaway from that when I was in college was "potentially traumatic experiments aren't necessarily unethical, but if you're going to do them you need to take long run responsibility for what you've done." Which is an important lesson for experimental psychologists.
Remember how he said there were "18 variations" of this experiment? In one, the test subject was a puppy being given fake electrical shocks. When people criticized this by claiming that the puppy wasn't really being hurt (even though the participants didn't know that), the participants shocked a real puppy -- to death. And by "a puppy" I mean "a puppy for each participant who took it that far". _That_ variation was unethical, but how else could the hypothesis be proven that people would go that far even after seeing and confirming the results of their actions?
@@Starcrash6984 This is partially incorrect. It was a live puppy, and they shocked it, but the shocks were harmless. They didn't kill any dogs. Additionally, this was Sheridan and King, not Milgram.
The interesting thing about Milgram's experiment you didn't touch on was that the prompts the experimenter spoke had a huge effect on whether the participant continued. For example, 100% of the participants who were told "you have no choice, you must continue" refused to do so.
I wish this was uploaded sooner so I could have showed this to my Sociology professor. He had us watch Zimbardo’s TED talk on the Lucifer Effect in class and he presented it like it was gospel. Meanwhile, I had just written a paper on Zimbardo’s questionable scientific ethics for a different class, so I was fuming in my seat. Even when I approached him after class and asked him if he was aware that Zimbardo’s findings have been largely discredited, he just shrugged me off. I wish I could have been half as articulate as you when I approached him.
This is me sometimes. And then you say the word so much that you start thinking "Is this a real word? Is that how it's really said? Is that how it's really spelled?" Or is that just me?
on one of my re-watches, and I really appreciate that KB as an Iraq veteran calls american war criminals what they are. There is a scary and nauseating amount of avoiding responsibility under international law in the U.S.
Same!! I'm sick of how apparently the Department of Justice and DoD just makes up some BS about not being able to prosecute more war criminals by engaging in bad legal arguments and no one calls it out. Am I the only one who thinks POWs are POWs not terrorists or detainees and that the USA not torturing people is the definition the bare minimum?
@@michaelf.2449 I agree but there's a difference between something done in the heat of the moment in the field and the government treating what are either essentially POWs or prisoners awaiting trial like garbage and torture them. I'm not saying they're great people but if service members deserve humane treatment when captured, our enemies do to. Then gain I'm also ok with mercy killings when done honestly or torturing people who are committing serious crimes as retribution in the field (within reason) but still.
@@joeblow9657 I agree I was made to see a soldier in Afghanistan being charged for killing a combatant because his troops had already passed him so he wasn't a danger or something like that, but he shot and killed the man and it was justified the dude was just trying to end his buddies lives and now they expect the soldiee to treat him like a regular citizens who's injuries once the guy wasn't a threat anymore.
@@michaelf.2449 Yeah Afghanistan was a weird war. IMO that wasn't even the worst crap. The tolerance of pedophiles and even supporting local police chiefs and elders who were very into it because "they're on the same side" but a guy who was trying to kill you and can't be evacuated you're not allowed to kill. Like, it's a country of people who can't read and are mostly morons. You should treat the villagers who'll betray you in a second like dirt imo. Not worth fighting imo. Remember guys, making woman wear burkhas and marrying off child brides is ok but letting soldiers into your house isn't because they're not brown like you
When I was college, I was a test subject in an experiment where we were told to go into little booths and answer personality questions. Then we heard screaming outside but the examiners would not respond to questions about it. Some people left the booths and found the examiners had left. The screaming and cries for help could be heard outside again. Most people just shrugged it off and went back inside the booths to finish the questions. The rationale they gave was that if it was really serious, then somebody would already be doing something and maybe that's what the examiners left to go do. One guy and I left the room and walked around the building to see if we could find the source of the screaming. We couldn't find anything suspicious. The screaming stopped and we went back to finish the questionnaire. Turns out, it was really a test to see if we would call 911. There was a phone (unknowingly rigged to reroute 911 calls to the experimenters) in the room but nobody picked it up. (This was before cell phones were common.)
If it's any help to know, my college uses the Stanford Prison Experiment as their example of a flawed trial when discussing experiment methodology. We go over exactly how it was essentially bunk from beginning to end and then suggest methods for improving on it and remedying its flaws. All this in a sociology class so I can only imagine that the psychology students tear it to pieces... I guess that the shift away from this pop science piece that people hold to the standard as Milgram that you were hoping for is already underway, at least in certain parts of the world.
Twenty-five years ago, our psych professors framed it to us more as "This is why we have Review Boards that will examine your methodology before you're allowed run an experiment, and this is why you will *always* obey the Review Board." Whether or not it had flawed methodology, the Stanford experiment resulted in causing harm to the subjects and we were taught that that was unconditionally unacceptable. I don't remember them teaching any kind of critique of how the methodology specifically encouraged the outcome; it was almost more a cautionary tale of how _experimenters_ -- the actual people running the study -- could fall victim to the same kind of trap as the subjects of Milgram's experiments.
I’ve always liked to think that i’m a part of the third of people who wouldn’t have flicked the last switch, but i wonder how many of the general public thinks the same way? We all like to assume that we’re the exception and not the rule.
I would imagine that just the fact that you know about this experiment would make you more likely to not flick the last switch. Kind of like how knowledge of the bystander effect is a great inoculation against the bystander effect.
This video is everything. I majored in Psychology and I always asked myself when we got to ethics HOW DOES ZIMBARDO HAVE A CAREER?!? But besides from that, as a small ancedote- In the three psych 101 classes I've seen taught at two unviersities and three different teachers (1 took, 2 TAed), I never actually learned what the Stanford prison experiment was about instead it was slotted into the ethics section of the course and we went into detail why it was terrible plus the legal ramifications for the IRB and human research. It was slotted next to other medical atrocities like the Tuskegee Syphillis experiment and Dr. Mengala. great vid as always
Also as a question, there was a precendent set in I beleive Vietnam where a squadron of soldiers raised a village to the ground on the command of their commander officer. The soldiers in the squadron were not tried, only the commanding officer was. I don't know if you know that story, but would be interested to know your perspective on that considering if these experiments impacted that outcome.
not to mention the fascism school event that happened called the third wave (the movie the wave 1981 and the wave (die welle 2008) edited for more info.
@@calebr7199 When Apartheid was instituted in South Africa they took cues from the slavery model of the American South as well as Jim Crow laws. Not sure why people here were so quick to try to assume they had the ethical high ground.
