Psychology
History Subfields
Basic science
Abnormal Biological Cognitive Comparative Cultural Differential Developmental Evolutionary Experimental Mathematical Personality Positive Social
Applied science
Applied behavior analysis Clinical Community Consumer Educational Health Industrial and organizational Legal Military Occupational health Political Religion School Sport
Lists
Disciplines Organizations Outline Psychologists Psychotherapies Publications Research methods Theories Timeline Topics
Portal
v t e

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2007)

Psychologist is a professional or academic title used by individuals who are either:^[1]

• Clinical, counseling, and school psychologists who work with patients in a variety of therapeutic contexts (contrast with psychiatrists, who are physician specialists).
• Organizational psychologists who apply psychological research, theories and techniques to "real-world" problems, questions and issues in business, industry, or government.^[2]
• Academics conducting psychological research or teaching psychology in a college or university;

There are many different types of psychologists, as is reflected by the 56 different divisions of the American Psychological Association (APA).^[3] Psychologists are generally described as being either "applied" or "research-oriented". The common terms used to describe this central division in psychology are "scientists" or "scholars" (those who conduct research) and "practitioners" or "professionals" (those who apply psychological knowledge). The training models endorsed by the APA require that applied psychologists be trained as both researchers and practitioners,^[4] and that they possess advanced degrees.

Most typically, people encounter psychologists and think of the discipline as involving the work of clinical psychologists or counseling psychologists. While counseling and psychotherapy are common activities for psychologists, these applied fields are just one branch in the larger domain of psychology.^[5] Research and teaching comprise a major role among psychologists. Technological advances in the future may increase the usage of computerized testing and assessment services in order to do some of the jobs of psychologists, including recognizing mental disorders.^[6]

Licensing and regulation[link]

Australia[link]

In Australia the psychology profession and the use of the title 'psychologist' is regulated by an Act of Parliament, Health Practitioner Regulation (Administrative Arrangements) National Law Act 2008[1], following an agreement between the state and territory governments. Under the national law, registration of psychologists is administered by the Psychology Board of Australia (PsyBA).^[7] Before July 2010, professional registration of psychologists was governed by various State and Territory Psychology Registration Board.^[8] The Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC) oversees education standards for the profession of psychology.

The minimum requirements for general registration in psychology and to use the title 'psychologist' is an APAC approved four year degree sequence in psychology followed by either: (1) a two year masters program or (2) two years supervised by a registered psychologist.[2]. Endorsement within a specific area of practice (e.g. Counselling, Clinical, Neuropsychological, Organisational, Forensic, or Educational Psychology) requires additional qualification.[3] These notations are not 'specialist' titles (Western Australian psychologists may use 'specialist' in their titles during a three year transitional period).^[9]

Membership with Australian Psychological Society (APS) differs from registration as a psychologist. The standard route to full membership (MAPS) of the APS technically requires a masters or doctoral degree in psychology in an accredited course. An alternate route is available for academics and practitioners who have gained appropriate experience and made substantial contribution to the field of psychology. Association membership requires four years of APAC accredited undergraduate study.

Restrictions apply to all who want to use the title 'psychologist' in any form in all states and territories of Australia. However, the terms 'psychotherapist', 'social worker', and 'counselor' is currently self-regulated with several organizations campaigning for government regulation.^[10]

Belgium[link]

In Belgium, the title "psychologist" is protected by law since 1993. It can only be used by people who are included as such on the list of a national government commission. The minimum requirement is a completed five years university training in psychology (Master's degree or equivalent). The title of "psychotherapist" is not legally protected (yet).

Finland[link]

In Finland, the title "psychologist" is protected by law. Restriction is governed by National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health (Finland). It takes 330 ECTS-credits (about six years) to accomplish the studies.

Germany[link]

In Germany, the use of the title 'Diplom-Psychologe' is restricted by law, and a practitioner is legally required to hold the corresponding academic title, which is comparable to a higher MSc degree and requires up to five years of training. With the current reforms, this degree will be replaced by a lower master's degree and a new Ph.D. degree in psychology. The academic degree of Diplom-Psychologe does not include a psychotherapeutical qualification, which requires three to five years of additional training. The psychotherapeutical training combines in-depth theoretical knowledge with supervised patient care and self-reflection units. After having completed the training requirements, psychologists take a state-run exam, which, upon successful completion, confers the official title of 'psychological psychotherapist' (psychologischer Psychotherapeut).^{[citation needed]}

Greece[link]

In Greece, the title "psychologist" has been protected by law since 1979. It can only be used by people who hold a relevant licence to practice as a psychologist. The minimum requirement is the completion of university training in psychology at a Greek university, or at a university recognized by the Greek authorities.^[11]

