Tyranny revisited Groups, psychological well-being and the health of societies

VIL acts, we like to think, are the preserve of psychopaths. Yet 30 to E 40 years ago, a series of classic STEPHEN REICHER and psychology experiments showed that the behaviour of ordinary people can be S. discuss transformed in groups and that the most decent of individuals can be led to behave results from their BBC Prison Study. in the most indecent ways. These studies raise critical questions about the processes In this, ordinary young men were divided agency and hence to become helpless to through which groups can transform us, randomly into prisoners and guards and resist antisocial impulses. Groups are and whether such transformations are placed in a prison-like setting. Very inevitably bad for you. Groups with power always for the worse. Yet for decades it has inevitably abuse it. Or, in the researchers’ been impossible to conduct studies with the own words, the aggression of the guards same power as the classic studies and to ‘Can collaborations between ‘was emitted simply as a “natural” interrogate their conclusions. The BBC the media and academia ever consequence of being in the uniform of Prison Study has broken this impasse and be of scientific value?’ a “guard” and asserting the power inherent provides a surprising new set of answers in that role’ (Haney et al., 1973, p.12). with important social, clinical and organisational ramifications. quickly, some of the guards began to act A powerful phenomenon… brutally. They set out to humiliate the but a questionable explanation Are groups ‘naturally’ bad prisoners and to deprive them of their Although few doubt what happened at for us? rights. Within days, some prisoners began Stanford, there are in fact good reasons Of all the demonstrations that groups can to develop psychological disorders. So to doubt Zimbardo’s explanation of the change us, perhaps the most extreme was severe were the consequences that a study events. If it is ‘natural’ to abuse power in conducted by Philip Zimbardo and scheduled to last a fortnight had to be groups, why did only some guards behave colleagues at the University of Stanford in terminated after only six days. this way? And if only some guards were 1971 (Haney, Banks & Zimbardo, 1973). The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) brutal, was this ‘natural’ or was it a product provided a grimly compelling portrait of of Zimbardo’s leadership? After all, in his the power of circumstances to shape briefing, Zimbardo instructed his guards by WEBLINKS behaviour. This is the main reason why its telling them: ‘You can create in the findings are well-known even beyond the prisoners…a notion of arbitrariness, that BBC Prison Study official website: boundaries of academia. But the SPE their life is totally controlled by us, by the www.theexperiment.org.uk didn’t just show the depths that people system, you, me – and they’ll have no Stanford Prison Experiment official website: can descend to in groups, it also sought to privacy… We’re going to take away their www.prisonexp.org explain exactly what caused this descent. individuality in various ways. In general Social science commentary on Abu Ghraib: To those who ran the study, it illustrated what all this leads to is a sense of tinyurl.com/8m2bx a general tendency for people in groups powerlessness.’ to lose their capacity for judgement and There are also moral reasons to doubt

