The Anatomy of Obedience

W of and obedience power by run psychologist Prison Experiment, a notorious investigation roles that students these took Stanford inthe one. Ultimately, acoin the determined flip former. “Nobody likes guards,” answered said thatin California would they prefer the chological experiment at Stanford University Brendan Maher obedience of anatomy The Peter Sarsgaard playspsychologistStanleyMilgram in 408 | NATURE408 | VOL | JULY 523|23 2015 one of prime the organizers of Holocaust, the response of to Adolf trial the Eichmann, of US upheaval.political Milgram’s was a convincedcan be to harm others. ing example of how well-intentioned people on to obedience authority stands as ashock infamousMilgram, whose 1961experiment workthe psychologist of social Stanley Michael Almereyda’s Alvarez, is now on limited release. Meanwhile, of same the name, by directed Kyle Patrick of NavalUS Office Research. Achilling film Philip Zimbardo and commissioned by the COMMENT EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY These experimentsThese spanned a decade 24 volunteers for an unusual psy a guard? In 1971,many of the ould you rather a prisoner be or BOOKS &ARTS Experimenter reviews two filmsprobing notorious USpsychological experiments. explores - - Experimenter © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. Allrights reserved interviews. The 1970s areinterviews. there: certainly that cannot from gleaned be grainy or videos captures something intimate and atmospheric study’sthe findings and legacy, but Alvarez oners’ well-being, shut it down prematurely. Zimbardo,six, when concerned for pris the ment from volunteer recruitment until day behaviours. experi the traces evil The film situations and group can bring effects about House, aimed 2007),which to explain how from Zimbardo’s ment’s basement. The screenplay is adapted Stanford inthe structed psychology depart ‘prison’ that Zimbardo and his colleagues con and claustrophobic, much like makeshift the putting extreme behaviour on display. experimentsboth haunt imagination the by Interpretations have long debated, been but diers filtered back from Vietnam the War. took place as reports of atrocities by USsol following orders. Zimbardo’s experiment unsuccessful defencewhose was that he was A handful of documentaries have explored Experiment Stanford Prison The . The Lucifer Effect (Random (Random is stark - - - - - John Wayne, adopts and affect the southern humiliation.to sexual One guard, nicknamed accessrestrict to necessities basic and resort guards verbally taunt film inthe prisoners, AbuUS-run Ghraib prison in2003:several alleling the harm done to Iraqi detainees at the can to lead abuse. It invoked has been as par how arbitrary assignment swiftly of power tended that experiment the demonstrates ers adapt to powerlessness, but he has con to stripinstructed naked for delousing. drains from face of the ‘prisoner 8612’ as he is moments, such cocksureas when humour oversight. There are subtle also emotional hair,the polyester the and research lax the 2015. BB Film/FJ Productions/IntrinsicValue/Jeff Rice/2B: DIRECTOR: MICHAELALMEREYDA Experimenter Sandbar Pictures/Abandon/Coupd’Etat:2015 DIRECTOR: KYLE PATRICK ALVAREZ The Stanford PrisonExperiment Zimbardo intended to explore how prison - - -

MAGNOLIA PICTURES BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT STEVE DIETL/IFC FILMS DIETL/IFC STEVE

Tensions rise between ‘guards’ and ‘prisoners’ in The Stanford Prison Experiment.

drawl of the sadistic prison captain in the 1967 findings came at the expense of human suffer- Almereyda playfully gives the audience a film Cool Hand Luke, preying undeterred on ing”. He wrote, “I am sorry for that and to this backseat view of the psychologist’s approach. the weaknesses of 8612 in particular. day apologize for contributing to this inhu- There are scenes in which Peter Sarsgaard, The prisoners, at first rebellious, are bro- manity.” The study was subsequently deemed playing Milgram, speaks directly to camera ken by the guards and pitted against one to fall within existing ethical guidelines. — an homage to Milgram’s own films explain- another; the experimenters themselves lose Others have wondered, however, whether ing his experiments. This is a work, as the title perspective. When 8612 begs to be released, Zimbardo oversold the results. When I implies, much more about the experimenter Zimbardo and his colleagues initially refuse, contacted the real-life ‘John Wayne’, Dave than about the experiment. Zimbardo has convinced that he is faking his distress — Eshelman, he said that the experiment reveals spoken of meeting Milgram, who “embraced even though that should not override the no generalizable truths about humans’ pro- me and said, ‘I’m so happy you did this voluntary nature of the experiment. Several pensity for evil, and that he was playing a part, because now you can take off some of the heat subjects, all screened as emotionally well running his own experiment to see how far of having done the most unethical study’.” grounded, have breakdowns; rather than he could push people. “I figured I was doing The shared legacies of the researchers can fear for their well-being, Zimbardo devel- them a favour by trying to force some results.” be seen in updated regulations for psycho- ops a paranoid belief that outside forces will At least one other guard has said that Zim- logical research on human subjects, which shut “his prison”. Finally, psychology PhD bardo went out of his way to create tension. prevent the kind of deception that Milgram student Christina Maslach (later Zimbardo’s Milgram, too, has a complex legacy, as perpetrated and the unstructured opportu- wife) persuades him to change his mind after Experimenter reveals. Through an imagina- nity for abuse that Zimbardo created. But seeing the prisoners, half-naked and chained tive structure, the film explores several of his their experiments will always hold captive a together, with bags over their heads, on a trip contributions to behavioural psychology. dark part of the human imagination as we to the toilet. She tells Zimbardo: “Those are But he is best known for his electroshock wonder just what kind of pain we would be boys, and you are harming them.” The next experiments at Yale University in New Haven, willing to inflict on other human beings. ■ day, as guards force prisoners to pantomime Connecticut, a decade before Zimbardo’s sexual intercourse, Zimbardo tells them that experiment. In them, an authority figure Brendan Maher is biology features editor at it is time to go home. asked volunteers to administer what they Nature. Additional reporting by Monya Baker. The film pulls few punches regarding were told were increasingly painful electric Zimbardo’s behaviour. This is consistent shocks to an actor who they believed was with his confession, in another volunteer. Two-thirds maxed out CORRECTION The Lucifer Effect, that NATURE.COM the voltage despite the actor’s anguished cries. The review ‘Space-rock alert’ (Nature 522, he failed to provide For more on science It was difficult for many to come to terms 418; 2015) gave an incorrect affiliation “adequate oversight in culture see: with the results — including some of the for Peter Jenniskens. He is at the SETI and surveillance when nature.com/ research subjects, who were unhappy about Institute in Mountain View, California. it was required ... the booksandarts the deception (Milgram preferred “illusion”).