The Netherlands[link]

In the Netherlands, the title of "psychologist" is not restricted by law. The Dutch professional association of psychologists (NIP), using trademark law, therefore posited its own title "Psychologist NIP" (Psycholoog NIP), which is granted exclusively to holders of a Masters degree in psychology, after a year of postgraduate experience. The titles "psychotherapist" (psychotherapeut) and "healthcare psychologist" (gz-psycholoog / gezondheidszorgpsycholoog) are restricted through the Individual Healthcare Professions Act (wet BIG) to those who have followed further postgraduate (PsyD/DPsych or Licentiate level) training. The use of the titles "clinical psychologist" (klinisch psycholoog) and clinical neuropsychologist (klinisch neuropsycholoog) is reserved for those who have followed specialist post-licentiate training.

New Zealand[link]

In New Zealand, the use of the title 'psychologist' is restricted by law. Initially, only 'clinical psychologist' and 'registered psychologist' were restricted (to people qualified as such). However, in 2004, the use of psychologist is now limited to only those registered psychologists (including clinical psychologists). This is to prevent the misrepresentation of other psychology qualifications in the mental health field. Academic psychologists (e.g., social psychologists) are now only able to refer to themselves as 'researchers in psychology'.

South Africa[link]

In South Africa,^[12] psychologists are qualified in one of Clinical-, Counselling-, Educational-, Organisational- or Research Psychology. To attain the qualification, one must complete a recognised Masters degree in Psychology and an appropriate practicum at a recognised training institution, and also sit an examination set by the Professional Board for Psychology.^[13] Registration with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA)^[14] is required, and includes a Continuing Professional Development component. The practicum usually involves a full year internship, and in some specializations the HPCSA requires completion of an additional year of community service. The Master's comprises seminar- and coursework-based theoretical and practical training, and a dissertation of limited scope, and is (in most cases) two years in duration. Prior to enrolling for the Master’s, the student will have studied psychology for three years as an undergraduate (B.A., B.Sc., and, for Organisational Psychology, also B.Comm.), followed by an additional postgraduate honours degree in psychology; see List of universities in South Africa. Qualification thus requires at least five years of study, and at least one of internship. There are plans to change the requirements at a future date, which will probably include the requirement that a candidate achieve a doctoral degree.

Sweden[link]

In Sweden the titles "psychologist" and "practiced psychologist" are restricted in law. It can only be used after receiving a license from the government. The basic requirements are a completed five years specialised course in psychology (equivalent of a Master's degree) and 12 months of practice under supervision. All other uses are banned, though often challenged. "Psychotherapist" follows similar rules but the basic educational demands are another 1.5 years (spread out over three years) at a specialised course in psychotherapy (that do vary a lot concerning theoretical footing), in addition to an academical level degree within a field concerning the treatment of people (psychologist, social worker, psychiatrist a.s.o.). Others than psychologist usually have to complete their education with basic courses in psychotherapy to meet the demands for the applied psychotherapy classes.

United Kingdom[link]

In the UK the following titles are restricted by law "registered psychologist" and "practitioner psychologist"; in addition the following specialist titles are restricted by law: "clinical psychologist", "counselling psychologist", "educational psychologist", "forensic psychologist", "health psychologist", "occupational psychologist" and "sport and exercise psychologist".^[15] The Health Professions Council (HPC-UK) is the statutory regulator for practitioner psychologists in the UK. In the UK the use of the title "chartered psychologist" is also protected by statutory regulation. The title "chartered psychologist" simply means that the psychologist is a chartered member of the British Psychological Society but it does not necessarily signify the psychologist is registered with the HPC-UK. It is an offense for someone who is not in the appropriate section of the HPC-UK Register to provide clinical psychology services, counselling psychology services, educational psychology services, forensic psychology services, health psychology services, occupational psychology services or sport and exercise psychology services.^[16] The threshold level of qualification for entry to the Register for clinical, counselling and educational psychologists is a professional doctorate (and in the case of the latter two the British Psychological Society's Professional Qualification which meets the standards of a professional doctorate).^[17] The title ‘psychologist’ is not protected on its own.^[18] Also the title of "neuropsychologist" is not protected at present.^[18] The British Psychological Society is working with the HPC-UK to ensure that the title of "neuropsychologist" is regulated as a specialist title for practitioner psychologists; one of the options could be the use of post-doctoral level registers.