The moment you said "Standford prison experiment" I immediately thought: the difference is that in the first study no one really got hurt. They learned an uncomfortable truth, but No One Got Hurt. The Standford prison situation can teach us things in the same way that Nazi human experimentation can teach us things, but that doesn't mean we call mengele a great scientist
Watching this I'm damn curious what would happen if you did the Standford Experiment but rather than push to be "tough" you stress that you have to be nice to the prisoners
In all likelihood about the same nicety what happens, when guards and prisoners aren't alone with each other, but there are visitors or external officials present
In every level of psychology course I've taken (high school, undergraduate, and graduate level) the ethics issues in the Milgrim and Stanford Prison experiments were discussed at large. In my high school and undergrad classes we actually never even went over the attribution theories, just the ethical issues in regards to the Stanford experiment. So its not like people are actually learning that these are perfect experiments that should be unquestioned.
I remember my mum telling me about this experiment when I was 8, along with the immorality of the 'I was just following orders' defence and how I should always follow my own judgement over what was or wasn't ethical. It think it probably made me a very difficult school child.
Same lol. Especially when I had a teacher tell me I should inherently respect them due to the authority of the position, and I said “I’ve respected all my previous teachers because they treated me with respect, you haven’t” and they said “I don’t have to, I’m a teacher!” I had detention for a few weeks :)
I would like to know, whether Zimbardo would qualify as a psychopath or not. Being the puppet master of something of this nature, seems to require a level of disconnect with the human participants.
I don't know if he's a psychopath. I think it's possible he might have been caught up in conducting his the research at the time, and have done highly questionable things in order to prove his hypothesis, and thus, his own bias. In retrospect, there seems to be a political agenda behind this, after all. And after the "experiment", he could either choose to milk it for all it was worth, or admit that he royally screwed up. He chose the former, clearly, and may or may not never have realised the lie of it. Just my two cents of speculation.
The whole "Dispositional or Situational" thing reminds me of my job working with children. I very rarely do more then talk sternly to them, one of the only times I ever yelled and got physical with a child was when she was playing around next to the street. Even then it was more out of my own fear: the pulling her back was necessary, the yelling in her face less so as she was already out of danger at that point. It's still possible yelling was useful as she never played around when waiting to cross the street after that, but the intention of the yelling in the moment was very much just a release of my own emotions, not a tool intended to help the situation.
Consider yourself lucky. My Psych 101 prof in college loved BF Skinner and Herman Maslow. After he did units on those two, neither man's theories appealed to me and I wasn't alone in that class in thinking so.
While at community college, I conducted an experiment based on the Asch conformity experiment. That's another REALLY interesting experiment regarding how your situation influences your actions, and no one has to suffer any psychological torture.
Another reason Psychology took off is because millions of people were coming home with PTSD because of the war(s). We wanted to know what was happening, and as time went on, flashbacks and episodes stopped being seen as "weak" and were treated more seriously.
Having worked in the prison system when I used to moonlight, I’m not sure if there are just more jerk guards who are drawn to that line of work or being a guard makes you a jerk. Nowadays they use online games for a lot of these studies with good success. And no one gets hurt.
God, this channel is so good. Well researched, well presented, well edited videos every time. This is communications at its best: history communications, science communications, social communications, even literary communications. Ever impressive and entertaining.
His videos on psychology are great I'll agree, it's what brought me into this channel His videos on political and social justice issues leave alot to be desired though.
I remember seeing on the Discovery Channel they redid the Milgram experiment. This time, they paired up the "teachers" but one of the teachers is really a confederate. It turns out that if one "teacher" refuses to continue the experiment, the other teacher will join her and quit the experiment.
Another thing that was discovered was that people would not follow a direct order. There were four scripted prods to get the Teachers to continue, but only the fourth and final one was a direct order, *"You have no other choice".* What they discovered though, was that, whenever they finally used the fourth prod... total disobedience. Not one Teacher would continue if they were given the direct order to do so. And yet, if you ask anyone today what the Milgram study shows, they will tell you that it shows that people follow orders, when in fact it shows the exact opposite. What the Milgram study actually proved was, if you can lead people into believing that what they're doing is worthwhile, you can get them to do anything. A lot of things that are worthwhile are very hard... breaking new ground into new studies or new ways of thinking is often fraught with danger, and comes with high risk. The people involved in such efforts must come to believe that what they're doing is right, and that it's for the greater good. And that's exactly how the Nazis approached the problem. Heinrich Himmler gave a speech to the SS just before they began carrying out The Final Solution, wherein he told them, (paraphrased) "of course you don't want to kill these people, nobody would want to do such a thing and it's going to be very hard for you... but, you must understand that, what you're about to do is necessary and for the greater good of Germany if we are to advance our noble cause." And there is the dark danger that the Milgram study proved. If you want to commit atrocities against an entire race of people, you won't get anywhere by ordering people to simply do it. What you have to do instead is convince them that, while you recognize that this is horrible (of course this is horrible), it's still for the greater good... more good will come from doing this than the pain it will initially cause, and it will advance a very noble ideal that will lead us to a brighter, more peaceful future (there is redemption waiting just on the other side).
@alan wake how did we go from an experiment trying to deal with the banality of evil and why Eichmann was on TV talking about how he was just following orders to being an actual nazi who happens to have the name of a video game protagonist
As a scientist myself (Immunology, not Psychology) I appreciate the time you take to accurately explain experimental design and what proper controls are. It's so important for the understanding of the results to include the context of the experimental design. It will inevitably help people understand other fields as well. Your videos are always so well put together and clearly explained.
Ive been seeing a lot of people using the Stanford prison experiment as an example of “ absolute power corrupts absolutely” to describe the police state in which we live. You touched on the power dynamic on which Zimbardo played and how it affected the results but I also think a major factor was what happens with the power that comes with assumed roles and hierarchical structures. (IE the “prisoners” assumed the role of the oppressed and rebellion, the Guards assumed the role of authoritarian .) they inherently adopted an “us vs them” dynamic which escalated into what happened. like “cops and robbers”, or “cowboys vs Indians”. Essentially they played a game with agreeded upon roles with an automatic opposition dynamic. The students deliberated on their actions in their roles as “prisoners and guards”( With Zimbardos input), on how to behave in this dynamic. I’m so very fascinated by the Stanford prison experiment there’s so many ways to dissect it
In my experience, deceit is so ingrained in psychology testing and I don't really know why. My ex-girlfriend in college was running an experiment that wasn't getting the participant turnout she wanted, so I helped out. I can't remember what she was testing, but even then, participating in a study run by someone I trusted, I still had the idea that I might have been given a red herring.
Teacher: Ready to begin? Me, the Learner: Yes. Wait, one sec guys can I make one tiny adjustment? Researchers: What? me, the Learner: Can we actually do the shocks. Also can I call the teacher daddy? Researchers: Ok experiment over.
