See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/278144932

Coverage of the Stanford Prison Experiment in Introductory Social Psychology

Textbooks

Article  in  Teaching of Psychology · October 2014

DOI: 10.1177/0098628314549703

CITATIONS READS

13 1,192

2 authors:

Richard Griggs George I Whitehead

University of Florida Salisbury University
119 PUBLICATIONS   2,211 CITATIONS    42 PUBLICATIONS   267 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Griggs on 20 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Teaching of Psychology
http://top.sagepub.com/

Coverage of the Stanford Prison Experiment in Introductory Social Psychology Textbooks

Richard A. Griggs and George I. Whitehead III
Teaching of Psychology 2014 41: 318
DOI: 10.1177/0098628314549703

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://top.sagepub.com/content/41/4/318

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Society for the Teaching of Psychology

Additional services and information for Teaching of Psychology can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://top.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://top.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Oct 5, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014

Topical Article
Teaching of Psychology
2014, Vol. 41(4) 318-324
Coverage of the Stanford Prison ª The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Experiment in Introductory Social DOI: 10.1177/0098628314549703
top.sagepub.com
Psychology Textbooks

Richard A. Griggs1 and George I. Whitehead III2

Abstract
This study is concerned with the nature of the coverage in introductory social psychology textbooks of the Stanford prison
experiment (SPE), given the many criticisms, especially recently, of the SPE. These criticisms concern both the study’s metho-
dology and the situationist explanation of the outcome. Ten textbooks were analyzed for coverage of the SPE and its ensuing
criticisms. Coverage of the SPE was found to be slightly less than that in introductory psychology textbooks, and the majority of
the texts providing coverage either provided no or minimal coverage of the criticisms. Contributing factors to and possible
explanations for such coverage are discussed. One explanation is applied to textbook coverage of the Kitty Genovese story and a
critique exposing its inaccuracies.

Keywords
Stanford prison experiment, social psychology texts, textbook analysis

The Stanford prison experiment (SPE; Haney, Banks, &
Zimbardo, 1973a, 1973b; Zimbardo, 2007) is one of the most
famous experiments, and arguably the most famous experi-
ment, in the history of psychology (Gregoire, 2013). However,
since the SPE was conducted in 1971, there have been numer-
ous criticisms of both the study’s methodology and the
researchers’ situationist explanation of its outcome. Because
Griggs (2014) has recently provided a detailed account of these
criticisms in this journal and this study is a direct continuation
of the Griggs study, we will only briefly highlight the evidence
for the most damning criticism of the SPE, the presence of
strong demand characteristics, and then provide a summary
listing of the other major criticisms before describing the pur-
pose of this study.
Not long after the SPE had been conducted, Banuazizi and
Movahedi (1975) provided data that indicated that the SPE was
likely confounded by strong demand characteristics. Banuazizi
and Movahedi solicited student responses to a questionnaire
that included a brief description of the procedures followed
in the SPE and some open-ended questions to determine the
respondents’ awareness of the experimental hypothesis and
their expectancies regarding the outcomes of the experiment.
The vast majority of the 150 students responding determined
the experiment’s hypothesis (80%) and predicted that the beha-
vior of the guards would be oppressive (80.9%). Thus, it seems
that most of the participants in the SPE would also have
guessed how they were supposed to behave in the experiment.
However, the participants, especially those who were assigned
to be guards, did not have to guess. Subsequent revelations by
Zimbardo himself about his active leadership in the SPE
(Zimbardo, 2007) disclosed that these participants were largely
told how they were supposed to behave (Banyard, 2007; Gray,
2013; Haslam & Reicher, 2003). This is because in his role as
prison superintendent, Zimbardo (2007) gave the guards an
orientation that seems to have provided clear guidance about
how they should behave (p. 55). As Banyard (2007; see also
Haslam & Reicher, 2003) pointed out, in his orientation,
Zimbardo aligned himself with the guards by using the pronoun
‘‘we’’ and gave clear instructions for the hostile environment
that ‘‘we’’ are going to create for ‘‘them’’ (the prisoners). For
example, he said, ‘‘They will be able to do nothing and say
nothing that we don’t permit’’ (p. 55). Thus, Zimbardo’s orien-
tation served to legitimize oppression in the SPE.
In addition, when some of the guards became abusive
toward the prisoners, Zimbardo, via his silence, provided tacit
approval of the guards’ behavior, thereby confirming to these
guards that they were behaving as they should. He also
instructed his prison warden (one of his research assistants)
to chastise the guards who were not behaving like these abusive
guards and to make them more assertive (see Zimbardo, 2007,
p. 65, for more details). Furthermore, Carlo Prescott, an ex-con
1
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
2
Salisbury University, Salisbury, MD, USA
Corresponding Author:
Richard A. Griggs, 4515 Breakwater Row West, Jacksonville, FL 32225, USA.
Email: rgriggs@ufl.edu

Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014

Griggs and Whitehead
who was the SPE’s chief consultant on real prisons (Zimbardo,
2007), claimed that he provided Zimbardo and his colleagues
with information that enabled them to make the experiment
more similar to real prison life (Prescott, 2005). In his 2005 let-
ter in the Stanford Daily titled ‘‘The lie of the Stanford Prison
Experiment’’ (available at http://valtinsblog.blogspot.com.au/
2012/03/lie-of-the-stanford-prison-experiment.html), Prescott
expressed great regret for his involvement in the SPE and dis-
closed that it was he who came up with the abusive and humi-
liating behaviors displayed by the guards (e.g., having
prisoners use buckets in place of toilets). He also said that he
thought that ‘‘Zimbardo began with a preformed blockbuster
conclusion and designed an experiment to ‘prove’ that
conclusion.’’
Gray (2013; see Addendum, February 14, 2014) also
reported some remarks by John Mark, one of the guards in the
SPE, that mesh well with Prescott’s admissions about the SPE.
Mark’s comments appeared in ‘‘The Menace Within,’’ in the
July/August 2011 issue of the Stanford Alumni magazine
(available at http://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/
article/?article_id¼40741). Mark said:
I didn’t think it was ever meant to go the full 2 weeks. I think
Zimbardo wanted to create a dramatic crescendo, and then end
it as quickly as possible. I felt that throughout the experiment,
he knew what he wanted and then tried to shape the experi-
ment—by how it was constructed, and how it played out—to fit
the conclusion that he had already worked out. He wanted to be
able to say that college students, people from middle-class
backgrounds—people [sic] will turn on each other just because
they’re given a role and given power. Based on my experience,
and what I saw and what I felt, I think that was a real stretch. I
don’t think the actual events match up with the bold headline. I
never did, and I haven’t changed my opinion.
Given Mark’s comments, Prescott’s admissions, Zimbardo’s
description of his guard orientation along with his tacit
approval of the bad guards’ later abusive behavior, and the
prison warden’s chastising talks with some of the nonabusive
guards, it certainly seems likely that the guards’ oppressive
behavior was largely a function of demand characteristics—
their doing what they believed they were supposed to do. It
is important to note that despite these strong demand character-
istics, not all of the guards (only about a third of them) became
sadistic ‘‘bad guards.’’ Some were tough but fair ‘‘by the book
guards,’’ and others were ‘‘good guards’’ (Zimbardo, 2007).
This variance in guard behavior is important because it argues
against a strict situationist interpretation of the SPE results.
That Zimbardo and his research associates’ guidance may
have been critical to the SPE outcome is also supported by
some findings of a study of simulated prison environments con-
ducted in Australia by Lovibond, Mithiran, and Adams (1979).
For example, in both a more liberal prison condition in which
security was maintained in a manner that allowed prisoners to
retain their self-respect and in a participatory condition in
which prisoners were treated as individuals and included in the
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014
319
decision-making process, the behavior of the guards and pris-
oners was rather benign and very dissimilar from the dramatic
behavioral outcomes observed in the SPE. In addition, in 2002,
social psychologists Alexander Haslam and Stephen Reicher,
in collaboration with the British Broadcasting Corporation
(BBC), conducted a prison study (known as the BBC Prison
Study) that followed the same basic paradigm as the SPE but
had a very different outcome. For our purposes, it is only
important to know that, unlike Zimbardo, Haslam and Reicher
did not instruct their guards to subjugate the prisoners to their
will in the way that Zimbardo did and that the guards’ and pris-
oners’ behavior diverged markedly from that in the SPE,
thereby bolstering the argument that demand characteristics
(and Zimbardo’s leadership) were responsible for the outcome
of the SPE. More information about the BBC Prison Study and
its results can be found in Haslam and Reicher (2005, 2012)
and Reicher and Haslam (2006) and at the study’s Web site,
www.bbcprisonstudy.org.
In addition to the presence of strong demand characteristics,
the SPE has been criticized for the lack of generalizability and
ecological validity (e.g., Banuazizi & Movahedi, 1975;
Fromm, 1973), the possibility of participant selection bias
(Carnahan & McFarland, 2007; McFarland & Carnahan,
2009), for breaching research ethics (e.g., Savin, 1973), for pro-
viding no satisfactory account of the individual differences
observed (e.g., McGreal, 2013), and for being a pseudoscienti-
fic experiment that is more aptly described as Kafkaesque
absurdist performance (Ribkoff, 2013).
This extensive body of criticism creates doubt about the
accuracy of the coverage of the SPE in psychology textbooks.
According to Morawski (1992), textbooks are the key transmit-
ters of psychological knowledge both to potential new mem-
bers of the discipline and to those outside of the discipline
(giving psychology away), and therefore it is essential that text-
book information be accurate. Thus, it is important to the psy-
chological teaching community to identify inaccuracies in our
textbooks, so that they can be corrected and we as textbook
authors and teachers do not continue to ‘‘give away’’ false
information about our discipline. Given that the SPE is one
of the most famous studies in psychology with far-reaching
impact outside of psychology, it is especially important that
coverage of it in our textbooks be accurate. Hence, Griggs
(2014) analyzed the accuracy of the coverage of the SPE and
the criticisms of it in a sample of 13 current introductory psy-
chology textbooks. He found that the coverage was inaccurate
because of the very limited coverage of the criticisms of the
SPE. For example, 5 of the 11 texts that discussed the SPE did
not include any discussion of the criticisms of the SPE, and the
other 6 included only very minimal coverage of them. He pro-
posed some possible explanations for this limited coverage,
principally: (a) text authors’ lack of awareness of the extent
of the criticisms and (b) space constraints in introductory psy-
chology textbooks.
Although these two explanations seem plausible for the
inadequate coverage in introductory psychology textbooks,
they would not be as applicable to introductory social
320 Teaching of Psychology 41(4)