United States and Canada[link]

Full membership with the American Psychological Association in United States and Canada requires doctoral training (except in some provinces like Alberta where a master's degree is sufficient). Associate membership requires at least two years of postgraduate studies in psychology or approved related discipline. The minimal requirement for full membership can be waived in certain circumstances where there is evidence that significant contribution or performance in the field of psychology has been made.^[19]

Outside of government and academia, a professional in the U.S. or Canada must also hold a psychology license to either practice psychology or use the title "psychologist".^[20] The exception to this is the profession of a school psychologist who can be certified by boards of education to practice and use the title "psychologist." The entry level degree for a school psychologist is a Masters or Education Specialist (Ed.S). The most commonly recognized psychology professionals are clinical and counseling psychologists, those who provide psychotherapy and/or administer and interpret psychological tests. There are state-by-state differences in requirements for academics in psychology and government employees.

Psychologists in the United States have campaigned for legislation changes to enable specially trained psychologists to prescribe psychiatric medicine. New legislation in Louisiana and New Mexico has granted those who take an additional masters program in psychopharmacology permission to prescribe medications for mental and emotional disorders in co-ordination with the patient's physician. Louisiana was the second state to provide such legislation.^[21] This legislation has not come without considerable controversy. As of 2009, Louisiana is the only of the United States where the licensing and regulation of the practice of psychology by medical psychologists who prescribe medications is regulated by those in medicine (i.e., Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners). While other states have pursued prescriptive privileges, they have yet to be successful. Similar legislation in the states of Hawaii and Oregon passed through the legislative House and Senate but it was vetoed by the Governor.^[21]

Employment[link]

The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (December 2010)

In the United States the vast majority of 170,200 psychologist jobs, 152,000 are employed in clinical, counseling, and school positions, 2300 are employed in industrial-organizational, and 15,900 in "all-other" positions. Opportunities are very limited for Bachelor degree and M.A. degree holders as psychologists. M.A. level psychologists will face intense competition.^[1]

Salaries[link]

In the U.S., The median salary for 2010 for clinical, counseling, and school psychologists was US$66,810 and the median salary for organizational psychologists was US$77,010.^[1][22]

Offices of other health practitioners: $68,400 Elementary and secondary schools: $65,710 State government: $63,710 Outpatient care centers: $59,130 Individual and family services: $57,440

Contrast with psychiatrist[link]

Although clinical psychologists and psychiatrists can be said to share a same fundamental aim—the alleviation of mental distress—their training, outlook, and methodologies are often quite different. Perhaps the most significant difference is that psychiatrists are licensed physicians. As such, psychiatrists often use the medical model to assess mental health problems and rely on psychotropic medications as the chief method of addressing mental health problems^[23]—although many also employ psychotherapy as well. Psychologists receive extensive training in psychological test administration, scoring, interpretation and reporting. Examples include the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory II (MMPI-II), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test IV (WAIS-IV), and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III). These tests, along with others, help to inform diagnostic decisions and treatment planning. For example, in a medical center, a patient with a complicated clinical presentation who is being seen by a psychiatrist might be referred to a clinical psychologist for psychological testing to aid in diagnosis and treatment. In addition, psychologists (particularly those from PhD programs) spend several years in graduate school being trained to conduct behavioral research, including research design and advanced statistical analysis. While this training is available for physicians via dual MD/PhD programs, it is not typically included in medical education.

Psychologists generally do not prescribe medication, although there is a growing movement for clinical psychologists to have limited prescribing privileges. Clinical and other psychologists are experts at psychotherapy (typically clinical psychologists are trained in a number of psychological therapies, including, behavioural, cognitive, humanistic, existential, psychodynamic, and systemic approaches), and psychological testing (e.g. including neuropsychological testing). In two US states, specifically New Mexico and Louisiana, some psychologists with post-doctoral pharmacology training have been granted prescriptive authority for certain mental health disorders upon agreement with the patient's physician.^[24]

See also[link]

• List of psychologists
• Psychology
• Psychiatry
• Psychiatrist
• Mental health professional
• List of psychological topics
• List of psychologists on postage stamps

References[link]

External links[link]

Listen to this article (info/dl)

This audio file was created from a revision of the "Psychologist" article dated 2006-12-17, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the article. (Audio help)

More spoken articles

• European Federation of Psychologists' Associations
• The National Psychologist, an independent bi-monthly newspaper for behavioral healthcare practitioners
• ThePsychologist.com Professional links for psychologists and students of psychology.
• Psychology terms
• Psychology Careers Blog Articles and other great content on Careers in Psychology
• American Psychological Association

Paul Ekman (born February 15, 1934) is an American psychologist who has been a pioneer in the study of emotions and their relation to facial expressions. He has been considered one of the 100 most eminent psychologists of the twentieth century.^[1] The background of Ekman's research analyzes the development of human traits and states over time (Keltner, 2007).