146

The Psychologist Vol 19 No 3 March 2006 BBC Prison Study

a piece of reality television with no serious judgement of those who read our work. implications? Can collaborations between However, for us, one of the contributions of the media and academia ever be of the study is already implied in the range of scientific value? Can broadcasting outputs it has led to. Characteristically, in psychological research be ethical? our everyday studies, psychologists tend to focus on a narrow set of phenomena and Scientific output collect a limited range of data. We thereby These were valid fears. That is why we perpetuate arbitrary disciplinary divisions negotiated a unique contract with the BBC between domains that one might expect to whereby we, the scientists, would design, be interrelated. In nearly 10 days of run and analyse the research (as we would constant data collection – which in any other study) while the broadcaster incorporated observational, psychometric recorded and transmitted key elements of and physiological measures – we were able the research. The television documentaries to examine how relations within and themselves were not the full scientific between groups developed and impacted story, but rather were designed to provide upon each other. We also had space to ‘a window on the science’: something that investigate clinical and organisational as might get people interested and motivate well as social psychological issues. We them to find out more for themselves. were thereby able to see how phenomena However, the process of producing that are of core concern to us as social television documentaries moves much psychologists (notably, the presence or more quickly than that of performing absence of a shared sense of social the ‘role’ explanation. It suggests that all scientific analysis and securing scientific identity) are related to the mental well- of us would mindlessly abuse others if we publication. So, for a long time these being of individuals and the health of were given roles that appeared to demand documentaries were the primary form of social systems. Although it has been this. This denies the capacity for human information about the study that was in the hypothesised that there is a link between agency and choice (Reicher & Haslam, in public domain. It is only now that, in the these elements (e.g. Ellemers et al., 1999; press). And it suggests that – whatever words of The Guardian’s John Sutherland Haslam, 2001), no single study had position they occupy in the social hierarchy (2005), The Experiment has ‘crossed back demonstrated that the phenomena are – bullies and tyrants are passive victims of into academia’. So it is only now that is it interrelated, elucidated how they are psychology who cannot be held possible to assess the scientific merits of interrelated, or explored how their accountable for their actions. In this way, the exercise. Did it provide any worthwhile relationship unfolds over time. psychological analysis easily ends up insights into the psychology of group excusing the inexcusable (Haslam & behaviour and misbehaviour? And did it do Procedure, ethics and rationale Reicher, 2006). so with a rigour that meets the standards In what ways, then, did the design of our required for scientific publication? This is study differ from the SPE? The study used Beyond Stanford – The BBC a particularly pertinent question in light of the same basic set-up as Zimbardo’s study Prison Study the fact that the findings of the SPE were and divided people randomly into prisoners We have been stuck with this questionable never published in a peer-reviewed and guards. However, unlike Zimbardo, we explanation for a whole generation, psychology journal. did not act as prison superintendents who because the behaviour that lent the SPE The answer to the latter question is instructed the guards how to act. We impact made it unethical to repeat. How clear. The study’s key findings were first simply set up a situation in which the can we advance understanding of the summarised in Scientific American Mind guards had authority, had the tools of psychology of tyranny without ourselves (Haslam & Reicher, 2005) and in a more power and had better conditions (food, being tyrannical? detailed exploration of tyranny in the living quarters, etc.) than the prisoners. Our This was the dilemma that confronted British Journal of intention was to create a situation that was us when we set to work on a new ‘prison (Reicher & Haslam, 2006). Additional harsh and testing, but not harmful. In order study’ in 2001. This ended up being one of publications also explore a broad range of to make sure we got the balance right, our the largest experiments in social social, clinical and organisational issues study was also overseen by clinical psychology since the 1970s. The study we including agency (Reicher & Haslam, in psychologists and an independent ethics conducted – referred to as the BBC Prison press), stress (Haslam & Reicher, in press- committee chaired by an MP. Study – was a collaboration between b), leadership (Reicher et al., 2005) and On the basis of social identity theory ourselves and the broadcaster. It was filmed organisational behaviour (Haslam & (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), we also planned by the BBC and televised in four hour-long Reicher, in press-a). Indeed, to our a series of interventions designed to impact documentaries in May 2002. knowledge, the study has generated more on the level of shared social identity among Yet even before the study was run, and peer-reviewed publications than any the prisoners and thereby to increase their certainly after the documentaries were previous social psychological field study. willingness to resist the guards’ regime and aired, the BBC Prison Study attracted As to the former question – did the any tyranny associated with it. Using considerable controversy – much of which study provide any worthwhile insights? – systematic observation (aided by was aired in The Psychologist. Was it just the answer obviously depends upon the unobtrusive filming) and daily