psychology textbooks. Because introductory social psychol- Results

ogy texts are exclusively on social psychology and written
First, 3 (30%) of the 10 texts did not include any discussion of
by social psychologists, lack of awareness of the extent of the
the SPE. It should be noted that one of these texts included the
criticisms should not be as problematic, and space issues
citation of Haney and Zimbardo (2009) in a sentence in a para-
would not be as constraining as they are in introductory psy-
graph on the fundamental attribution error that claimed that this
chology texts in which social psychology is typically covered
error often resulted in a gross underestimation of the inherent
in just one chapter (Griggs & Jackson, 2013). Thus, in this
power of the situation. We decided that this one sentence, com-
study, we examined a sample of contemporary introductory
prising at best a tangential reference to the SPE, did not consti-
social psychology textbooks to check their coverage of the
tute coverage of the SPE. Coverage in the other seven
SPE and the criticisms of it. We hypothesized that on average,
textbooks varied from 1 to 6 paragraphs, with mean and median
these texts would provide lengthier and more balanced cover-
coverage of 3.0 and 2.0 paragraphs, respectively. Mean and
age of the SPE and the criticisms of it. If this hypothesis is
median coverage for the entire sample of 10 textbooks were
supported, then the extent and nature of the coverage will
2.1 and 1.5 paragraphs, respectively, with a range of 0–6.
be of interest; if it is not supported, the reasons for the lack
To put these coverage statistics into perspective, we will
of more adequate coverage than in introductory psychology
compare them to the comparable statistics observed by Griggs
textbooks will be of interest.
(2014) for a set of 13 contemporary introductory psychology
textbooks. Griggs found that 2 (15%) of the 13 texts did not
Method include any discussion of the SPE and that SPE coverage in the
other 11 textbooks varied from 1 to 7 paragraphs, with mean
We used the most recent editions of 10 introductory social psy-
and median coverage of 3.6 and 4.0 paragraphs, respectively.
chology textbooks as the text sample. We include complete ref-
Mean and median coverage for the entire sample of 13 text-
erence information for all of these texts in the References
books were 3.1 and 3.0 paragraphs, respectively, with a range
section, and each reference is denoted by an asterisk. These
of 0 to 7 paragraphs. Thus, contrary to our hypothesis, the typ-
10 texts comprise almost the population of introductory social
ical SPE coverage in introductory social psychology textbooks
psychology textbooks if briefer versions of two of these texts
was slightly less (but not significantly so, p ¼ .15, t-test) than
and texts authored by sociologists are excluded.1
that observed in introductory psychology textbooks.
The methodology was similar to that used in Griggs (2014).
In the seven introductory social psychology textbooks that
To determine whether coverage of the SPE was included in a
included SPE coverage, this coverage appeared in six different
text, the Name Index was checked for Zimbardo and the Subject
content chapters—twice in an opening chapter on the nature of
Index was checked for Stanford prison experiment or any possi-
social psychology and once each in chapters on research meth-
ble variants, such as prison study. If coverage was identified, the
ods, group processes, social influence, behavior and attitudes,
location of the coverage was recorded and the extent of the cov-
and the law, respectively. The coverage in the two opening
erage was measured in terms of the number of paragraphs
chapters mainly involved using the SPE as an example of social
devoted to it. The extent of coverage of SPE criticisms was also
psychology research explaining behavior, especially the power
measured by the number of paragraphs devoted to them. This
of the situation, and the coverage in the research methods chap-
measure of length (number of paragraphs) was used primarily
ter centered on ethical issues in social psychology research.
because the actual amount of text on a page varies greatly among
The coverage in the other four chapters revolved around social
texts. This variance is caused by the number of columns of text,
roles in two texts and conformity and real prison experience in
how extensive the art program is, the font size employed, and so
the other two. The text that included SPE coverage in the law
on. In addition, this length measure allowed us to compare our
chapter (under the subtopic of real prison experience) also
coverage findings to those of Griggs (2014) for introductory psy-
included very brief SPE discussions in a section on ethics in
chology textbooks. The number of photographs of the SPE and
research in a chapter on doing social psychology research and
their content was also recorded for each text, and whether or not
a section on roles in a chapter on group processes.
the SPE was related to the Iraqi prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib
Three of the seven texts providing SPE coverage did not
was noted.
include any coverage of the SPE criticisms. Of the four that did,
As in Griggs (2014), the nature of the coverage of the SPE
two provided rather minimal coverage in one paragraph. One
was determined by the chapter topic and subsection heading of
discussed only the ethical issues associated with the SPE and
the location in the text. If coverage was spread across multiple
the other discussed the individual differences present in situa-
chapters, chapter topics and subsection heading information
tions such as the SPE and very briefly, alluded to the possibility
were noted for all of the locations. The completeness of cover-
of participant self-selection in the SPE. The other two texts pro-
age was determined by identifying what other SPE-related
vided more nuanced, lengthier coverage of the SPE criticisms.
studies or critiques were cited and how much space was
One text focused mainly on the BBC Prison Study and the
devoted to coverage of the critiques. The cited references were
implications of its findings with respect to the SPE results,
recorded for the purpose of determining which SPE references
leading to a discussion of social norms and how they arise. The
were cited most often and whether references for SPE critiques
other text very briefly alluded to two SPE criticisms, then
and the BBC Prison Study were included.

Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014

Griggs and Whitehead
discussed the BBC Prison Study and its findings, and ended
with a discussion of the possible participant self-selection crit-
icism proposed by Carnahan and McFarland (2007). Neither of
these two texts explicitly mentioned the strong demand charac-
teristics present in the SPE, but one did cite the Banuazizi and
Movahedi (1975) reference as a sample methodological criti-
cism. In sum, only two of the seven texts including coverage
of the SPE approached providing the type of coverage pre-
dicted by our hypothesis.
The mean and median numbers of SPE citations per text
were 2.3 and 2.0, respectively, with a range of 1–5. The specific
SPE references cited varied considerably across the seven texts.
There were seven different references cited and a total of 16
citations provided for the SPE. Two of these seven references
were cited only once, two twice, and two 3 times. One (Haney
et al., 1973b) was cited 4 times. This citation variance is likely
at least partially due to the shotgun publication approach used
to initially report the SPE results in the early 1970s. With
respect to citations to SPE criticisms, Banuazizi and Movahedi
(1975), Carnahan and McFarland (2007), McFarland and Car-
nahan (2009), Savin (1973), and Turner (2006) were all cited
once. Citations for the BBC Prison Study included three (twice
in one text) to Reicher and Haslam (2006) and one each to
Haslam and Reicher (2007) and Haslam and Reicher (2012).
Providing evidence of the SPE’s compelling iconography,
five of the seven texts providing SPE coverage included at least
one photo from the SPE. The mean and median numbers of
photos were 1.1 and 1.0, respectively, with a range of 1–4. All
of the photos were of the guards or prisoners or both. In addi-
tion, six of the seven textbooks discussed the Iraqi prisoner
abuse at Abu Ghraib and related it to the SPE.
Discussion
Our hypothesis that introductory social psychology textbooks
would provide lengthier, more balanced coverage of the SPE
and its criticisms than that found in introductory psychology
textbooks was not supported. The current findings indicated
that introductory social psychology textbooks do not devote
much space to coverage of the SPE and even less to its criti-
cisms. Thirty percent did not even include coverage of the SPE,
and the remainder only devoted an average of three paragraphs
to it, slightly less than the coverage in introductory psychology
textbooks. Coverage of the SPE criticisms was also rather
scarce in most of the textbooks. Of the seven texts that provided
coverage of the SPE, three provided no coverage of the criti-
cisms, two provided rather minimal critical discussions, and
two provided coverage that approached the predicted lengthier,
more balanced coverage of the SPE and its criticisms.
First, we will consider the question of why, given the abun-
dance of SPE criticism available, would most introductory
social psychology text authors provide such limited coverage
of it? Two possibilities are (a) lack of space for inclusion and
(b) lack of knowledge of the criticism. Lack of sufficient space
for inclusion would not seem very likely, given that such cov-
erage would only entail a few paragraphs of text. Two of the
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014
321
texts in the present study demonstrated that such coverage was
clearly doable. Lack of knowledge of the criticism also does
not seem very likely, given the sheer amount of criticism that
has been published and the prominence of the journals in which
it has appeared. Nevertheless, it may be the case that the some
text authors are not aware of the extent of the criticism, and if
they were, they would likely revise their coverage of the SPE or
possibly even omit it. If this is the case and the text authors are
not aware of the entirety of the criticism of the SPE, then this
article should help to rectify that situation.
Another possibility for the lack of coverage of the SPE criti-
cisms stems from the pressure on text authors to be up to date
and include coverage of important new studies and topics but
keep the text length about the same (Blumenthal, 1990–
1991). In order to accommodate these conflicting demands,
expansions of coverage for all of the existing topics required
by new developments for those topics obviously cannot make
it into the new edition. Sometimes older classic studies are even
deleted from texts (Griggs & Jackson, 2007). But, given the
notoriety of the SPE, it would seem too important to delete
or not to update its coverage. However, 3 of the 10 textbooks
examined did not even include coverage of the SPE. This lack
of any coverage could be due to the age of the SPE, but it could
also be due to the authors’ decision not to include coverage
because the extensive criticism of the SPE has successfully
negated its findings (e.g., see Gray, 2013, who details why he