Biography[link]

Ekman was born in 1934 in Washington, D.C., and grew up in New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, and California.

At the age of 15 and without graduating from high school he enrolled at the University of Chicago where he completed three years of his undergraduate. He completed his final year at New York University where he earned his BA in 1954.^[2] He received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology at Adelphi University (1958), after a one year internship at the Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute.

At the University of Chicago, his classmates included Susan Sontag, Mike Nichols, and Elaine May.^[3]

He received a Research Scientist Award from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) in 1971, which was renewed in 1976, 1981, 1987, 1991 and 1997. For over forty years, NIMH supported his research through fellowships, grants, and awards. He also wrote a famous book called "Telling Lies" in the year 1985. He was encouraged to write this book by his college friend and teacher Silvan S. Tomkins.

In 2001, Ekman collaborated with John Cleese for the BBC documentary series The Human Face. He retired in 2004 as professor of psychology in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). From 1960 to 2004 he worked at the Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute.

He was named one of the top Time 100 most influential people in the May 11, 2009 edition of Time magazine.^[4]

Work[link]

Ekman's work on facial expressions had its starting point in the work of psychologist Silvan Tomkins.^[5] Ekman's projects included developing techniques for measuring facial muscular movement while also developing theories about emotion and deception through empirical research. ^[6] Ekman showed that contrary to the belief of some anthropologists including Margaret Mead, facial expressions of emotion are not culturally determined, but universal across human cultures and thus biological in origin. Expressions he found to be universal included those indicating anger, disgust, fear, shame, joy, sadness, and surprise. Findings on contempt are less clear, though there is at least some preliminary evidence that this emotion and its expression are universally recognized.^[7] Ekman's first publication in 1957 discussed all of his findings on developing methods for measuring nonverbal behavior.^[8]

In a research project along with Dr. Maureen O'Sullivan, called the Wizards Project (previously named the Diogenes Project), Ekman reported on facial "microexpressions" which could be used to assist in lie detection. After testing a total of 20,000 people^[9] from all walks of life, he found only 50 people that had the ability to spot deception without any formal training. These naturals are also known as "Truth Wizards", or wizards of deception detection from demeanor.^[10]

He developed the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) to taxonomize every human facial expression. Ekman conducted and published research on a wide variety of topics in the general area of non-verbal behavior. His work on lying, for example, was not limited to the face, but also to observation of the rest of the body.

In his profession, he also uses oral signs of lying. When interviewed about the Monica Lewinsky scandal, he mentioned that he could detect that former President Bill Clinton was lying because he used distancing language.^[11]

Ekman has contributed to the study of social aspects of lying, why we lie,^[12] and why we are often unconcerned with detecting lies.^[13] He is currently on the Editorial Board of Greater Good magazine, published by the Greater Good Science Center of the University of California, Berkeley. His contributions include the interpretation of scientific research into the roots of compassion, altruism, and peaceful human relationships. Ekman is also working with Computer Vision researcher Dimitris Metaxas on designing a visual lie-detector.^[14]

Emotion classification[link]

Ekman devised a list of basic emotions from cross-cultural research on the Fore tribesmen of Papua New Guinea. He observed that members of an isolated culture could reliably identify the expressions of emotion in photographs of people from cultures with which the Fore were not yet familiar. They could also ascribe facial expressions to descriptions of situations. On this evidence, he concluded that the expressions associated with some emotions were basic or biologically universal to all humans.^[15] The following is Ekman's (1972) list of basic emotions:

• Anger
• Disgust
• Fear
• Happiness
• Sadness
• Surprise

However in the 1990s Ekman expanded his list of basic emotions, including a range of positive and negative emotions not all of which are encoded in facial muscles.^[16] The newly included emotions are:

1. Amusement
2. Contempt
3. Contentment
4. Embarrassment
5. Excitement
6. Guilt
7. Pride in achievement
8. Relief
9. Satisfaction
10. Sensory pleasure
11. Shame

Ekman had a policy against commenting on public officials, those seeking public office, litigants, or those with impending litigation.^[17]

Educational innovations[link]

Ekman was featured in an issue of Greater Good Magazine devoted to trust. In this issue, Ekman and daughter Eve are interviewed on parent-child trust. The main topic of the interview focuses on the benefits of trusting your children, how to encourage trustworthy behavior, and what it takes to build trust between parents and children. Ekman is a contributor to Greater Good Magazine, Greater Good Science Center, University of California, Berkeley.

