3 ms·

No. What the experiment showed is that you can be TEMPORARILY coerced into certain behaviors in abusive environments (especially by authority figures - as was e

No. What the experiment showed is that you can be TEMPORARILY coerced into certain behaviors in abusive environments (especially by authority figures - as was exemplified in the Milgram experiment), but it won't change who you actually are. The SPE is really a study in toxic workplaces and abusive relationships. I really wish people would stop quoting the SPE without researching what actually happened and why (and the fact that it was tainted due to Zimbardo's direct involvement and direction in order to get the results he wanted). Don't worry: You are NOT your job, and your job isn't going to change you forever. This is just a scare piece. The only thing you should keep in mind is: If it FEELS wrong to you, go with your gut, because sticking around will be traumatic.

Atrine 3y ago
This isn't what I took away from it. It's basically your environment really dictates a lot of who you are and what you become. From my experience, this is absolutely the case.
- kstenerud 3y ago
  Your environment during your early formative years, yes. By the time you're in your mid-late teens, your moral reasoning is already pretty much solidified (and really it's more about clan loyalty than morality at that point - although we often conflate the two when it comes to inter-clan conflict).
  - matt_daemon 3y ago
    Maybe in an ideal world, but in practically any real world scenario this isn't the case. Spend enough time somewhere and the mechanics of that place inevitably influence the way we act, in the workforce and out.
    - ipaddr 3y ago
      You can change the work environment. The ability to influence goes both ways.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    Reasoning I think keeps developing with your brain to your mid-20s.
    - gnz11 3y ago
      The prefrontal cortex isn’t fully developed until around age 25.
AtlasBarfed 3y ago
You don't think post college jobs and experiences change you? You don't think being a salaryman vs a school teacher versus world travel changes your perspective values and behaviors? But it is healthy to keep this perspective (Tyler durdens assertion) and always try to grow in some way that isn't involved with money
- edu 3y ago
  I agree with both. Your job is a pretty big part of your life and, like any experience you have, it shapes you. You’re a complex and constantly evolving human. Your job is a part of you, like it’s your family, friends, education, hobbies, media you consume, ideas, secrets… So, you’re not your job but your job is a big part of you.
jxl62 3y ago
If someone gets angry, lashes out, and the following day says sorry I wasn't acting like my self the other day.. Why would that be true? Why can't it just be that it was a part of you? I don't mean when it's said casually either. Even without the experiment, it seems odd to me that behaviors and culture you engage with for generally half of your waking hours for several decades has nothing to do with your identity. This posts reads a bit like a Joshua Fluke reaction video.
- em-bee 3y ago
  Why can't it just be that it was a part of you it could be, but assuming that in general implies that your behavior is genetic and there is nothing you can do to change it. which i do not believe to be true. your behavior is formed by your environment, and you can change how you behave.
saberience 3y ago
> Don't worry: You are NOT your job, and your job isn't going to change you forever. This is just a scare piece. Jobs definitely can and do change people though. For a while I worked for a financial company (and I had previously worked in videogames) and I definitely became a different person there, one whom I didn't like. I ended up leaving because I could see myself changing over time and it made me uncomfortable when looking at the "lifers" in the company and understanding that was my future.
hyperthesis 3y ago
Maybe not change you, but become mistaken as to who you are. But who is anyone, anyway? How do you know? Is the old advice is profound or meaningless: Temet Nosce
helloplanets 3y ago
Stanford prison experiment has very much been debunked, it does not reflect at all what would naturally happen in such a situation. > These new criticisms include the biased and incomplete collection of data, the extent to which the SPE drew on a prison experiment devised and conducted by students in one of Zimbardo's classes 3 months earlier, the fact that the guards received precise instructions regarding the treatment of the prisoners, the fact that the guards were not told they were subjects, and the fact that participants were almost never completely immersed by the situation. [0] > Zimbardo and his assistants ordered the guards to become cruel, and, moreover, that guards and prisoners alike knew what Zimbardo was trying to prove and were eager to help. [1] > In other words, the sadism of the guards and the submissiveness of the prisoners in the experiment didn’t reveal the hidden darkness of the human soul, so much as the willingness of college students to please a professor. [1] [0]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/ [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/beware-the-epiphany-industrial-complex/ https://www.wired.com/story/beware-the-epiphany-industrial-c...
- ceceron 3y ago
  That's why I am so often disgusted with the psychology research ethics. So many experiments are impossible to reproduce (vide recent reproducibility crisis), some (like the Stanford Prison Experiment) are debunked, but it is already too late — the damage is already done. As soon as a controversial research thesis reaches the public opinion (Zimbardo made sure his thesis would become popular), it becomes part of the "folk wisdom" and is repeated as a holy truth and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
  - jmcgough 3y ago
    Fwiw I don't think an IRB would ever sign off on Zimbardo in 2023. Extremely poorly designed study; it's a travesty that we still see his mug while he narrates videos in Psych 101.
j7ake 3y ago
Most people who go through university and grad school would disagree. They are clearly very different at 18 years old freshman vs 23 graduate, and most would say it is because of their university experience.
yard2010 3y ago
Nothing lasts forever, and we both know hearts can change