has never included SPE coverage in his introductory psychol-
ogy textbook).
Another factor that may have partially contributed to the
brief coverage of the SPE and the lack of coverage of the SPE
criticisms is the authors’ desire to link the SPE to the recent
Iraqi prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, thereby demonstrating the
relevance of social psychology research to real-world behavior.
Such authors would need to provide at least minimal coverage
of the SPE in order to develop the link to Abu Ghraib in their
text. In support of this possibility, six of the seven texts that
provided coverage of the SPE linked the SPE results to prisoner
abuse at Abu Ghraib. Interestingly, the seventh text linked the
Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse to Milgram’s obedience experi-
ments (Milgram, 1974) instead of the SPE.
One other possible reason for the lack of sufficient coverage
of the SPE criticisms is what we term the ‘‘story line’’ explana-
tion. Without inclusion of any criticism that would muddle the
story line, the SPE ‘‘story’’ can be told in two or three paragraphs
and provides a compelling tale of the power of social roles and
the situation, likely leading students to grasp this singular point.
As McConnell (1988) pointed out in his article on textbook writ-
ing, ‘‘If you want to capture the imaginations of young people,
you have to tell them stories!’’ (p. 160). But what happens if the
story line is muddled by infusing the various SPE criticisms into
the story? Simplicity becomes complexity, likely resulting in
student confusion and disengagement (Harris, 1979). This expla-
nation is also consistent with the transportation theory of narra-
tive impact on persuasion (Green & Brock, 2000, 2002).
According to this theory, a story impacts persuasion via the
reader being transported into the world of the narrative (being
322
engrossed in the story) and hence, cognitively and affectively
impacted by the narrative. It certainly seems likely that the SPE
narrative sans criticisms would lead to such ‘‘transportation.’’
This story line explanation could reasonably apply to the two
texts that positioned SPE coverage in the opening chapter on the
nature of social psychology and another that positioned coverage
in its discussion of social roles. None of these texts included any
discussion of SPE criticism to complicate the SPE story line. The
story line explanation can also be applied to one of the two texts
that provided rather minimal discussion of the SPE criticisms.
This text positioned the SPE coverage in the research methods
chapter and only briefly mentioned the ethical issues created
by the experiment, thereby not muddling the SPE story line. The
obvious downside of such coverage is that students will be mis-
led into accepting the story as fact, and sadly, it seems that stu-
dents seldom question the textbook stories that they are told
(Burton, 2001). Thus, it becomes critical for social psychology
teachers who are using textbooks lacking sufficient coverage
of the SPE criticisms to provide such coverage in their lectures.
Coverage of these methodological criticisms will also serve to
reinforce students’ knowledge of research methods and their
importance in psychological research.
To pursue this explanation further, we will consider another
story developed by Gansberg (1964) and Rosenthal (1964) that
is included in almost all, if not all, introductory social psychol-
ogy textbooks—the story of the 38 witnesses who watched the
attack but remained inactive during the brutal murder of Kitty
Genovese. Providing coverage of both this story and the recent
evidence-based criticisms of the accuracy of the story by
Manning, Levine, and Collins (2007) poses a problem for
textbook authors akin to that of providing coverage of the
SPE story and its subsequent criticisms.2 Similar to the SPE
story, the story of the 38 witnesses is compelling and can be told
in a few paragraphs. However, just as coverage of the SPE
criticisms would muck up the SPE story line, the Manning
et al. criticisms would do so for the Kitty Genovese story. For
example, there were likely only 3 to 6 witnesses, not 38; there
were only two attacks, not three; there is clear evidence of inter-
vention disrupting the first attack, even calls to the police; and
given the location of the second and fatal attack, it was impossi-
ble for all but one of the known witnesses to observe it. The Kitty
Genovese story is a good test of the story line explanation
because according to Manning et al., it is resistant to change
because it has come to function as a kind of modern parable—the
antonym of the parable of the Good Samaritan. Hence, to
examine further the plausibility of the story line explanation for
the lack of coverage of SPE criticisms that we observed, we
analyzed the coverage of the Kitty Genovese story in our sample
of 10 introductory social psychology textbooks.