147

March 2006 www.thepsychologist.org.uk BBC Prison Study

administration of psychometric and oppression or reject and resist it? And what prisoners than to punish them. Our physiological measures, we then observed is the role of the group in these processes? participants showed no ‘natural’ tendencies how both groups reacted. to slip helplessly into role. Although we set the study in a prison- The Guard–Prisoner Regime: The fact that the prisoners came to like environment, our primary goal was not Solidarity and well-being share a group identity while the guards did to mimic a real prison. That would have What we found can be divided into two not is important in itself. But some of the been impossible as well as unethical. What phases. At the start of the study, both most interesting findings in the study have was real, however, was the fact that one groups felt distinctly uncomfortable with to do with the consequences of this group (the guards) had more power and the exercise of power and with inequalities contrast. These are summarised in Table 1. resources than the other (the prisoners) – they encountered. This is understandable in Amongst the prisoners, social identification a feature that is also characteristic of a the case of the prisoners. It meant that, as led to agreement and mutual support. This wide range of institutional environments time went by, they increasingly banded in turn led to effective coordination, agreed such as offices, schools, factories, and so together as a group in order to challenge leadership and organisational effectiveness. on. Our interest, like Zimbardo’s, was then the authority of the guards. It is, perhaps, They worked together and were thereby to use our findings – and, more specifically, somewhat more surprising in the case of empowered to turn their goals, beliefs and the theoretical analysis they support the guards, who were never willing to values into social realities. This collective (Turner, 1981) – to comment more embrace their position and exert their self-realisation both increased the initial generally upon how people respond to authority. So, rather than passive prisoners level of group identification and was in social inequality. When do the powerful and brutal guards, we observed rebellious turn good for the psychological well-being embrace inequality and abuse their power? prisoners and ambivalent guards – some of the prisoners. Their levels of depression When do the powerless succumb to of whom were keener to befriend the and burnout decreased over time. They didn’t let the stressors in the situation overcome them but rather acted to TABLE 1 The interrelationship between social identity and social, eliminate the sources of their stress. In organisational and clinical functioning in the BBC Prison Study effect, they experienced the virtuous circle Among the Guards Among the Prisoners of social identification represented in The inability to achieve a sense of shared The increasing sense of shared social Figure 1a. social identity contributes to… identity contributes to… The contrast with the guards could not be greater. For them, lack of social Social functioning G failure to internalise roles G group cohesiveness and solidarity identification led to disagreement and G disagreement and internal tension G intragroup cooperation discord. There was no coordination G lack of consensus G shared social cognition amongst them, no leadership, no G disengagement G consensualised understanding of the organisational effectiveness. They worked G inability to maintain status quo situation against each other and thereby lost any G attempts to bring about social power they could have derived from the change resources available to them. Their inability to impose their will led to a decrease in Organisational G role confusion G role clarity group identification and to rising levels functioning G lack of trust G trust of depression, burnout and internal dissent G poor communication G good communication over time. Rather than their roles and G an inability/unwillingness to develop G emergent leadership and resources allowing them to master the and use resources effectively followership situation (and the prisoners), their lack G leadership crisis G collective empowerment of identity allowed situational stressors G powerlessness G the ability of leaders to embed to master them. In this way, they were G failure of organisation identity in practice exposed to the vicious circle of social atomisation represented in Figure 1b. Clinical G failure to support fellow group G provision of social support to fellow Overall, these findings suggest that, functioning members group members far from undermining agency, shared group G attempts by individual group G attempts by group members to identity provides the power that enables members to reduce personal work together to try to remove people to implement their beliefs and exposure to stressors stressors values (Turner, 2005). Such collective G individual strategies of stress G collective strategies of stress agency promotes the psychological well- avoidance and denial resistance being of individual group members. As the G paranoia G increased personal and collective days went by, the prisoners in our study G reduced personal and collective self- self-efficacy became more cohesive and powerful, while efficacy G positive mood the guards became more fragmented and G depression G enhanced well-being powerless. This continued to the point G burnout (lack of accomplishment, where some prisoners broke out of their exhaustion, callousness) cells and destroyed the old regime. Together, ex-guards and ex-prisoners then