Atrine 3y ago

This isn't what I took away from it. It's basically your environment really dictates a lot of who you are and what you become. From my experience, this is absolutely the case.

kstenerud 3y ago
Your environment during your early formative years, yes. By the time you're in your mid-late teens, your moral reasoning is already pretty much solidified (and really it's more about clan loyalty than morality at that point - although we often conflate the two when it comes to inter-clan conflict).
- matt_daemon 3y ago
  Maybe in an ideal world, but in practically any real world scenario this isn't the case. Spend enough time somewhere and the mechanics of that place inevitably influence the way we act, in the workforce and out.
  - ipaddr 3y ago
    You can change the work environment. The ability to influence goes both ways.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  Reasoning I think keeps developing with your brain to your mid-20s.
  - gnz11 3y ago
    The prefrontal cortex isn’t fully developed until around age 25.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

You don't think post college jobs and experiences change you? You don't think being a salaryman vs a school teacher versus world travel changes your perspective values and behaviors? But it is healthy to keep this perspective (Tyler durdens assertion) and always try to grow in some way that isn't involved with money

edu 3y ago
I agree with both. Your job is a pretty big part of your life and, like any experience you have, it shapes you. You’re a complex and constantly evolving human. Your job is a part of you, like it’s your family, friends, education, hobbies, media you consume, ideas, secrets… So, you’re not your job but your job is a big part of you.

jxl62 3y ago

If someone gets angry, lashes out, and the following day says sorry I wasn't acting like my self the other day.. Why would that be true? Why can't it just be that it was a part of you? I don't mean when it's said casually either. Even without the experiment, it seems odd to me that behaviors and culture you engage with for generally half of your waking hours for several decades has nothing to do with your identity. This posts reads a bit like a Joshua Fluke reaction video.

em-bee 3y ago
Why can't it just be that it was a part of you it could be, but assuming that in general implies that your behavior is genetic and there is nothing you can do to change it. which i do not believe to be true. your behavior is formed by your environment, and you can change how you behave.

saberience 3y ago

> Don't worry: You are NOT your job, and your job isn't going to change you forever. This is just a scare piece. Jobs definitely can and do change people though. For a while I worked for a financial company (and I had previously worked in videogames) and I definitely became a different person there, one whom I didn't like. I ended up leaving because I could see myself changing over time and it made me uncomfortable when looking at the "lifers" in the company and understanding that was my future.

hyperthesis 3y ago

Maybe not change you, but become mistaken as to who you are. But who is anyone, anyway? How do you know? Is the old advice is profound or meaningless: Temet Nosce

helloplanets 3y ago

Stanford prison experiment has very much been debunked, it does not reflect at all what would naturally happen in such a situation. > These new criticisms include the biased and incomplete collection of data, the extent to which the SPE drew on a prison experiment devised and conducted by students in one of Zimbardo's classes 3 months earlier, the fact that the guards received precise instructions regarding the treatment of the prisoners, the fact that the guards were not told they were subjects, and the fact that participants were almost never completely immersed by the situation. [0] > Zimbardo and his assistants ordered the guards to become cruel, and, moreover, that guards and prisoners alike knew what Zimbardo was trying to prove and were eager to help. [1] > In other words, the sadism of the guards and the submissiveness of the prisoners in the experiment didn’t reveal the hidden darkness of the human soul, so much as the willingness of college students to please a professor. [1] [0]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31380664/ [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/beware-the-epiphany-industrial-complex/ https://www.wired.com/story/beware-the-epiphany-industrial-c...

ceceron 3y ago
That's why I am so often disgusted with the psychology research ethics. So many experiments are impossible to reproduce (vide recent reproducibility crisis), some (like the Stanford Prison Experiment) are debunked, but it is already too late — the damage is already done. As soon as a controversial research thesis reaches the public opinion (Zimbardo made sure his thesis would become popular), it becomes part of the "folk wisdom" and is repeated as a holy truth and a self-fulfilling prophecy.
- jmcgough 3y ago
  Fwiw I don't think an IRB would ever sign off on Zimbardo in 2023. Extremely poorly designed study; it's a travesty that we still see his mug while he narrates videos in Psych 101.

j7ake 3y ago

Most people who go through university and grad school would disagree. They are clearly very different at 18 years old freshman vs 23 graduate, and most would say it is because of their university experience.

yard2010 3y ago

Nothing lasts forever, and we both know hearts can change