Honors Independent study project: Social psychology in the Abu Ghraib prison
My visual portrays one of the famous images that was leaked to the US public jest before the Abu Ghraib prison closed. The wires connected from the mans fingers to batteries to show that the torture within the prison was result of strong figures of authority enforcing strong figures of obedience. I made the American flag that drapes over the man to show how the media that “covered” the prison after the photos were released. The blackness in the background is there to represent the dark depression that “surrounded” the prisoners.
Explaining the Evil in Abu Ghraib
“The line between good and evil is permeable and almost anyone can be induced to cross it when pressured by situational forces.”
~Philip G. Zimbardo
Abu Ghraib, a prison located in an Iraqi city just west of Baghdad, where some 15,000 suspected insurgents were held prisoner from late 2003 to early 2004 during the Iraq War. This was the site of some of the most atrocious torture ever been recorded in US history. The events did not become public until photos of the prisoners were released in 2004. Military police personnel of the United States Army and the Central Intelligence Agency ran the prison. US officials were prosecuted for violating the human rights of the prisoners though rape, sodomy, physical and mental abuse, and killing of the prisoners. One of the prisoners spoke of the torture in the documentary The ghosts of Abu Ghraib after being released from the prison. His words struck the heart of Americans: “The most painful thing for the inmates there were the cries of the people being tortured. One day, they brought sheets to cover the cell in order for no one to see anything. They began torturing one of them and we could hear what was happening. We listened as his soul cracked. The sound of his voice really twisted our minds and made our hearts stop.” After the events of Abu Ghraib became public, many questioned the motives of the US military. Why would US officials, who were previously described as being “kind” and “understanding,” do such a thing? The answer lies not in the identity of the US officials, but in their environment. In other words, it was the barrel that was bad, not the apples. The US military personnel responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib were products of their social environment rather than evil individuals.
After the events in Abu Ghraib were made public, people described the US officials responsible for the torture in the prison as evil, devilish, and terrible human beings. However, just prior to going into the prison, they were described by friends and family as “kind,” “understanding,” and “compassionate.” What made these individuals switch from being the kind and understanding friends that they were described as before entering the prison? The answer lies in the bad barrel effect. In social psychology, the “bad barrel effect” describes the concept that our actions are dependent on the situations we find ourselves in. Meaning, under the "right" conditions, anyone can perform evil acts. This is contrary to the typical belief that evil things happen because evil people do them. In reality, evil things happen as a result of "bad barrels," not a few "bad apples.” This concept was investigated in the “Stanford Prison Experiment” conducted by Philip Zambardo. In 1971 Zambardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Standford University's psychology building, he then selected 24 phyc- approved undergraduate students to play the roles of both prisoners and guards. While the Stanford Prison Experiment was originally slated to last 14 days, it had to be stopped after just six days due to what was happening to the student participants. The guards became abusive and the prisoners began to show signs of extreme stress and anxiety. Just like in the Stamford prison experiment the US officials that are to blame for the torture in Abu Ghraib did not go into the prison with sadistic tendencies; this is not an underlying piece of their personality; they are not murderers and torturers. Rather, they were transformed into perpetrators of evil by their situation, the “bad barrel” of war (Zambardo). The perpetrations of evil are results of being obedient to those who generated the environment the individuals are in.
Many of the motives behind the torture in Abu Ghraib are unclear, however, they are all in result of obedience to superiority. Obedience is defined as the compliance with an order, request, or law or submission to another's authority. In the Milgram experiment performed by social psychologist Stanley Milgram in 1963, people were asked by an individual of high authority to deliver a 400-volt electrical shock to another person. Shockingly (pun intended), most people did as they were told. The experiment uncovered that, when asked to do something by a figure of high authority, no matter the favor, one will usually do it, even if it means sacrificing your morals to meet the expectations of said figure of authority. We see this phenomenon in Abu Ghraib: when levels of torture hit their peak just after evidence was found that suggests that US Secretary of Defense approved the torture within the prison (Zinn) . This means that the US officials in charge of running the prison were told by their authority that the torture they were performing on the imamates was approved, thus supporting their actions.