On February 27, 2009, he was a guest presenter at the Science of a Meaningful Life seminar "Building Compassion, Creating Well-being", along with University of California, Berkeley and Greater Good Science Center Executive Director Dacher Keltner. Together they covered strategies for building resilience, reducing stress, and strengthening relationships with colleagues, clients, family, and friends.

Criticisms[link]

Ekman's work, particularly its applications to airport security via the Transportation Security Administration's "Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques" (SPOT) program, has been criticized for not having been subjected to controlled scientific tests.^[18] A 2007 report on SPOT stated that "simply put, people (including professional lie-catchers with extensive experience of assessing veracity) would achieve similar hit rates if they flipped a coin".^[19] Ekman no longer publishes details of his recent work in peer-reviewed journals, asserting that this is a deliberate strategy to avoid aiding scientists in countries that the United States considers a potential threat.^[18] The methodology used by Ekman and O'Sullivan in their recent work on Truth wizards has also received criticism on the basis of validation.^[20] Other criticisms of Ekman's work are based on experimental and naturalistic studies by several other emotion psychologists who, in the last two decades, did not find evidence in support of discrete emotions and discrete facial expression, thus questioning Ekman's proposed taxonomy.^[21]

Publications[link]

• Emotional Awareness: Overcoming the Obstacles to Psychological Balance and Compassion (Times Books, 2008) ISBN 0-8050-8712-5
• Unmasking the Face ISBN 1-883536-36-7
• Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and Emotional Life (Times Books, 2003) ISBN 0-8050-7516-X
• Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage (W. W. Norton & Company, 1985) ISBN 0-393-32188-6
• What the Face Reveals (with Rosenberg, E. L., Oxford University Press, 1998) ISBN 0-19-510446-3
• The Nature of Emotion: Fundamental Questions (with R. Davidson, Oxford University Press, 1994) ISBN 0-19-508944-8
• Darwin and Facial Expression: A Century of Research in Review ISBN 0-12-236750-2
• Facial Action Coding System/Investigator's ISBN 99936-26-61-9
• Why Kids Lie: How Parents Can Encourage Truthfulness (Penguin, 1991) ISBN 0-14-014322-X
• Handbook of Methods in Nonverbal Behavior Research ISBN 0-521-28072-9
• Face of Man ISBN 0-8240-7130-1
• Emotion in the Human Face ISBN 0-08-016643-1
• Handbook of Cognition and Emotion (Sussex, U.K. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 1999)

See also[link]

• Body language
• Emotions and Culture
• Emotion classification
• Microexpression
• Nonverbal communication
• Lie to Me (TV series)
• Wizards Project

References[link]

External links[link]

• Interview
• Official site
• Complete bibliography
• A biography from Lifeboat Foundation site
• Video of Freitas-Magalhaes´s 2008 Ceremony of Doctorate Honoris Causa to Paul Ekman, "The Ekman Code or the Eulogy to the Human Face"
• Article: The Naked Face
• Interview (History Channel transcript)
• Interview (Financial Times)
• Greater Good Magazine: Interview between Ekman and daughter Eve on parent-child trust
• Recording of a conversation with Daniel Goleman
• Detecting Deception, American Psychological Association

Philip George Zimbardo
Zimbardo speaking in Poland, 2009
Born	(1933-03-23) March 23, 1933 (age 79) New York City, New York
Residence	United States
Nationality	American
Fields	Psychology
Institutions	Yale University New York University Columbia University Stanford University
Alma mater	Brooklyn College Yale University
Known for	Stanford prison study, spouse of Christina Maslach, UC Berkeley, Time paradox, Lucifer Effect, Abu Ghraib
Influences	Stanley Milgram
Spouse	Christina Maslach

Philip George Zimbardo (born March 23, 1933) is a psychologist and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. He is president of the Heroic Imagination Project. He is known for his Stanford prison study and authorship of various introductory psychology books and textbooks for college students, including The Lucifer Effect and The Time Paradox.

Early years[link]

Zimbardo was born in New York City on March 23, 1933, from a family of Sicilian immigrants. He completed his BA with a triple major in psychology, sociology, and anthropology from Brooklyn College in 1954, where he graduated summa cum laude. He completed his M.S. (1955) and Ph.D (1959) in psychology from Yale University, where Neal E. Miller was his advisor.^[1] He taught at Yale from 1959 to 1960. From 1960 to 1967, he was a professor of psychology at New York University. From 1967 to 1968, he taught at Columbia University. He joined the faculty at Stanford University in 1968.