I read a book recently called The Zimbardo Effect and it was written by the dude and part of it mentioned the stuff you're saying about the standford prison experience. It's a good book if that kinda thing is your genre. Also I just found your channel yesterday and I'm in love with it. I rarely find good educational channels because I have a sensory processing issue and developmental delay so I have a hard time with abstract concepts but I can completely understand and follow along with what you're saying. Thanks for being awesome!
When I was a kid in school and was getting interested in Psychology, Zimbardo was like a hero to me, maybe hero isn't the right word but as a kid I really looked up to him and was fascinated by his work and played a big part in the reason why I'm studying psychology now. I realise now that psychological science, while interesting, isn't anywhere near as fanciful as his study. I guess I know better now.
I'm currently working on my Masters degree in psychology and I have come to resent any psychological theory that asserts that people don't have agency or overstate circumstances to explain away human behavior. The human ability to think about one's own behavior and evaluate yourself is incredible. Ignoring human capacity and saying that your actions are just the results of your circumstances is an incredible moral failing, in my opinion... let alone trying to prove that point with an incredibly unethical "experiment".
As a former psych student, my first textbook was by Zimbardo et al. It was fascinating to read about all the big experiments, that were so impactful compared to more recent ones. Then years later, I found out how dodgy many of the experiments were: -six degrees of seperation? Doesn't really work out IRL. Only a tiny percentage of packages sent out got returned within 6 steps. -The Prison Experiment: see above -Milgram's Obedience experiment: there are some issues with this one as well. From wikipedia: "In 2012 Australian psychologist Gina Perry investigated Milgram's data and writings and concluded that Milgram had manipulated the results, and that there was "troubling mismatch between (published) descriptions of the experiment and evidence of what actually transpired." She wrote that "only half of the people who undertook the experiment fully believed it was real and of those, 66% disobeyed the experimenter". She described her findings as "an unexpected outcome" that "leaves social psychology in a difficult situation.""
Was that JJ McCullough at 8:50 or so? Edit: Alright he reads everything it seems like? Cool though because I actually quite enjoy his videos and its awesome to see a cross over!
Guest narrators have been a staple of the channel for a while, the selection of guest narrators has included numerous educational, liberal and leftist channels, all worth checking out.
Mike Daniels I think that he means that many channels that are considered to be in at least one of those categories do this. I think one can argue that JJ is an educational channel
I love this channel is growing. It’s one of the best on UA-cam in my opinion. With all of the lowbrow anti-intellectualism, it’s glad to see people still care about a higher learning.
Incredibly well done video, KB. I took an intro psych course in high school, and they taught the Stanford Prison Experiment in exactly the way you described. It's crazy to know that all of that "research" was so flawed.
Knowing better i can't believe you challenged one of my favorite episodes of mindfield. I always leave your videos feeling amazed at how smart you are and how much research you do and how well I understand because you explain things very neatly for my brain
I know Bias Game is strong in psychology, but how the hell Zimbardo got so famous and gained a lot when his "experiment" was already said troublesome by other academics?? That's like super saturated bias!
because people LOVE talking about how horrid humanity is and Zimbrdo provided "evidence" that we really are all capable of horrific actions and would gleefully do so if given the opportunity
Because most people aren't trained to see flaws in scientific studies and Zimbardo wasn't going to cop to how much shit he pulled when presenting his findings. His "findings" were shocking and the news, which often has to simplify science into easily digestible segments for the average person, ran with it.
Delgado as the Master is all I can think about when I look at the guy. They really should have hired him to play the Master in the new series (would've been an improvement over "Missy", God that was dumb).
I love when you talk psychology. You make it interesting, the way you present information is good, you make it easy to understand. Thanks so much for your videos!
Now I'm seriously debating even reading the rest of the Lucifer Effect book that Phillip Zimbardo wrote. : \ It was starting to make me feel uneasy, and now I l know why.
@@gatekeeper99924 Zimbardo explains the Stanford Prison Experiment and uses historical events under the premise that group dynamics/an individual's environment determine if they will do bad things. I was thinking about reading it but after watching this video I'm also having second thoughts
Holy crap! I had read about Zimbardo's experiment a ton of times, and had no idea how crazy it really was! Now, I can only wonder how Zimbardo didn't face criminal charges or a civil suit for this.
I haven’t finished the video yet, I’m 22 minutes in and completed convinced that you’re doing something with the static transition sounds.. I can’t even recall from memory if they’re in all of your videos.
I think the biggest takeaway from the Stanford Prison Experiment film was at the end were they're showing real interview clips of the people involved, and the very end the "John Wayne" guy remarks at how shocked he was that, no matter how far he pushed it, no one tried to stop him. No one spoke up to say he was pushing it too far. Now considering the faults in the experiment, that could be for any number of reasons, but it's something to ponder.
Well, that just proved how bad my hearing is... When you said "I bet you just flinched" I was confused - why on earth would that flash make me flinch? What did I miss? And I had to replay the scene *twice* to be able to hear the high-pitched noise at all. 🙃
Science is a method, not a dogma. The method of "science" is largely unchanged. There's a lot of knowledge that we lack, but science exists to help us better attain that knowledge, it isn't that knowledge itself.
@@Lawrence330 And the Jews had the dialectic, a foundation for the scientific method, as far back as the Jerusalem Talmud, just called by a different name. Jewish scientists have had the tools far longer than their Gentile colleagues, I find _that_ fascinating.
> _Knowing that about yourself changes your perspective._ This is true. And, it's absolutely necessary that everyone knows this about themselves and one another.
@@SM-lh3jz Perhaps to the British torture camps the War Office ran in post-war Germany to root out communists and Soviet spies? Maybe to the treatment of the Boers during and after the second Boer war? Maybe to any other injustice the British Empire heaped on a colonized part of the world? I'm curious as well now.
Jon Ronson's book So You've Been Publicly Shamed has a good chapter about the Stanford Prison Experiment. Basically saying the same thing, it has a good interview with the accented guard.
“You just flinched didn’t you?”
Me having been awake for 20 hours: wait what?
Dexis 20? Ametuer! I can pull 50
x _ my record is 80 if that’s what we’re comparing, I was just sitting on 20 at the time
The pride and superiority you feel from having an unhealthier lifestyle than others is a short term gratification that will lead to long term detriments.