All 10 textbooks provided coverage of the Kitty Genovese
story, on average in three paragraphs. This finding is consistent
with Manning et al.’s (2007) finding that the typical Kitty
Genovese story was present in all of the 10 introductory social
psychology texts (copyright dates ranging from 1995 to 2005)
that they examined. In support of the story line explanation,
five (50%) of the texts examined in this study did not cite
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014
Teaching of Psychology 41(4)
Manning et al., and three of the five that cited it did so in a
rather perfunctory manner in one sentence, somewhat defusing
its importance (e.g., ‘‘Although some of the facts have been
disputed, . . . ’’). In one of these texts, essentially the same sen-
tence citing Manning et al. appeared in two different chapters
(methodology and prosocial behavior). One of the two remain-
ing texts provided a paragraph describing Manning et al.’s criti-
cisms but separated the Kitty Genovese story and the Manning
et al. coverage with about five pages of text, thereby lessening
its impact on the Genovese story line. Although three of these
four texts did not provide much coverage of the corrections, it
is important to note that they did provide qualification of the
story. The fifth text did describe the corrections and integrated
them within its coverage of the Genovese story. In sum, cover-
age of the Kitty Genovese story is consistent with the story line
explanation in that half of the texts did not even cite the Manning
et al. critique and some of those that did, did so in a somewhat
defusing manner. These findings for coverage of the Kitty Gen-
ovese story thus provide support, albeit indirect, for the story line
explanation as a contributing factor to the lack of satisfactory
coverage of the SPE criticisms observed in this study.
Given the story line explanation’s plausibility as a contribut-
ing factor to the lack of coverage of SPE criticisms and the
Manning et al. (2007) study, the coverage of Milgram’s obedi-
ence experiments (which provide another compelling story line
for textbook authors) in future editions of introductory social
psychology textbooks should prove interesting because
recently the methodology of these experiments has received
substantial criticism (Gibson, 2013; Nicholson, 2011; Perry,
2013). For our purposes here, we will only briefly describe
some of Perry’s criticisms.
After spending months locating and interviewing some of
the participants in the Milgram experiments, relatives of the
men who served as experimenter and learners in the experi-
ments, and Milgram’s former students in addition to poring
over the articles, notebooks, and recordings in the Milgram
archives, Perry (2013) discovered some serious methodological
problems in the obedience experiments. It seems that Milgram
deliberately misrepresented his postexperimental debriefing
procedures in his published work (see also Nicholson, 2011).
Perry found that most of the participants at the end of the
experiment were not completely debriefed and not told that the
shock machine was a fake, that the learner was an actor, and
that the learner was not actually shocked. It turns out that it was
almost a year before these people received a complete explana-
tion. In addition, the man posing as the experimenter did not
stick to the experimental protocol and only use the four speci-
fied prods in the script and then stop the experiment after these
prods had been exhausted. At various times, he strayed from
the script and didn’t stop at four prods but invented more coer-
cive prods and continued on. For example, in one experimental
condition, he insisted that a woman participant continue 26
times. In addition, the extent and nature of the experimenter’s
deviation from protocol varied across experimental conditions.
Even the infamous ‘‘65% obedience rate’’ is brought into ques-
tion by the strong possibility of participant expectations. For
Griggs and Whitehead
example, Perry argues that only about half of the participants in
the experiments fully believed that the learner was being
shocked, and about two thirds of these participants disobeyed
the experimenter.
Given Perry’s criticisms (and those of Gibson, 2013, and
Nicholson, 2011), it will be interesting to see how introductory
social psychology textbook authors present the Milgram obedi-
ence ‘‘story’’ in the next editions of their textbooks. Will these
criticisms be ignored as many text authors have ignored the
SPE criticisms and Manning et al.’s (2007) criticism of the
accuracy of the Kitty Genovese story? We would hope not, but
the present results indicate that this is a strong possibility.
It is likely that all of the factors that we have discussed as
well as others that we are not aware of played a role in the text-
book authors’ decisions about the extent and nature of SPE
coverage to be included in their texts. Making such decisions