Prison study[link]

In 1971, Zimbardo accepted a tenured position as professor of psychology at Stanford University. With a government grant from the U.S. Office of Naval Research, he conducted the Stanford prison study in which 24 clinically sane individuals were randomly assigned to be "prisoners" or "guards" in a mock prison located in the basement of the psychology building at Stanford (three additional college students were selected as alternates, only one of whom participated^[2] in the study). The planned two-week study into the psychology of prison life ended after only six days due to emotional trauma being experienced by the participants. The students quickly began acting out their roles, with "guards" becoming sadistic and "prisoners" showing extreme passivity and depression.

The volunteers knew they were being used in a study but they did not know when the study would be taking place, so the initial shock of being randomly arrested one morning and taken to the mock prison put them in a mild state of shock. On arrival, the "prisoners" were stripped, searched, shaved and deloused, which caused a great deal of humiliation. They were then issued uniforms, ID numbers, and escorted to their cells by the volunteer prison guards. These changes isolated the prisoners making it harder for them to portray their individual characteristics. The guards themselves were not given any specific instruction or guidelines for the way they were to treat the prisoners. Instead, the psychologists allowed them to do whatever was needed to keep order in the prison. They were dressed very professionally in identical uniforms. They also wore a whistle around their neck and carried a night stick.

At the beginning of the experiment, Zimbardo started off with nine guards and nine prisoners. All the original volunteers were kept as backups and 3 prisoners as well as 3 guards occupied the prison at a time. Their first night in the prison, the volunteer prisoners were awakened at 2:30 AM by the guards blowing their whistles. They did this several times to familiarize the prisoners with how things were going to work and to let them know who was in charge.

The study shows that before the volunteer prisoners started showing signs of distress, they did not take the guards and their authority seriously. The prisoners mocked the guards, trying to regain their individuality. This, however, was short-lived. The prisoners soon realized that the attitude of the guards was very serious and that they demanded obedience. This began a long string of confrontational quarrels between the guards and prisoners. The guards used physical punishment and exercises, such as pushups, in order to show their authority to the prisoners.

In the morning of only the second day, a rebellion broke out among the volunteer prisoners. They ripped off their uniforms and locked themselves in their cells by pushing their beds up against the door. In response to this, the guards became very angry and called for backup assistance to the situation. This surprised Zimbardo as well as the rest of the psychologists because they had not thought it would be taken this far. Guards who were not on duty were called in and the guards who were assigned to only the night shift stayed with the guards who came in all the way through their shift the next morning. The tactic the guards came up with was to fight back in order to discipline the unruly prisoners and make them obey. In response to the prisoners barricading themselves in their cells, the guards used fire extinguishers on them to get them away from the entrances.

Once the guards were able to get into the cells, they stripped the inmates naked, tore apart the beds and the cell, and put the prisoners who had started the rebellion in solitary confinement. As all nine guards could not be on duty at once, they began rewarding the prisoners for good behavior. The prisoners who had not been involved in starting the riot were allowed to lie in their beds, wash themselves and brush their teeth and eat while those who had started the riot were not allowed to. The guards continued to use tormenting tactics to break up the prisoners relations with each other to avoid further organized resistance. In the case with one prisoner, who was a smoker, the guards were able to control his behavior because they decided when and if he was allowed to smoke.

Less than two full days into the experiment, one inmate began suffering from depression, uncontrolled rage, crying and other mental dysfunctions. The prisoner was eventually released after screaming and acting unstable in front of the other inmates. This prisoner was replaced with one of the alternates.^[2]

On the third day, the study allowed visiting hours for friends and family. The visitation was closely monitored and timed with many rules and restrictions.

The next event that added to the prison experiment "drama" was a rumored escape plan that the prisoners were planning on carrying out directly after visiting hours. The prisoner was going to have some of his friends round up, break into the prison and free all of the prisoners. After one of the guards overheard this plan, an informant was placed in among the prisoners and the escape never happened. The prisoners who had been thought to have organized the escape were disciplined and harassed with more pushups and toilet cleaning.

At some point, even the prisoners who were thought of as role models, those who obeyed all of the guards' commands were being punished. Going to the bathroom was considered a privilege rather than a necessity, and those who acted out against the guards were made to urinate and defecate in a bucket in their cell.

By the end of the experiment, there was no unification among prisoners as well as guards. The guards also had won complete control over all of their prisoners and were using their authority to its greatest extent. One prisoner had even gone as far as to go on a hunger strike. Refusing to eat, the guards put him into solitary confinement for three hours (even though their own rules stated the limit that a prisoner could be in solitary confinement was only one hour). Instead of the other prisoners looking at this inmate as a hero and following along in his strike, they chanted together that he was a bad prisoner and a troublemaker. Prisoners and guards had rapidly adapted to their roles, stepping beyond the boundaries of what had been predicted and leading to dangerous and psychologically damaging situations.