Lmao I just stared at my screen like why would I flinch? I completely glossed over the first beep so that confused me until I went back
Dexis bullshit
“When replicated without pushing the guards towards aggression, it turns to a summer camp type situation”
Is my favorite detail
Yeah that sounds like fun
basically the sex raft
@@skyeye61 I just found out about the sex raft idek how but it’s my favorite social experiment I’ve ever learned about
@@elihenley6982 if they have weed it will be a lovely experience
In the late 70s I took part in an experiment also set in a mock-prison environment, but unlike participants in the Stanford study, I did NOT consent to take part, nor was I EVER actually informed that events were not real. This experiment also differed significantly both in duration (15 years) and with its use of mock trials. In my opinion, they overdid it with the authenticity ... and I'm STILL waiting to be paid for my time.
Best comment on this video so far
Sounds like quite the ethical violation.
I hope it wasn't supported by an amendment to the American Constitution
@@Crick1952 I'm pretty sure he's talking about a 15 year prison sentence lol. There's subtle hints of sarcasm in the last few sentences, hence why I commented what I did after reading over it a couple of times
@@MasterOfKnowledge. I know, I'm referencing the fact that the 13th amendment *literally* allows slavery as long as it's imposed by the government aka a prison sentence
@@Crick1952 Ahh, yeah. I get what you're saying now. Can't believe your comment went over my head lol
Knowing Better: *"Watch me destroy this man's credibility in 25 minutes"*
and now, we know better
Looks like the study says a lot more about the psychology state of Dr Zimbardo, rather than the participants.
I wanna hunt beasts. How do I contact you?
That is the point. If you read anything Zimbardo has written you know that he isn’t vile or evil. His research has a lot to say about “evil” and us/versus them thinking.
@@ErebuBat You're not wrong. Phil Zimbardo isn't evil. He just completely lacks any form of self awareness and refuses to look back on the Stanford events critically. He has done other research that is high quality and very well done, but until he's honest about what happened at Stanford, specifically the effect his personal loss of detachment had on influencing outcomes being the most important finding salvageable from that garbage fire, it'll always be a huge black mark on his reputation.
Dr Zimbardo's gf stopped him from continuing his experiment - she saw it, and him, was "out of control."
Hmmm.... And I was there thinking it sounds more like a very strange BDSM play party...
Entering the co-worker of Zimbardo who had experience as 'master sadist'....
Yeah. Adds up.
Still way to less latex to peek my interest.
Glorious video! Loved it. Missed you.
Can you pardon me for kneecapping my grandpa?
Why are you everywhere? And why are you verified?
Krischna Gabriel click on his channel you’ll find out
Joe H.S click on his channel and you’ll find out
Oh, hey Jesus 👋
Initially, the first experiment seems questionable and possibly unethical. Then you explain Zimbardo's experiment and it makes the first one seem like a perfectly ethical scenario to put someone through.
Psych 101 teaches you the unethical part was letting the prisoners go through that crap (and dont get me wrong I didn't know it was this bad from this video, with the gaslighting) but the real injustice was this hackjob of a professor peddling his nonsense to cause harm in society. Basically amounts to result fabrication and academic dishonesty! And the fact that he isn't punished and disowned by the Psych academia shows how much of a joke the Psych academia is, and a huge failure on Stanford's part
I know which one I'd rather be in.
From a modern perspective, in my education the Miligram experiments were used as an example of excellent praxis for experiments that could be very stressful or potentially traumatic to the subjects.
Specifically cited were his allowing the subject to meet the cohort afterward to demonstrate they were okay, as well as allowing the subject as much time as they needed to talk to both the cohort and the proctor to process what just happened. The other were his periodic (I don't know if KB missed this or it got cut, but Milgram followed up with his subjects multiple times) followups with subjects to gauge their long term mental health. As a side note- here we can see a major divergence between Milgram and Zimbardo, Milgram did not directly participate in his experiments for the most part, he had proctors who worked for him do it specifically so he wouldn't influence the results.
One interesting statistic from the Milligram experiments is that 84% of participants were glad they participated and only 1% regretted their involvement in a retrospective survey he took.
The takeaway from that when I was in college was "potentially traumatic experiments aren't necessarily unethical, but if you're going to do them you need to take long run responsibility for what you've done." Which is an important lesson for experimental psychologists.
Remember how he said there were "18 variations" of this experiment? In one, the test subject was a puppy being given fake electrical shocks. When people criticized this by claiming that the puppy wasn't really being hurt (even though the participants didn't know that), the participants shocked a real puppy -- to death. And by "a puppy" I mean "a puppy for each participant who took it that far". _That_ variation was unethical, but how else could the hypothesis be proven that people would go that far even after seeing and confirming the results of their actions?
@@Starcrash6984 This is partially incorrect. It was a live puppy, and they shocked it, but the shocks were harmless. They didn't kill any dogs. Additionally, this was Sheridan and King, not Milgram.
I just love how he always looks like someone's dad. He most likely is someone's dad. He seems like he makes for a good dad.
just the ferrets :/
Hey Muta
Hello guys and gals
So is he “Knowing Daddy” or “Daddy Better”
@@swolejeezy2603 How about "Father Better" or, the better alternative, "Knowing Father"
I usually don’t expect new content on Sundays, now, I know better.
Nice
You haven't been watching this channel very long, have you? Knowing Better always releases on Sunday.
@@stevehall383 And now they know better.
Youbare knowing better
Cue ferret footage...
The interesting thing about Milgram's experiment you didn't touch on was that the prompts the experimenter spoke had a huge effect on whether the participant continued. For example, 100% of the participants who were told "you have no choice, you must continue" refused to do so.
Reactance effect in action
Dr. Zimbardo, putting a model of the thunderdome in his ant farm:
Yes, I am a scientist.
Dr.Zimbabwe: you know im sth of a scientist myself
Dr. Zimbardo in the evenings in front of his mirror: *Maniacal Laugh* Mwahahahah *maniacal laugh*
I once made an ant and another ant fight.
So you could say I'm something of a scientist myself.
@@laxjoh have you gotten your Nobel yet?
Utopian mouse experiment ;)
I wish this was uploaded sooner so I could have showed this to my Sociology professor. He had us watch Zimbardo’s TED talk on the Lucifer Effect in class and he presented it like it was gospel. Meanwhile, I had just written a paper on Zimbardo’s questionable scientific ethics for a different class, so I was fuming in my seat. Even when I approached him after class and asked him if he was aware that Zimbardo’s findings have been largely discredited, he just shrugged me off. I wish I could have been half as articulate as you when I approached him.
Everyday, normal people.
Everyday, normal people.
Everyday, normal people.
This is me sometimes. And then you say the word so much that you start thinking "Is this a real word? Is that how it's really said? Is that how it's really spelled?" Or is that just me?
Every other day, Normal people
BoURgEoIsiE BuOrGeOi 😁Thank you
And then we are told over and over again that everyday, normal people are all good and hardworking and are the foundation of our society.
