Last Wednesday, I had the opportunity to meet and interview
Christina Maslach, a professor of psychology at UC Berkeley. She is known for her extensive research on occupational burnout and has won awards, such as the Professor of the Year award from the Carnegie Foundation in 1997.
But, for better or worse, Maslach is perhaps better known as the person who stopped the Stanford Prison Experiment in August of 1971.
Christina Maslach, photo from obweb.org
The Stanford Prison Experiment
At the time, Maslach was dating Phil Zimbardo, whom she later married. Zimbardo had designed and begun to implement an experiment in which college students, all male, all screened for prior criminal conduct, signs of depression, etc., were divided, at random, into two categories: prisoners and prison guards.
At the start of the experiment, prisoners were "arrested," dragged out of their dorm rooms in the middle of the night and taken to a location unbeknownst to them (that location was Jordan Hall, one of the buildings on Stanford's Main Quad), where they would be kept for two weeks. Prison guards, on the other hand, were not required to remain on-site for two weeks, but instead, worked daily shifts at the "prison."
According to Maslach, Zimbardo and his colleagues believed the experiment would be innocuous--boring, even. They predicted that the college students would just sit around, prisoners on one side, guards on the other, while the two weeks allotted for the experiment went by. Maslach underscored the point that the experiment was reviewed and approved by all relevant bodies (human subjects, legal, etc.)
Nobody predicted that the prison
experiment would actually begin to resemble a quite disturbing prison
experience.
Maslach was not directly involved with the planning and implementation of the experiment. She explained that while Zimbardo was preparing to conduct the experiment, she was finishing her doctorate work at Stanford. When the experiment started, she was getting ready to start her professorship at Berkeley, across the Bay. But partway through the experiment, Zimbardo asked her if she would help him collect data by interviewing the participants. She agreed to help.
Maslach had been on-site earlier on in the experiment, when she observed/participated as part of a mock parole hearing, however, she said she "didn't see much." This time, when she came to interview participants, she got a better look at what was going on in the basement of Jordan Hall.
Maslach described standing around, chatting with people in the basement, when she caught sight of the prison guards escorting the prisoners to the bathrooms. "I saw these guys come out with these khaki uniforms and they had a line of guys in white smocks with paper bags over their heads-- and the paper bags were so they were not actually seeing we're in the basement... And I saw that, and I just got sick to my stomach... I didn't understand what was going on. I didn't want to look."
When Zimbardo met up with Maslach, he escorted her to a space where she could see the prison yard, and she recognized one of the people she had been chatting with earlier that day. "Oh, that's the one they call John Wayne," an observer told her, "he's the toughest guard, so the prisoners call him John Wayne." "John Wayne" had adopted a Southern accent and gave harsh commands to the prisoners.
Maslach was upset-- she felt like what she had witnessed was wrong, but at the same time, nobody else seemed to find it all that disturbing. Other observers pointed out that she had recently gotten a degree in social psychology-- wasn't this just human behavior? "Can't you take it? Can't you look at it?" They asked her.
Despite others' opinions, Maslach shared her concerns with Zimbardo. The two had recently started dating, and Maslach was frustrated that he couldn't see things from her perspective. "The more we talked, the more upset I was getting."
"Is this really the man I think he is?" Maslach wondered.
Zimbardo and Maslach, photo from Lund University website
At the end of a long discussion with Zimbardo, he decided to end the experiment. All of the prison guards and prisoners were called in and the study was formally concluded. The last day was spent interviewing participants and debriefing as a group.
Remember John Wayne? Maslach explained that during the debriefing session, one of the prisoners asked John Wayne if he was being himself or if he was just playing a role. John Wayne claimed it was just an act-- but the prisoner pointed out, if it was just an act, why did John Wayne need to trip him? Why was his behavior so excessively mean?
Them, Not Me
During my interview with Maslach, I began to think, if I could have observed the Stanford Prison Experiment back in August of 1971, would I have been bothered by what I saw? I want to think I would be, I want to think I would not be comfortable watching a guard like John Wayne verbally abuse a helpless prisoner. But the truth is, I don't know. I don't know how I'd react.
As I sat there, the thought popped into my mind: I know I wouldn't be John Wayne. I know I could never be so cruel.
In retrospect, the Stanford Prison Experiment is considered by some to be unethical, and it is very unlikely that a similar experiment will ever be carried out again.
When people write about the Stanford Prison Experiment today, they often focus on the fact that seemingly "good" guys turned into mean prison guards. They made prisoners do counts, kept them from getting to sleep on time-- they went out of their ways to fulfill their roles. But Maslach pointed out, not all the guard were like John Wayne. He was an anomaly. Some of the guards were actually really nice to prisoners, or at least, didn't go out of their ways to insult or trip them.