148 March 2006 The Psychologist Vol 19 No 3 BBC Prison Study

FIGURE 1a The virtuous circle of social identification leadership to the extent that they had reached the same levels of authoritarianism as the dissenters. As a result, those in the Social identity Commune showed limited resistance to the new tyranny. This is where, for both ethical and practical reasons, we terminated the study. So what started with our participants Enhanced clinical social Organisation; rejecting a relatively mild form of well-being Community inequality had ended on the brink of an authoritarian world of their own making. How had this happened? The crucial step is to recognise that organisational social identities, and the norms and values associated with them, are related to the Collective Power practical ways we organise our everyday self-realisation world. Where they empower us to create the worlds we value (as for the prisoners in the first phase of our study), they engender positivity. Where we fail to use group power to organise our world effectively (as FIGURE 1b The vicious circle of social atomisation for the Communards in the second phase), then group beliefs become, quite literally, useless. So, because the Communards Lack of remained suspicious of the exercise of social identity group power, they were unable to transform democratic ideals into working democratic structures. As a result, these clinical social Compromised Disorganisation; ideals came to seem more of a hindrance Alienation than a help. By contrast, any system that well-being promised to work – even a tyranny that had previously seemed deeply unattractive – gained in allure. The tragedy of the organisational Communards was that their own fear of using power created the conditions where Collective Powerlessness power could be misused against them. impasse Giving choice not taking it away For all the twists and turns in the BBC study, there are two findings that are constant throughout. The first is that shared proposed their own regime: ‘a self- unwilling to use power to discipline social identity creates social power, and governing, self-disciplining commune’. dissent. As a result, the Commune system where people are willing to deploy that began to break down. Its supporters power they become effective social agents The Commune: Power, group became despondent as they became unable who shape their own worlds. The second is failure and health of societies to turn their social beliefs into a form of that where people are unable to shape their At its outset, the Commune exemplified all social being – or, in the terms used above, world – either because they lack shared the advantages of a cohesive group. This as the lack of collective self-realisation identity and hence power or because they was no longer a category we had imposed became chronic. It was in this context that have shared identity but fail to deploy the upon our participants, but rather one they those who opposed the Commune – a power that flows from it – they are liable to had created for themselves. They identified combination of ex-guards and ex-prisoners become despondent and open to alternative highly with the values and goals of the – proposed reinstating the guard–prisoner belief systems, however extreme they Commune and they worked energetically system, but in a more tyrannical form (see might be. to implement these goals. Indeed, initially the manifesto, reproduced for the first time Conceptually, this viewpoint is they worked harder and supported each on the contents page of this issue). diametrically opposed to that which the other more than they ever had under the old This was disturbing. But what was more Stanford Prison Experiment is typically system. troubling was that, as our psychometric used to advance. Groups, we suggest, give However the Commune had a fatal flaw. measures showed, those who had people choice rather than take it away. And While most participants supported it, some previously supported the Commune were the ability to exercise choice is good for did not. And while the ‘Communards’ were themselves becoming more authoritarian our well-being. How people exercise their willing to be self-organising they were and more sympathetic to autocratic choice will depend upon the norms and

149 March 2006 www.thepsychologist.org.uk BBC Prison Study

values they subscribe to. Hence the impact bad for the well-being of individual group processes and extreme behaviours. of groups upon the health of society is not members. It is also bad for the health of We have put our data and our conclusions given in our psychology but is rather society. For that is when people become into the public domain and others can now something for which people must take more liable to accept extreme suggestions judge these for themselves (or, even better, responsibility. All members of a group, advance the debate through their own from the highest to the lowest, play a part research). in determining what the group stands for ‘All members of a group play As Turner (2006) notes in his and the type of world it seeks to create. a part in determining what commentary on our study, social Conversely, the failure of groups, and psychologists have been locked into the consequent lack of collective power, the group stands for’ a negative view of groups and a narrow removes choice from people, and this is understanding of tyranny for far too long. and thereby succumb to inequitable As he points out, a key and undeniable solutions to their social problems. That contribution of our study is that it DISCUSS AND DEBATE is when ordinary people and erstwhile encourages us to ‘escape our theoretical democrats can be seduced by tyranny. prisons’ – forcing us to address new Do people in groups inevitably abuse positions of In short, do groups and power corrupt? questions and to look at old questions in power – and, if so, are they to blame? Not in and of themselves. But the failure new ways. As social psychologists, clinical Would society be healthier if we encouraged people of groups does corrupt absolutely. psychologists, organisational psychologists to act as individuals, not as group members? These are, of course, big and bold – or even better, all together – it is high Should we seek to have an integrated understanding claims. We don’t expect everyone to accept time to reconsider the relationship between of social, clinical and organisational psychology, them without demur. Indeed Zimbardo group processes, individual well-being and and do we have the theoretical and (2006) himself remains implacably healthy societies. methodological tools to achieve this? opposed to our analysis. We have provided Have your say on these or other issues this article a detailed response to his criticisms I Stephen Reicher is a professor of raises. E-mail ‘Letters’ on [email protected] or (Haslam & Reicher, 2006), but we psychology at the University of St Andrews. contribute to our forum via www.thepsychologist.org.uk. welcome the debate. Our major ambition in E-mail: [email protected]. undertaking the BBC Prison Study was to I Alex Haslam is a professor of reopen normal scientific investigation and psychology at the University of Exeter. discussion around the relationship between E-mail: [email protected].