Amazing what normal people do in extraordinary circumstances!
"That's J.J doing voiceovers."- Me, the whole video.
Lmao me too
*5 seconds in*
I bet these beeps are going to be relevant later in the video
"Is the beep part of the experiment?"
Prismarine Stars I’m not hearing beeps and I’m halfway through
@@tinyshamrocks2172 They were only in the first few seconds.
You’ve been conditioned
They are there at the end of the video
on one of my re-watches, and I really appreciate that KB as an Iraq veteran calls american war criminals what they are. There is a scary and nauseating amount of avoiding responsibility under international law in the U.S.
Same!! I'm sick of how apparently the Department of Justice and DoD just makes up some BS about not being able to prosecute more war criminals by engaging in bad legal arguments and no one calls it out. Am I the only one who thinks POWs are POWs not terrorists or detainees and that the USA not torturing people is the definition the bare minimum?
@@joeblow9657 I think certain "war crimes" are justified and should be conditional
@@michaelf.2449 I agree but there's a difference between something done in the heat of the moment in the field and the government treating what are either essentially POWs or prisoners awaiting trial like garbage and torture them. I'm not saying they're great people but if service members deserve humane treatment when captured, our enemies do to.
Then gain I'm also ok with mercy killings when done honestly or torturing people who are committing serious crimes as retribution in the field (within reason) but still.
@@joeblow9657 I agree I was made to see a soldier in Afghanistan being charged for killing a combatant because his troops had already passed him so he wasn't a danger or something like that, but he shot and killed the man and it was justified the dude was just trying to end his buddies lives and now they expect the soldiee to treat him like a regular citizens who's injuries once the guy wasn't a threat anymore.
@@michaelf.2449 Yeah Afghanistan was a weird war. IMO that wasn't even the worst crap. The tolerance of pedophiles and even supporting local police chiefs and elders who were very into it because "they're on the same side" but a guy who was trying to kill you and can't be evacuated you're not allowed to kill.
Like, it's a country of people who can't read and are mostly morons. You should treat the villagers who'll betray you in a second like dirt imo. Not worth fighting imo.
Remember guys, making woman wear burkhas and marrying off child brides is ok but letting soldiers into your house isn't because they're not brown like you
I actually didn't flinch. I'm surprised. I guess I'm a God now
Coda Mission lol same
I didn’t even know I was supposed to flinch because of the beeps. Maybe I’m just too darn deaf
Deity status obtained
All my ears did, was ring slightly. Lol
Well I didn’t flinch too we could be Deities man
When I was college, I was a test subject in an experiment where we were told to go into little booths and answer personality questions. Then we heard screaming outside but the examiners would not respond to questions about it. Some people left the booths and found the examiners had left. The screaming and cries for help could be heard outside again. Most people just shrugged it off and went back inside the booths to finish the questions. The rationale they gave was that if it was really serious, then somebody would already be doing something and maybe that's what the examiners left to go do. One guy and I left the room and walked around the building to see if we could find the source of the screaming. We couldn't find anything suspicious. The screaming stopped and we went back to finish the questionnaire. Turns out, it was really a test to see if we would call 911. There was a phone (unknowingly rigged to reroute 911 calls to the experimenters) in the room but nobody picked it up. (This was before cell phones were common.)
If it's any help to know, my college uses the Stanford Prison Experiment as their example of a flawed trial when discussing experiment methodology. We go over exactly how it was essentially bunk from beginning to end and then suggest methods for improving on it and remedying its flaws. All this in a sociology class so I can only imagine that the psychology students tear it to pieces...
I guess that the shift away from this pop science piece that people hold to the standard as Milgram that you were hoping for is already underway, at least in certain parts of the world.
yeah, it was one of the studies on which they showed us flawed methodology in my psych courses as well.
Twenty-five years ago, our psych professors framed it to us more as "This is why we have Review Boards that will examine your methodology before you're allowed run an experiment, and this is why you will *always* obey the Review Board." Whether or not it had flawed methodology, the Stanford experiment resulted in causing harm to the subjects and we were taught that that was unconditionally unacceptable. I don't remember them teaching any kind of critique of how the methodology specifically encouraged the outcome; it was almost more a cautionary tale of how _experimenters_ -- the actual people running the study -- could fall victim to the same kind of trap as the subjects of Milgram's experiments.
Vsauce did a good mind field about the experiment and modified it
Dr Zimbardo is the most mad scientist name I've ever heard. What a dark fit
That's a Spiderman villain name my dudes.
"All evil begins at 15 volts."--Stanley Milgram
I wouldn't have hesitated if it were my lil bro
@@mandalortemaan7510 😲😲😲 You monster!
"You just flinched, didn't you?"
Me, staring dead-eyed at the screen: ...what?
I’ve always liked to think that i’m a part of the third of people who wouldn’t have flicked the last switch, but i wonder how many of the general public thinks the same way? We all like to assume that we’re the exception and not the rule.
Famously one of the few people who refused to flip was a Dutch immigrant who had lived during the Nazi-occupation.
No one would. Unless something happened to them that replicates it.
I would imagine that just the fact that you know about this experiment would make you more likely to not flick the last switch. Kind of like how knowledge of the bystander effect is a great inoculation against the bystander effect.
If I had no knowledge of the experiment, I'd probably be part of the majority. I feel comfortable following orders.
Nah, I have no doubt i would've pressed it a soon as I was told. Although I've come to terms with being a terrible person lol.
This video is everything. I majored in Psychology and I always asked myself when we got to ethics HOW DOES ZIMBARDO HAVE A CAREER?!? But besides from that, as a small ancedote- In the three psych 101 classes I've seen taught at two unviersities and three different teachers (1 took, 2 TAed), I never actually learned what the Stanford prison experiment was about instead it was slotted into the ethics section of the course and we went into detail why it was terrible plus the legal ramifications for the IRB and human research. It was slotted next to other medical atrocities like the Tuskegee Syphillis experiment and Dr. Mengala. great vid as always
Also as a question, there was a precendent set in I beleive Vietnam where a squadron of soldiers raised a village to the ground on the command of their commander officer. The soldiers in the squadron were not tried, only the commanding officer was. I don't know if you know that story, but would be interested to know your perspective on that considering if these experiments impacted that outcome.
"could it happen here" as it happens multiple times here
Yeah, the nazi's were inspired quite a bit by how the US treated the Native Americans.
not to mention the fascism school event that happened called the third wave (the movie the wave 1981 and the wave (die welle 2008) edited for more info.
I understand reoffending was rare in Germany, but I don't claim that liberalism works in every country.
