This idea that Americans have in their brains- that prison “works” seems to mean that it reduces crime. Upon further investigation, I’ve learned that prison not only impacts crime, but it sets up the perfect way for criminals to derive new plans to commit more crimes. Back in 1993, Terrie Moffett, a psychologist, wrote a paper about his idea that there are two different kinds of prisoners. The less serious kind of prisoner, known as “Adolescent-limited”, usually are young men, who commit crimes more so for fun, while being part of gangs, or other reasons, end up maturing and giving up their lifestyles and moving on. The other kind is “lifelong-persistent” prisoners, who commit crimes repeatedly and end up on a never-ending cycle in the criminal justice system (Why Prison Doesn’t Work: An Essay).
Prison is used to custody people who violate against the law inorder to deprivale their liberty as a kind of punishment. Separate the law violated citizens from the society to maintain social order, deter others potential offenders from criminal behaviour, and also ensecure the public safety. Nevertheless most of the prisoners will reintegerate to society, we should give them an opportunity to reform, however how to prevent them from recidivate is a pressing issue among the world. In US, it contain the world highest incarceration rate, 7,308,200 up to 2008 were sent to prisons and jails. The report of recidivism rate are vay, in the 2009 Florida prison recidivism study which study the prisoners who were released from 2001 to 2008 showed the
Criminals who breach their early-release conditions, by failing to keep an appointment or committing another offence, can be recalled to jail. Enver Solomon, the author of the report, said: “The untold story of the record prison population is the large number of offenders who do not pose a threat to the public but are being dragged back to overcrowded, overstretched jails at great expense to the taxpayer.” His report calls on the Government to relax the national guidelines on when a prisoner should be “breached” for breaking licence conditions and make them less punitive. Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison Reform Trust, accused the Home Office of setting up ex-prisoners to fail. She said: “Arrangements designed to be tough and fair
The Stanford prison experiment was a study of the psychological effects of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. The experiment was conducted at Stanford University from August 14 to August 20 of 1971 by a team of researchers led by psychology professor Philip Zimbardo. The original purpose of the experiment was to observe the effect that being in a prison like institutional setting has upon people, and how they react to being placed in positions both with and without authority. As it developed however, the experiment quickly spiralled out of control, the “guards” abuse of the “prisoners” became excessive causing them far more trauma than the experiment justified. Whether the experiment went horribly wrong or horribly right is entirely a matter of opinion, although the “horrible” seems pretty clear cut.
The men were divided into two groups: Prisoners and Guards. They were warned that as prisoners of this experiment their privacy and other rights would be violated, as well as being harassed. Zimbardo’s goal for this experiment was to find out the period in which the prisoners and guards become controlling and passive. In order to do this he had to set up a mock prison. The prisoners were given the same smocks to wear, lived in cells, and were given ID numbers.
Critical Response to “Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment: A Lesson in the Power of Situation” by Phillip G. Zimbardo Abraham Lincoln once quoted “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man character, give him power”. Power is frequently defined as the ability to influence the behavior or others with or without resistance. The use of power could be seen as good or evil depending on whomever hands it falls into. In the article “Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment…,” Zimbardo does an experiment to prove his theory on “what happens to essentially good people when they are placed in positions of power in a prison situation” (Zimbardo 302). The experiment shows that every man, even a good one, can in circumstances do horrible things.
The article, Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison, written by Philip G. Zimbargo takes us inside the research world of the prison environment and reveals several ethical and behavioral concerns about using social experiments to study human behavior. Zimbargo, a psychology professor at Stanford University, was fascinated with the social dynamics of prison, especially the individual interaction that takes place between guards and prisoners. Zimbardo’s method was simply to take all the accounts of ex-convicts and prison guards and create an environment that most reflected that of an actual prison system. Once that was in place he would assess the inmates using three different psychological tests (List tests) to eliminate perceivable confounds the Zimbardo use a random sample of a population consisting of inhabitants of the Stanford university area. There were 22 participants’ chosen for the role of either guards or inmates and 2 other participants were selected for the role of “warden” and “superintendent.” The guards and inmates were randomly assigned and instructed only on what they needed to know.
Surprisingly, the participants truly embodied their roles. Throughout the experiment, the prison guards enforced their authoritarian power and tormented the prisoners both mentally and physically. Despite being the conductor of the experiment, Zimbardo also played a role as the superintendent of the prison. The Stanford Prison Experiment was significant due to its controversial nature and continued discussion in the classroom. The experiment itself was a form of field research.
Prisoners were arrested at their homes and were treated like criminals. They were blindfolded and taken to Zimbardo’s imitated prison where they were finger printed, booked and photographed. Those who were assigned the role of guards were given khaki uniforms, whistles, a wooden baton, and reflective sunglasses so that eye contact with the prisoners was impossible. Prisoners were given prison clothing with an identification number on front and back, a tight nylon cap, rubber sandals, and a chain around one ankle. Slowly each individual began to conform to their roles as prisoners and guards and the individuation process began.
Most of the guinea pigs were white middle class and attending Stanford University at the time. After the selection, it was time to create a makeshift prison in the basement of part of the University. A dark, dreary little place that was selected to dizzy and disorient the prisoners. The guards and prisoners alike were given new clothing to mask their old identity and to create a new one, both of which came from a military surplus store. The prisoner’s uniforms consisted of a nylon