is not an easy task so it is important to realize that authoring
a textbook is a very complex, challenging, and arduous task.
McConnell’s (1988) discussion of this task for introductory
psychology authors explicates the problems facing textbook
authors. He pointed out that textbook authors have to satisfy
five different audiences—students, instructors, peers and col-
leagues, publishers, and one’s inner feelings and needs—that
make different and sometimes conflicting demands on the text-
book author. As McConnell concluded: ‘‘Satisfying them all is
something of an impossibility’’ (p. 167).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.
Notes
1. Because we did not include briefer versions of regular introductory
social psychology textbooks, it is important to point out that
Aronson (2012) is not a briefer version of Aronson, Wilson, and
Akert (2013).
2. As Manning et al. (2007) carefully pointed out, there is a clear dis-
tinction between the Kitty Genovese story itself and the bystander
intervention research tradition that emerged in response to it,
resulting in our knowledge of the bystander effect (e.g., Latané
& Darley, 1968, 1970). They also make it clear that challenges
to the accuracy of the story in no way invalidate the canon of
bystander research.
References
An * indicates a textbook examined in the present study.
*Aronson, E. (2012). The social animal (11th ed.). New York, NY:
Worth.
*Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2013). Social psychol-
ogy (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014
323
Banuazizi, A., & Movahedi, S. (1975). Interpersonal dynamics in a
simulated prison: A methodological analysis. American Psycholo-
gist, 30, 152–160.
Banyard, P. (2007). Tyranny and the tyrant: From Stanford to Abu
Ghraib. [Review of the book The Lucifer effect: Understanding
how good people turn evil, by P. G. Zimbardo]. The Psychologist,
20, 494–495.
*Baron, R. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Byrne, D. (2012). Social psy-
chology (13th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
*Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2014). Social psychology and
human nature (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Blumenthal, A. L. (1990-1991, Winter). The introductory psychol-
ogy textbook. The International Journal of Social Education, 5,
11–28.
Burton, G. (2011). The tenacity of historical misinformation: Titch-
ener did not invent the Titchener illusion. History of Psychology,
4, 228–244.
Carnahan, T., & McFarland, S. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford prison
experiment: Could participant self-selection have led to the
cruelty? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 603–614.
*Franzoi, S. (2013). Social psychology (6th ed.). Redding, CA: BVT
Publishing.
Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. New York,
NY: Fawcett Crest.
Gansberg, M. (1964, March 27). 37 who saw murder didn’t call the
police. New York Times, p. 1.
Gibson, S. (2013). ‘‘The last possible resort’’: A forgotten prod and the
in situ standardization of Stanley Milgram’s voice-feedback condi-
tion. History of Psychology, 16, 177–194.
*Gilovich, T., Keltner, D., Chen, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2013). Social
psychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Norton.
Gray, P. (2013, October 18). Why Zimbardo’s prison experiment isn’t
in my textbook [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://www.
psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/201310/why-zimbardo-
s-prison-experiment-isn-t-in-my-textbook
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the
persuasiveness of pubic narratives. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 79, 701–721.
Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2002). In the mind’s eye:
Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M. C.
Green, J. J. Strange, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Narrative impact: Social
and cognitive foundations (pp. 315–341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Gregoire, C. (2013, December 18). 10 psychological studies that will
change what you think you know about yourself. The Huffington
Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/18/
20-psychological-studies-_n_4098779.html
Griggs, R. A. (2014). Coverage of the Stanford prison experiment in
introductory psychology textbooks. Teaching of Psychology, 41,
195–203.
Griggs, R. A., & Jackson, S. L. (2007). Classic studies as primary
source reading in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychol-
ogy, 34, 181–186.
Griggs, R. A., & Jackson, S. L. (2013). Introductory psychology text-
books: An objective analysis update. Teaching of Psychology, 40,
163–168.
324
Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973a). A study of prisoners and
guards in a simulated prison. Naval Research Reviews, 9, 1–17.
Washington, DC: Office of Naval Research.
Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973b). Interpersonal
dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminol-
ogy and Penology, 1, 69–97.
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2009). Persistent dispositionalism in inter-
actionist clothing: Fundamental attribution error in explaining prison
abuse. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 807–814.
Harris, B. (1979). Whatever happened to Little Albert? American
Psychologist, 34, 151–160.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2003). Beyond Stanford: Questioning a
role-based explanation of tyranny. Dialogue, 18, 22–25.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2005, October). The psychology of
tyranny. Scientific American MIND, 6, 41–51.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2007). Beyond the banality of evil:
Three dynamics of an interactionist social psychology of tyranny.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 615–622.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2012). Tyranny: Revisiting Zimbardo’s
Stanford prison experiment. In J. R. Smith & S. A. Haslam (Eds.),
Social psychology: Revisiting the classic studies (pp. 126–141).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
*Kassin, D. T., Fein, S., & Markus, H. R. (2013). Social psychology
(9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
*Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., & Cialdini, R. B. (2010). Social psy-
chology: Goals in interaction (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1968). Group inhibition of bystander
intervention in emergencies. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 10, 215–221.
Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why
doesn’t he help? New York, NY: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Lovibond, S. H., Mithiran, X., & Adams, W. G. (1979). The effects of
three experimental prison environments on the behavior of non-
convict volunteer subjects. Australian Psychologist, 14, 273–287.
Manning, R., Levine, M., & Collins, A. (2007). The Kitty Genovese
murder and the social psychology of helping: The parable of the
38 witnesses. American Psychologist, 62, 555–562.
McConnell, J. V. (1988). Confessions of a textbook writer. American
Psychologist, 33, 159–169.
McFarland, S., & Carnahan, T. (2009). A situation’s first powers are
attracting volunteers and selecting participants: A reply to Haney
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by guest on October 7, 2014
View publication stats
Teaching of Psychology 41(4)
and Zimbardo. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35,
815–818.
McGreal, S. (2013, September 10). Individual differences in the Stan-
ford Prison Experiment [Web log comment]. Retrieved from http://
www.psychologytoday.com/blog/unique-everybody-else/201309/
individual-differences-in-the-stanford-prison-experiment
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority: An experimental view.
New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Morawski, J. G. (1992). There is more to our history of giving: The
place of introductory psychology textbooks in American psychol-
ogy. American Psychologist, 47, 161–169.
*Myers, D. G. (2012). Social psychology (11th ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Nicholson, I. (2011). ‘‘Torture at Yale’’: Experimental subjects,
laboratory torment and the ‘‘rehabilitation’’ of Milgram’s ‘‘obedi-
ence to authority.’’ Theory & Psychology, 21, 737–761.
Perry, G. (2013). Behind the shock machine: The untold story of the
notorious Milgram psychology experiments. New York, NY: The
New Press.
Prescott, C. (2005, April 28). The lie of the Stanford prison
experiment. Stanford Daily, in News section. Posted at: http://
valtinsblog.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/lie-of-the-stanford-prison-
experiment.html
Reicher, S., & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psychology of
tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psycho-
logy, 45, 1–40.
Ribkoff, F. (2013, February). Unheeded post-traumatic unpredictabil-
ity: Philip G. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment as absurdist
performance. Liminalities: A Journal of Performance Studies, 9.
Retrieved from http://liminalities.net/9-1/unheeded.pdf
Rosenthal, A. M. (1964). Thirty-eight witnesses: The Kitty Genovese
case. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
*Sanderson, C. A. (2010). Social psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley.
Savin, H. B. (1973). Professors and psychological researchers:
Conflicting values in conflicting roles. Cognition, 2, 147–149.
Turner, J. C. (2006). Tyranny, freedom and social structure: Escaping
our theoretical prisons. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25,
41–46.
Zimbardo, P. G. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good
people turn evil. New York, NY: Random House.