@@calebr7199 ANd how do you figure that
@@calebr7199
When Apartheid was instituted in South Africa they took cues from the slavery model of the American South as well as Jim Crow laws. Not sure why people here were so quick to try to assume they had the ethical high ground.
The moment you said "Standford prison experiment" I immediately thought: the difference is that in the first study no one really got hurt. They learned an uncomfortable truth, but No One Got Hurt.
The Standford prison situation can teach us things in the same way that Nazi human experimentation can teach us things, but that doesn't mean we call mengele a great scientist
Didn’t even notice the beeps until you said that lol
Same
Me too
@@matthewaltemose1819 Same thing with me. Only both were not white. They were blueish gray.
Me 2
@@matthewaltemose1819 omg yes
“Master Sadist”? This is a position?
gordon thomas sounds like my previous landlord
Yes, it's the person who drafts all the forms you have to fill out at the DMV.
I wanna be master sadist...
Nah, the positions are dictated by the master sadist, though.
Yes at your local bdsm dungeon
Watching this I'm damn curious what would happen if you did the Standford Experiment but rather than push to be "tough" you stress that you have to be nice to the prisoners
It is described in The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether.
In all likelihood about the same nicety what happens, when guards and prisoners aren't alone with each other, but there are visitors or external officials present
George Chakhidze Nice Poe reference! That story doesn’t get the attention it deserves
@@Colddirector that sounds like a very gay porno
In every level of psychology course I've taken (high school, undergraduate, and graduate level) the ethics issues in the Milgrim and Stanford Prison experiments were discussed at large. In my high school and undergrad classes we actually never even went over the attribution theories, just the ethical issues in regards to the Stanford experiment. So its not like people are actually learning that these are perfect experiments that should be unquestioned.
That's a relief to hear
milgram*
I studied the Stanford Prison Experiment in high school! I was aware there were issues with the study but holy moly is it flawed.
I never knew just how messed up they set up those poor students. It was even worse than I thought. Horrific!
@@dawnoheee9524 they set up the Experiment as a survival horror game.
I think the experiment did at least prove that the german soldiers of ww2 were not uniquely evil simply because they were germans
*First blink*
"Uh, that was annoying"
*Second blink*
"Is he going to do this all video?"
*Third blink and query on whether I flinched*
"uh... what?"
*_Oooohh boy!_* This is gonna be a good 25 minutes well spent
beeeep
I remember my mum telling me about this experiment when I was 8, along with the immorality of the 'I was just following orders' defence and how I should always follow my own judgement over what was or wasn't ethical. It think it probably made me a very difficult school child.
Same lol. Especially when I had a teacher tell me I should inherently respect them due to the authority of the position, and I said “I’ve respected all my previous teachers because they treated me with respect, you haven’t” and they said “I don’t have to, I’m a teacher!”
I had detention for a few weeks :)
I would like to know, whether Zimbardo would qualify as a psychopath or not. Being the puppet master of something of this nature, seems to require a level of disconnect with the human participants.
I don't know if he's a psychopath. I think it's possible he might have been caught up in conducting his the research at the time, and have done highly questionable things in order to prove his hypothesis, and thus, his own bias. In retrospect, there seems to be a political agenda behind this, after all. And after the "experiment", he could either choose to milk it for all it was worth, or admit that he royally screwed up. He chose the former, clearly, and may or may not never have realised the lie of it.
Just my two cents of speculation.
He would, mostly because psychopaths aren’t real. At least not in the way most people think.
Shit
"Bleeding Heart sadist" OMEGALUL
I'm not sure if he's a psychopath, but he's definitely a criminal.
The whole "Dispositional or Situational" thing reminds me of my job working with children. I very rarely do more then talk sternly to them, one of the only times I ever yelled and got physical with a child was when she was playing around next to the street. Even then it was more out of my own fear: the pulling her back was necessary, the yelling in her face less so as she was already out of danger at that point. It's still possible yelling was useful as she never played around when waiting to cross the street after that, but the intention of the yelling in the moment was very much just a release of my own emotions, not a tool intended to help the situation.
Ugghh, my high school psychology teacher LOVED Zimbardo and praised him for being so brilliant. I never liked him.
Trust your guts
@@robertracicot7232 ?
Your teacher or Zimbardo?
@@Samm815 both
Consider yourself lucky. My Psych 101 prof in college loved BF Skinner and Herman Maslow. After he did units on those two, neither man's theories appealed to me and I wasn't alone in that class in thinking so.
While at community college, I conducted an experiment based on the Asch conformity experiment. That's another REALLY interesting experiment regarding how your situation influences your actions, and no one has to suffer any psychological torture.
Another reason Psychology took off is because millions of people were coming home with PTSD because of the war(s). We wanted to know what was happening, and as time went on, flashbacks and episodes stopped being seen as "weak" and were treated more seriously.
Never heard people whose families murdered had PTSD. I do constantly hear the murderers kept having PTSD.
Having worked in the prison system when I used to moonlight, I’m not sure if there are just more jerk guards who are drawn to that line of work or being a guard makes you a jerk.
Nowadays they use online games for a lot of these studies with good success. And no one gets hurt.
I did not expect to hear JJ's voice. That was a nice surprise!
Conner Toennis I’m as surprised as anyone!
I bet! It's great to see collaborations like this. Even if they're small, it makes this platform more connected
Conner Toennis I’ve been a KB fan for a long time so this is quite cool! Plus, I think this is honestly one of his best videos.
@@JJMcCullough I agree, it's definitely one of my favorites!
I was right about JJ.
UA-cam needs to add a love button, for when like simply isn't enough. This was a superb presentation.
Psychologist here: great video, and well made criticism on zimbardo.
Are the MythBusters still a thing?
The MythBusters should do the prison experiment.
Vsauce did it and had awesome results
No. They ended their run back in 2016. And the end was cemented with the death of Grant Imahara a few years back.
This remembers me something my dad told me: "people go to war because some one else tolds them to go, even if that someone never goes with them"
If you're wondering who the narrator is, it's J.J McCullough.
God, this channel is so good. Well researched, well presented, well edited videos every time. This is communications at its best: history communications, science communications, social communications, even literary communications. Ever impressive and entertaining.
His videos on psychology are great I'll agree, it's what brought me into this channel
His videos on political and social justice issues leave alot to be desired though.
I like that J.J. was a voice in this.
I remember seeing on the Discovery Channel they redid the Milgram experiment. This time, they paired up the "teachers" but one of the teachers is really a confederate. It turns out that if one "teacher" refuses to continue the experiment, the other teacher will join her and quit the experiment.