Sure, it's scary that regular people can turn into monsters-- but in talking to Maslach, I realized that perhaps what's
more scary is that the dozens of people around them can watch that transformation without doing anything about it, without even really realizing that it's happening. Zimbardo, his team of researchers, the other prison guards, they watched an ordinary college student turn into "John Wayne," yet didn't do anything to stop, or to even mitigate, his behavior.
When Maslach pointed that out-- when she pointed out that none of the other guards suggested John Wayne ease up on the prisoners or redirect his energy-- I suddenly realized that I was just as bad as the rest of them. Even if I could never see myself yelling at or directly demeaning prisoners the way John Wayne did, I could see myself, another prison guard on the prison yard, standing timidly by as one of my colleagues mistreated the prisoners entrusted to our care.
I suddenly thought of an event that had happened only a few days prior to my meeting with Maslach. My husband Jared and I were relaxing at home, in our small studio apartment, when we began to hear shouting coming from upstairs. It was the second time something like that had happened: a male voice yelling, a woman crying. The time before, we had heard what sounded like a woman being shoved to the ground. That time I had called the police. This time, I wasn't sure what to do. Would calling the police do any good? Should I try to find a security guard? Should Jared and I go upstairs and knock on our neighbors' door ourselves? I knew that whatever was happening, it wasn't right, but I felt powerless and ultimately did nothing.
Maslach explained that studies show that there are many factors that prevent people from intervening when they know something bad is happening. For instance, oddly enough, the more people that see something happen, the less likely someone is to intervene. Take a busy street or a crowded subway car, for example. How many times have you seen something that was off, yet reasoned that if there really was a problem, someone else would help?
That night, when I heard commotion upstairs, I used that line of reasoning. I thought, we live in a large apartment complex. Maybe some of our neighbors will hear the fight and do something about it.
Maslach also pointed out that people are less likely to help when they're in a hurry. That reminded me of the Biblical parable of the Good Samaritan-- in an animated version for children that I saw years ago, the priest doesn't stop to help because he has somewhere important to get to. What could be more important than a suffering man about to die? I used to think as a child.
Now, I thought back to the 16th Street and Mission BART Station I used to ride to every day for my summer internship; how often did I pause to take a good look around and see if any of the homeless people sprawled out near the station's entrance were in need? I all but ignored them as I ran up the stairs and hurried to work, even when they waved their hands in my face and called out to me, I pretended not to hear them or politely said "I'm sorry, no cash" before I quickened my pace and sped away from the station.
When I shared some of my thoughts with Maslach (in particular, the anecdote about my neighbors), she explained that another barrier to intervention was when a dispute seemed like a family matter. That made me think of the rare, but painfully memorable, times that I have seen parents be especially mean to their children (I'm not just talking strict, I'm talking, scary) and have just felt my heart break in two, unable to say or do anything. I've felt afraid that my intervention would only make things worse or might result in a negative outcome for me as well. I worried that maybe I just didn't understand another person's family dynamic, culture, upbringing, etc.
I thought back to a recent campaign a friend of mine had posted about on Facebook:
Save Our Sisters, a campaign to end violence against women in India. I was touched by the beautiful, devastating "Abused Goddesses" posters created for their latest campaign. I grew up in a household where all forms of physical violence were considered unacceptable, and the posters reaffirmed what I already believed. I wondered what effect, if any, these posters would have on people who lived in communities were certain forms of domestic violence were considered acceptable.
This is why nothing is done, I realized, because even though hundreds, thousands, probably millions of people, don't think domestic violence is acceptable, it's hard to summon the courage to go out of your way to directly confront someone who is abusive. On top of that, it's hard to convince the victim of violence that they deserve better than that, that they should not tolerate such abuse.
As part of Maslach's work on occupational burnout, she interviewed police officers. According to the officers she interviewed, the most difficult calls to respond to were domestic violence calls. Officers never knew what situations they'd encounter behind closed doors-- would the victim be grateful that they had come? Or would the victim defend their abuser, would the abuser and the abused turn on the cops?
I felt a little pang of guilt when I thought about calling 911 to report my neighbors.
I like to think that I am the kind of person who stands up to injustice, who speaks up when she sees inappropriate conduct, but maybe I am more of a "sheep" than I realize I am. While I might not be one of the John Waynes of the world, I don't know if I'm one of the Christina Maslachs of the world either-- if I'm willing to speak up in a situation where everybody else seems to think things are okay.
In my efforts to learn more about the Stanford Prison Experiment, I ended up learning a little more about myself. And I'm not sure what to do with that insight yet.
End Note: The interview of Christina Maslach, along with an interview of Phil Zimbardo, were commissioned by the
Stanford Storytelling Project. These interviews, along with other interviews of notable professors and alumni, will be used to create a geo-tagged history of places on the Stanford campus. A special thank you goes out to
Natacha Ruck for working tirelessly to arrange these interviews and many others.