One-third of the guards were judged to have exhibited "genuine" sadistic tendencies, while many prisoners were emotionally traumatized and five had to be removed from the study early.

Zimbardo himself started to give into the roles of the situation. He had to be shown the reality of the experiment by Christina Maslach, his girlfriend and future wife, who had just received her doctorate in psychology.^[3]

At the end of the experiment, after all the prisoners had been released and the guards let go, everyone was brought back into the same room for evaluation and to be able to get their feelings out in the open towards one another. Ethical concerns surrounding the famous study often draw comparisons to the Milgram experiment, which was conducted in 1961 at Yale University by Stanley Milgram, Zimbardo's former high school friend.

Similar studies[link]

There were ethical issues in researching the original study. A subsequent study looked at the power of roles in selected situations.^[4]

A 2006 study was conducted by the British Broadcasting Company replicating the study by Zimbardo.^[5] This study, due to the fact that was conducted in later times, had more restrictions. While there were restrictions, there were also great differences. The first of the differences was how the participants were filtered. The Stanford Prison Experiment only gave the participants interviews and then certain personality tests. The BBC study used first psychometric tests, which combined a series of personality, attitude and mood tests. These tests were self-report tests. The second measure to filter the participants was a telephone interview. If they had passed through the first two filters the final was a full clinical interview. The second difference was how the participants were labeled either to be guards or prisoners. The Stanford Prison Experiment used random assignment to arrange them into the two groups. The BBC study first divided the participants into groups of smaller numbers in which they were organized by key psychological dimensions. From here they were then separated into prisoners and guards. Another difference was how the prisoners were brought to the mock prisons. The Stanford Prison Experiment participants were actually arrested for crimes which they did not commit, while those in the BBC study were just brought to the location by a blacked out car.

When it comes to the difference in the results between the Stanford Prison Experiment and the BBC prison study, it is clear that the BBC study is more of a struggle to figure out what to do when there is no direction given. There was more of a conflict within the two groups than between the two groups themselves. The Stanford Prison Experiment was looking at what happened when you gave one group authority over another and the power the situation.^[6] Philip Zimbardo himself even made a critique on the BBC study describing the differences in the setup, execution and results of the study. The setup differences range from the actual participants age and how the Stanford Prison Experiment actually used college students, while the BBC prison study used men of different ages. The two studies differed with how they were executed and how rules were set up and a hierarchy was put in place. Neither of these happened in the BBC prison study. In the conclusion, Zimbardo states that the conclusion was only one that was put in place for media, not for science.^[7]

Other endeavors[link]

Prof. Philip G. Zimbardo, Berlin, Germany, 2008

After the prison experiment, Zimbardo decided to look for ways he could use psychology to help people; this led to the founding of The Shyness Clinic in Menlo Park, California, which treats shy behavior in adults and children. Zimbardo's research on shyness resulted in several bestselling books on the topic. Other subjects he has researched include mind control and cultic behavior.^[8]

Zimbardo is the co-author of an introductory Psychology textbook entitled Psychology and Life, which is used in many American undergraduate psychology courses. He also hosted a PBS TV series titled Discovering Psychology which is used in many college telecourses.^[9]

In 2002, Zimbardo was elected president of the American Psychological Association. Under his direction, the organization developed the website PsychologyMatters.org, a compendium of psychological research that has applications for everyday life. Also that year, he appeared in the British reality television show, The Human Zoo. Participants were observed inside a controlled setting while Zimbardo and a British psychologist analyzed their behavior.

In 2004, Zimbardo testified for the defense in the court martial of Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, a guard at Abu Ghraib prison. He argued that Frederick's sentence should be lessened due to mitigating circumstances, explaining that few individuals can resist the powerful situational pressures of a prison, particularly without proper training and supervision. The judge apparently disregarded Zimbardo's testimony, and gave Frederick the maximum 8-year sentence. Zimbardo drew on the knowledge he gained from his participation in the Frederick case to write a new book entitled, The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, about the connections between Abu Ghraib and the prison experiments.^[10]

In September 2006, Zimbardo joined the faculty at Palo Alto University as Professor of Psychology, where he teaches social psychology to doctoral students in the clinical psychology program.

Zimbardo's writing appeared in Greater Good Magazine, published by the Greater Good Science Center of the University of California, Berkeley. Zimbardo's contributions include the interpretation of scientific research into the roots of compassion, altruism, and peaceful human relationships. His most recent article with Greater Good magazine is entitled: "The Banality of Heroism",^[11] which examines how ordinary people can become everyday heroes. In February 2010, Zimbardo was a guest presenter at the Science of a Meaningful Life seminar: Goodness, Evil, and Everyday Heroism, along with Greater Good Science Center Executive Director Dacher Keltner.