Another thing that was discovered was that people would not follow a direct order. There were four scripted prods to get the Teachers to continue, but only the fourth and final one was a direct order, *"You have no other choice".* What they discovered though, was that, whenever they finally used the fourth prod... total disobedience. Not one Teacher would continue if they were given the direct order to do so. And yet, if you ask anyone today what the Milgram study shows, they will tell you that it shows that people follow orders, when in fact it shows the exact opposite. What the Milgram study actually proved was, if you can lead people into believing that what they're doing is worthwhile, you can get them to do anything. A lot of things that are worthwhile are very hard... breaking new ground into new studies or new ways of thinking is often fraught with danger, and comes with high risk. The people involved in such efforts must come to believe that what they're doing is right, and that it's for the greater good. And that's exactly how the Nazis approached the problem. Heinrich Himmler gave a speech to the SS just before they began carrying out The Final Solution, wherein he told them, (paraphrased) "of course you don't want to kill these people, nobody would want to do such a thing and it's going to be very hard for you... but, you must understand that, what you're about to do is necessary and for the greater good of Germany if we are to advance our noble cause." And there is the dark danger that the Milgram study proved. If you want to commit atrocities against an entire race of people, you won't get anywhere by ordering people to simply do it. What you have to do instead is convince them that, while you recognize that this is horrible (of course this is horrible), it's still for the greater good... more good will come from doing this than the pain it will initially cause, and it will advance a very noble ideal that will lead us to a brighter, more peaceful future (there is redemption waiting just on the other side).
@alan wake how did we go from an experiment trying to deal with the banality of evil and why Eichmann was on TV talking about how he was just following orders to being an actual nazi who happens to have the name of a video game protagonist
alan wake you just became a real life example! Thanks, dude.
@@thebonesaw..4634 Yet billions of people humor direct rules or claims from a you-know-what, such as "I am the way, the truth, and the life".
Picollo: Gohan, quickly DODGE out of the way!
Gohan: *freezes in terror*
Picollo: Dam you Pavlov!!!!!!
As a scientist myself (Immunology, not Psychology) I appreciate the time you take to accurately explain experimental design and what proper controls are. It's so important for the understanding of the results to include the context of the experimental design. It will inevitably help people understand other fields as well. Your videos are always so well put together and clearly explained.
Ive been seeing a lot of people using the Stanford prison experiment as an example of “ absolute power corrupts absolutely” to describe the police state in which we live. You touched on the power dynamic on which Zimbardo played and how it affected the results but I also think a major factor was what happens with the power that comes with assumed roles and hierarchical structures. (IE the “prisoners” assumed the role of the oppressed and rebellion, the Guards assumed the role of authoritarian .) they inherently adopted an “us vs them” dynamic which escalated into what happened. like “cops and robbers”, or “cowboys vs Indians”. Essentially they played a game with agreeded upon roles with an automatic opposition dynamic. The students deliberated on their actions in their roles as “prisoners and guards”( With Zimbardos input), on how to behave in this dynamic. I’m so very fascinated by the Stanford prison experiment there’s so many ways to dissect it
In my experience, deceit is so ingrained in psychology testing and I don't really know why. My ex-girlfriend in college was running an experiment that wasn't getting the participant turnout she wanted, so I helped out. I can't remember what she was testing, but even then, participating in a study run by someone I trusted, I still had the idea that I might have been given a red herring.
Teacher: Ready to begin?
Me, the Learner: Yes. Wait, one sec guys can I make one tiny adjustment?
Researchers: What?
me, the Learner: Can we actually do the shocks. Also can I call the teacher daddy?
Researchers: Ok experiment over.
That sort of experiment would give COMPLETELY different data that the researchers hadn’t anticipated.
That's what we call, "selection bias."
And now we have the internet for that. Who'd thought the same technology would advance to that end?
Oh my god, you have no idea how happy I am that I didn't click off Chrome a few minutes ago, I would have missed this!
I like the use of JJ McCullough’s voice reading the papers etc. Another of my favorite UA-camrs.
Yeah I also discovered him recently , man the know betterverse is amazing
regarding the intro gag: jokes on you! I could't hear the beep due to hearing damage! Haha!
I miss high notes...
There was a beep?
12 | I didn’t hear it because I didn’t have my volume up and I wasn’t paying much attention
I promise some sounds arent worth hearing
I read a book recently called The Zimbardo Effect and it was written by the dude and part of it mentioned the stuff you're saying about the standford prison experience. It's a good book if that kinda thing is your genre.
Also I just found your channel yesterday and I'm in love with it. I rarely find good educational channels because I have a sensory processing issue and developmental delay so I have a hard time with abstract concepts but I can completely understand and follow along with what you're saying. Thanks for being awesome!
22:15 how many people just wanna see what happens when the turkey got dropped in the oil?!?!
When I was a kid in school and was getting interested in Psychology, Zimbardo was like a hero to me, maybe hero isn't the right word but as a kid I really looked up to him and was fascinated by his work and played a big part in the reason why I'm studying psychology now. I realise now that psychological science, while interesting, isn't anywhere near as fanciful as his study. I guess I know better now.
I spent the whole video trying to remember whose voice was reading quotes, until he said the word "about"
Nice to hear you, JJ
I'm currently working on my Masters degree in psychology and I have come to resent any psychological theory that asserts that people don't have agency or overstate circumstances to explain away human behavior. The human ability to think about one's own behavior and evaluate yourself is incredible. Ignoring human capacity and saying that your actions are just the results of your circumstances is an incredible moral failing, in my opinion... let alone trying to prove that point with an incredibly unethical "experiment".
This is Fallout 4 or the whole series of games in the lore (it is fiction) they have Vaults where they do unethical experiments on people.
Wasn’t there a vault that utilized that same experiment?
As a former psych student, my first textbook was by Zimbardo et al. It was fascinating to read about all the big experiments, that were so impactful compared to more recent ones.
Then years later, I found out how dodgy many of the experiments were:
-six degrees of seperation? Doesn't really work out IRL. Only a tiny percentage of packages sent out got returned within 6 steps.
-The Prison Experiment: see above
-Milgram's Obedience experiment: there are some issues with this one as well. From wikipedia:
"In 2012 Australian psychologist Gina Perry investigated Milgram's data and writings and concluded that Milgram had manipulated the results, and that there was "troubling mismatch between (published) descriptions of the experiment and evidence of what actually transpired." She wrote that "only half of the people who undertook the experiment fully believed it was real and of those, 66% disobeyed the experimenter". She described her findings as "an unexpected outcome" that "leaves social psychology in a difficult situation.""
1st blip: that's annoying
2nd blip: ouchie not fun
3rd flash: *squinty eyes*
KB: "you just flinched"
Me: WAT no that's illegal!
I didnt prob a sign to catch some sleep
Every time I’ve seen this experiment mentioned, this angle has never been mentioned. Thank you for giving the full details!