References Ellemers, N., Spears, R. & Doosje, B. Study. In C. Bartel, S. Blader & happened and the Stanford (1999). Social identity: Context, A.Wrzesniewski (Eds.) Identity Prison Experiment got it content and commitment. and the modern organization. wrong. The Guardian (G2), p.24. Oxford: Blackwell. New York:Lawrence Erlbaum. Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1979).An Haney, C., Banks, C. & Zimbardo, P. Haslam, S.A. & Reicher, S.D. (in integrative theory of (1973).A study of prisoners press-b). Stressing the group: intergroup conflict. In W.G. and guards in a simulated Social identity and the Austin & S.Worchel (Eds.) The prison. Naval Research Reviews, unfolding dynamics of stress. social psychology of intergroup September, pp.1–17. Journal of Applied Psychology. relations (pp.33–47). Monterey, Washington, DC: Office of Reicher, S.D. & Haslam, S.A. (2006). CA: Brooks/Cole. Naval Research. [Reprinted In Rethinking the psychology of Turner, J.C. (1981). Some E.Aronson (Ed.) Readings about tyranny:The BBC prison study. considerations in generalizing the social animal (3rd ed., British Journal of Social experimental social psychology. pp.52–67). San Francisco:W. H. Psychology, 45, 1–40. In G.M. Stephenson & J.H. Freeman] Reicher, S.D. & Haslam, S.A. (in Davis (Eds.) Progress in applied Haslam, S.A. (2001). Psychology in press). On the agency of social psychology (Vol. 1, organizations:The social identity individuals and groups: Lessons pp.3–34). Chichester:Wiley. approach. London: Sage. from the BBC Prison Study. In Turner, J.C. (2005). Explaining the Haslam, S.A. & Reicher, S.D. (2005). T. Postmes & J. Jetten (Eds.) nature of power:A three- The psychology of tyranny. Individuality and the group: Scientific American Mind, 16(3), Advances in social identity. process theory. European 44–51. London: Sage. Journal of Social Psychology, 35, Haslam, S.A. & Reicher, S.D. (2006). Reicher, S.D., Haslam, S.A. & 1–22. Debating the psychology of Hopkins, N. (2005). Social Turner, J.C. (2006).Tyranny, freedom tyranny: Fundamental issues of identity and the dynamics of and social structure: Escaping theory, perspective and leadership: Leaders and our theoretical prisons. British science. British Journal of Social followers as collaborative Journal of Social Psychology, 45, Psychology, 45, 55–63. agents in the transformation of 41–46. Haslam, S.A. & Reicher, S.D. (in social reality. Leadership Zimbardo, P.(2006). On rethinking press-a). Social identity and the Quarterly, 16, 547–568. the psychology of tyranny:The dynamics of organizational life: Sutherland, J. (2005, 31 October). BBC prison study. British Journal Insights from the BBC Prison Abu Ghraib need not have of Social Psychology, 45, 47–53.

150 March 2006 The Psychologist Vol 19 No 3