Zimbardo, who officially retired in 2003, gave his final "Exploring Human Nature" lecture on March 7, 2007, on the Stanford campus, bringing his teaching career of 50 years to a close. David Spiegel, professor of psychiatry at the Stanford University School of Medicine, called Zimbardo "a legendary teacher", saying that "he has changed the way we think about social influences."^[12]

Though retired Zimbardo still conducts research at Stanford University and teaches one class at the former Pacific Graduate School of Psychology, now Palo Alto University.

Zimbardo has made appearances on American TV, such as The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on March 29, 2007,^[13] The Colbert Report on February 11, 2008 ^[14] and Dr. Phil on October 25, 2010. ^[15]

Zimbardo is currently heading a movement for everyday heroism as the founder and director of The Heroic Imagination Project (HIP), a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting heroism in everyday life. The project is currently collecting data from former American gang members and former individuals with ties to terrorism for comparison, in an attempt to better understand how individuals change violent behavior. This research portion of the project is co-headed by Dr. Rony Berger, Dr. Yotam Heineburg, and Dr. Leonard Beckum. ^[16] He published an article contrasting heroism and altruism in 2011 with Dr. Zeno Franco and Kathy Blau in the Review of General Psychology.^[17]

Recognition[link]

In 2005, Zimbardo received the Dagmar and Václav Havel Foundation Vision 97 Award in Prague.

In 2003, Zimbardo, Gian Vittorio Caprara and Claudio Barbaranelli an academic of the University of Rome La Sapienza were awarded the sarcastic Ig Nobel Award for Psychology^[18] for their report "Politicians' Uniquely Simple Personalities."^[19]

Works[link]

• Influencing attitude and changing behavior: A basic introduction to relevant methodology, theory, and applications (Topics in social psychology), Addison Wesley, 1969
• The Cognitive Control of Motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1969
• Stanford prison experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment, Philip G. Zimbardo, Inc., 1972
• The psychology of imprisonment: privation, power and pathology, Stanford University, 1972
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1969, ISBN 0-07-554809-7
• Canvassing for Peace: A Manual for Volunteers. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, 1970, ISBN
• Influencing Attitudes and Changing Behavior (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley., 1977, ISBN
• How to Overcome Shyness. Family Circle magazine, May 31, 1977 page 14 (with questionnaire)
• Cults go to high school: A theoretical and empirical analysis of the initial stage in the recruitment process, American Family Foundation, 1985
• Shyness: What It Is, What to Do About It, Addison Wesley, 1990, ISBN 0-201-55018-0
• The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991, ISBN 0-87722-852-3
• Psychology (3rd Edition), Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1999, ISBN 0-321-03432-5
• The Shy Child : Overcoming and Preventing Shyness from Infancy to Adulthood, Malor Books, 1999, ISBN 1-883536-21-9
• Violence Workers: Police Torturers and Murderers Reconstruct Brazilian Atrocities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002, ISBN 0-520-23447-2
• Psychology - Core Concepts, 5/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-47445-4
• Psychology And Life, 17/e, Allyn & Bacon Publishing, 2005, ISBN 0-205-41799-X
• The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, Random House, New York, 2007, ISBN 1-4000-6411-2
• The Time Paradox: The New Psychology of Time That Will Change Your Life, Simon & Schuster, New York, 2008, ISBN 1-4165-4198-5
• The Journey from the Bronx to Stanford to Abu Ghraib, pp. 85–104 in "Journeys in Social Psychology: Looking Back to Inspire the Future", edited by Robert Levine, et al., CRC Press, 2008. ISBN 0-8058-6134-3
• Zimbardo, Philip G. " A Simulation Study of the Psychology of Imprisonment Conducted at Stanford University." The Stanford Prison Experiment. 2009. Web. 1 Dec 2009
• Psychology, AP* Edition, Zimbardo, Phil, Johnson, Robert, Weber, Ann, Gruber, Craig, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 2010

See also[link]

• Human experimentation in the United States
• List of social psychologists
• Stanford prison experiment
• Banality of evil
• Milgram experiment
• Seductive Poison

References[link]

External links[link]

• Zimbardo's official website
• Philip G. Zimbardo Papers (Stanford University Archives)
• Appearances on C-SPAN
• Philip Zimbardo at TED Conferences
• Philip Zimbardo at the Internet Movie Database
• Works by or about Philip Zimbardo in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Philip Zimbardo on the Lucifer Effect, in two parts