Deep South Knowing Better can't hurt you
Also Deep South Knowing Better:
Learned more about this today than I have from hours of my own interest in the topic. Thanks for putting together this incredible video!
Was that JJ McCullough at 8:50 or so?
Edit: Alright he reads everything it seems like? Cool though because I actually quite enjoy his videos and its awesome to see a cross over!
Guest narrators have been a staple of the channel for a while, the selection of guest narrators has included numerous educational, liberal and leftist channels, all worth checking out.
@@Quintinohthree are you suggesting JJ is a liberal? Lol
@@Quintinohthree
JJ had said multiple times that he is a Conservative. He also had Jreg in a cutaway and Jreg said that JJ is a Conservative.
Mike Daniels I think that he means that many channels that are considered to be in at least one of those categories do this. I think one can argue that JJ is an educational channel
@@Tdwt18
Yes.
I love this channel is growing. It’s one of the best on UA-cam in my opinion. With all of the lowbrow anti-intellectualism, it’s glad to see people still care about a higher learning.
Incredibly well done video, KB. I took an intro psych course in high school, and they taught the Stanford Prison Experiment in exactly the way you described. It's crazy to know that all of that "research" was so flawed.
Knowing better i can't believe you challenged one of my favorite episodes of mindfield. I always leave your videos feeling amazed at how smart you are and how much research you do and how well I understand because you explain things very neatly for my brain
I know Bias Game is strong in psychology, but how the hell Zimbardo got so famous and gained a lot when his "experiment" was already said troublesome by other academics??
That's like super saturated bias!
because people LOVE talking about how horrid humanity is and Zimbrdo provided "evidence" that we really are all capable of horrific actions and would gleefully do so if given the opportunity
Because most people aren't trained to see flaws in scientific studies and Zimbardo wasn't going to cop to how much shit he pulled when presenting his findings. His "findings" were shocking and the news, which often has to simplify science into easily digestible segments for the average person, ran with it.
I knew about the Zimbardo experiment, but was unaware of the methodological flaws. So thanks for shedding light on that - much appreciated !
Is it me or is Zimbaro, 'The Master'. I mean serious there are some strong similarities right there... (Doctor Who (Pertwee I think)).
Yup, also thought of Delgado! Master when I saw him
Delgado as the Master is all I can think about when I look at the guy. They really should have hired him to play the Master in the new series (would've been an improvement over "Missy", God that was dumb).
I love when you talk psychology. You make it interesting, the way you present information is good, you make it easy to understand. Thanks so much for your videos!
Yes! Psychology videos are back!
The Milgram Experiment was perfectly justifiable. Nobody was hurt. Not even psychologically.
Now I'm seriously debating even reading the rest of the Lucifer Effect book that Phillip Zimbardo wrote. : \ It was starting to make me feel uneasy, and now I l know why.
@@gatekeeper99924 Zimbardo explains the Stanford Prison Experiment and uses historical events under the premise that group dynamics/an individual's environment determine if they will do bad things. I was thinking about reading it but after watching this video I'm also having second thoughts
Holy crap! I had read about Zimbardo's experiment a ton of times, and had no idea how crazy it really was! Now, I can only wonder how Zimbardo didn't face criminal charges or a civil suit for this.
That ring would’ve got me a few years ago. My phones been on silent ever since I got the Apple Watch. That doesn’t work on me anymore.
I haven’t finished the video yet, I’m 22 minutes in and completed convinced that you’re doing something with the static transition sounds.. I can’t even recall from memory if they’re in all of your videos.
MAN I HAD MY PSYCH EXAM JUST YESTERDAY
This would’ve helped me a lot if it were released just 1 day ago 😂
Vsauce mind field
Guys he conditioned us to not expect videos on Sunday and then released a video on Sunday. The madlad.
new subscriber here, haven't caught up with all your older vids yet and already get to see new stuff! exciting!! love your content :)
don't care
@@michaelmendez59 oh my gawd you completely rekt him your great divines is to much for me to bear
@@lookadookatheblackswan3727 amen. He's a master
“You just flinched didn’t you?”
Yeah I flinched, I’ve got Tourette’s. I always flinch
You make the best content on this site
I think the biggest takeaway from the Stanford Prison Experiment film was at the end were they're showing real interview clips of the people involved, and the very end the "John Wayne" guy remarks at how shocked he was that, no matter how far he pushed it, no one tried to stop him. No one spoke up to say he was pushing it too far.
Now considering the faults in the experiment, that could be for any number of reasons, but it's something to ponder.
Ayyee you got JJ on, I’m so happy aboot that.
I love that JJ and you have been crossing over to each other's channels.
This is the best birthday present ever
Happy birthday! 🎉🎁🎈🎂
Hbd!
Did you get more LEGO?
Happy Birthdaaaayyy!! ❤❤❤
Well, that just proved how bad my hearing is...
When you said "I bet you just flinched" I was confused - why on earth would that flash make me flinch? What did I miss? And I had to replay the scene *twice* to be able to hear the high-pitched noise at all.
🙃
The real issue is the amazing fact of how under developed science actually is.
Science is a method, not a dogma. The method of "science" is largely unchanged. There's a lot of knowledge that we lack, but science exists to help us better attain that knowledge, it isn't that knowledge itself.
@@Lawrence330 And the Jews had the dialectic, a foundation for the scientific method, as far back as the Jerusalem Talmud, just called by a different name. Jewish scientists have had the tools far longer than their Gentile colleagues, I find _that_ fascinating.
> _Knowing that about yourself changes your perspective._
This is true. And, it's absolutely necessary that everyone knows this about themselves and one another.
Great video. Big fan of the channel 👌
Glad you're back, Zach. Always a thought-provoking presentation. I'm hooked. I just wish I had money to send you. Consider this as moral support.
His name isn't Zach.
"Something like the holocaust could never happen here!"
The UK: Hold my beer.
@@SM-lh3jz Perhaps to the British torture camps the War Office ran in post-war Germany to root out communists and Soviet spies? Maybe to the treatment of the Boers during and after the second Boer war?
Maybe to any other injustice the British Empire heaped on a colonized part of the world? I'm curious as well now.
Egregius lovely stuff
Turkey: oh shut up, WE were the original!
@@egregius9314 As much as that stuff is horrible it really doesn't measure up to the industrial scale of the Holocaust.
Wow! What an interesting video. As always great work. Keep doing what you are doing. I really enjoy and appreciate your delivery and enthusiasm.
JJ McCullough!
Jon Ronson's book So You've Been Publicly Shamed has a good chapter about the Stanford Prison Experiment.
Basically saying the same thing, it has a good interview with the accented guard.