Skeletons in the Closet: The Dark Side of Psychological History

In the opening scene of the original 1984 version of Ghostbusters, Dr. Venkman says, "I'm studying the effect of negative reinforcement on ESP ability." He delivers this line while conducting a rigged ESP test. This remark has become well known for its scientific inaccuracy, as the experiment actually demonstrates positive punishment. Venkman is deliberately misleading the participants.

Psychology has some troubling aspects in its history, including asylums, electric shock therapies, and non-regulated experimentation. It's important to acknowledge that when we learn better, we do better. However, this doesn't mean we shouldn't know about and respect the origins of our current practices.

The history of psychological assessment is fraught with both groundbreaking insights and significant ethical challenges. A prominent example of this is the Stanford Prison Experiment, which took place in 1971 and aimed to explore the psychological effects of perceived power within a simulated prison environment. Originally designed to last for two full weeks, the experiment was abruptly terminated after just six days due to the severe psychological distress and abusive behaviors exhibited by the participants.

This tightly controlled study involved college students assigned to the roles of either guards or prisoners, leading to unexpected and alarming consequences. The participants swiftly internalized their roles, with the “guards” displaying increasingly authoritarian and dehumanizing behaviors towards the “prisoners,” who, in turn, experienced extreme stress and emotional turmoil. The rapid escalation of psychological abuse not only raised questions about the ethical limits of psychological research but also highlighted the potential for ordinary individuals to engage in harmful behavior when placed in positions of power.

The lessons from this experiment resonate today, particularly when considering the actions and culture  of organizations. Understanding the psychological mechanisms that drove the behavior of the participants in the Stanford Prison Experiment may shed light on the current operational dynamics and ethical considerations faced by individuals in similar authority roles today. This reflection invites us to critically examine the frameworks and conditions that permit such behaviors and their effects on those subjected to them.

Philip Zimbardo, the psychologist who orchestrated the infamous Stanford Prison Experiment, passed away recently at the age of 91. His life and work remind us that our understanding of human psychology, particularly concerning authority, compliance, and moral decision-making, is still very much a developing field. The Stanford Prison Experiment, conducted in 1971, revealed profound insights into the nature of power and the psychological effects of situational contexts on behavior.

This experiment has sparked ongoing discussions about the ethics of psychological research, the balance between scientific inquiry and the welfare of subjects, and the broader implications for understanding systemic evil in society. As we reflect on Zimbardo’s contributions, it becomes clear that we still have much to explore regarding human behavior, morality, and the structure of social institutions.

Numerous experiments and narratives illustrate the profound ways in which societal structures and environments influence individual behavior and mental health. Recent studies have shown that solitary confinement can have lethal consequences; these findings are becoming increasingly significant in discussions surrounding criminal justice and mental health.

Solitary confinement is one of the most severe forms of punishment employed within our prison systems. Research indicates that this particular penalty inflicts the most profound psychological damage compared to other disciplinary measures. The effects of isolation are not immediately noticeable; rather, the long-term implications on mental health can persist for years, long after the affected individuals have left solitary conditions. The experience of being confined alone, devoid of human interaction and sensory stimulation, can lead to a range of debilitating psychological issues, including anxiety, depression, and even suicidal tendencies.

This highlights the urgent need for reform in the treatment of incarcerated individuals, as the consequences of solitary confinement extend far beyond prison walls, affecting lives long after release. If both guards and prisoners have strong reactions to the roles they play within the prison system, the field of psychology may need to develop a form of punishment that does not exacerbate the issues faced by rule-followers upon their entry. Actions defined in specific ways seem to have heightened psychological effects, both in current prison experiments and in previous studies conducted by psychologists that would not meet contemporary ethical standards.

While psychology has a lot of skeletons in the closet (only a few select mentioned here), it’s not only overt changes we need within the prison system, but cultures of permissiveness for us to behave in ways that are less than ideal because the person in senior authority behaves in such a way, giving permission for others to act similarly. Those seeking power will align with those who control the culture of those spaces. Those that say,  “Well, I would never do that,” are subject to the same influences of human behavior as anyone else. I bet the students that participated in the prison experiment would have said the same thing before they started it. I would say, I wouldn’t be so sure either, because context, environment, and culture create nuance, and room to excuse why we choose to do what we do. Don’t be so sure you would not be subject to the same influences; but in the same breath, when we know our history, we can hopefully keep from repeating it.

 Reference: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/12/08/solitary_symposium/