Soldiers are trained into obedience. When one enlists in the United States Military, active duty or reserve, they take an oath that states: “ I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States… I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me” (United States Military Oath) In 2002, President George W. Bush reassured US citizens with a speech after the terrorist attacks of 9-11. In his speech he said that the US government will make every effort to “smoke [suspected terrorists and members of al Qaida] out of their holes.” This set an ideological climate for our military that effectively dehumanized suspected terrorists. In other words, it fabricated the “barrel” for the tortures in Abu Ghraib. Rather then evil individuals ,the US military personnel responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib were products of their social environment.
People perpetrate evil when in an evil environment. However, like most things, evil has an opposing force. Love, kindness, and other pieces of morality we were all raised to inhabit. When individuals are placed in a positive, peaceful environment they will, as a result, perform peaceful and positive actions. Robert Kennedy once said “Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total, of all those acts will be written in history.” If we, as the people who witness history, can create more positive global environment, then the events that we contribute to history will in result, be more peaceful and positive.
Citations:
Zimbardo, Philip G.. The Lucifer effect: understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House, 2007. Print.
Zinn, Howard. A people's history of the United States: 1492-2001. New ed. New York: seven stories press, 1980. Print.
Roper Center (2009). "Job Performance Ratings for President Bush". Retrieved March 9, 2009.
America's Navy Reserve." - A Global Force for Good: NavyReserve.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. http://www.navyreserve.com
“The line between good and evil is permeable and almost anyone can be induced to cross it when pressured by situational forces.”
~Philip G. Zimbardo
Abu Ghraib, a prison located in an Iraqi city just west of Baghdad, where some 15,000 suspected insurgents were held prisoner from late 2003 to early 2004 during the Iraq War. This was the site of some of the most atrocious torture ever been recorded in US history. The events did not become public until photos of the prisoners were released in 2004. Military police personnel of the United States Army and the Central Intelligence Agency ran the prison. US officials were prosecuted for violating the human rights of the prisoners though rape, sodomy, physical and mental abuse, and killing of the prisoners. One of the prisoners spoke of the torture in the documentary The ghosts of Abu Ghraib after being released from the prison. His words struck the heart of Americans: “The most painful thing for the inmates there were the cries of the people being tortured. One day, they brought sheets to cover the cell in order for no one to see anything. They began torturing one of them and we could hear what was happening. We listened as his soul cracked. The sound of his voice really twisted our minds and made our hearts stop.” After the events of Abu Ghraib became public, many questioned the motives of the US military. Why would US officials, who were previously described as being “kind” and “understanding,” do such a thing? The answer lies not in the identity of the US officials, but in their environment. In other words, it was the barrel that was bad, not the apples. The US military personnel responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib were products of their social environment rather than evil individuals.
After the events in Abu Ghraib were made public, people described the US officials responsible for the torture in the prison as evil, devilish, and terrible human beings. However, just prior to going into the prison, they were described by friends and family as “kind,” “understanding,” and “compassionate.” What made these individuals switch from being the kind and understanding friends that they were described as before entering the prison? The answer lies in the bad barrel effect. In social psychology, the “bad barrel effect” describes the concept that our actions are dependent on the situations we find ourselves in. Meaning, under the "right" conditions, anyone can perform evil acts. This is contrary to the typical belief that evil things happen because evil people do them. In reality, evil things happen as a result of "bad barrels," not a few "bad apples.” This concept was investigated in the “Stanford Prison Experiment” conducted by Philip Zambardo. In 1971 Zambardo set up a mock prison in the basement of Standford University's psychology building, he then selected 24 phyc- approved undergraduate students to play the roles of both prisoners and guards. While the Stanford Prison Experiment was originally slated to last 14 days, it had to be stopped after just six days due to what was happening to the student participants. The guards became abusive and the prisoners began to show signs of extreme stress and anxiety. Just like in the Stamford prison experiment the US officials that are to blame for the torture in Abu Ghraib did not go into the prison with sadistic tendencies; this is not an underlying piece of their personality; they are not murderers and torturers. Rather, they were transformed into perpetrators of evil by their situation, the “bad barrel” of war (Zambardo). The perpetrations of evil are results of being obedient to those who generated the environment the individuals are in.
Many of the motives behind the torture in Abu Ghraib are unclear, however, they are all in result of obedience to superiority. Obedience is defined as the compliance with an order, request, or law or submission to another's authority. In the Milgram experiment performed by social psychologist Stanley Milgram in 1963, people were asked by an individual of high authority to deliver a 400-volt electrical shock to another person. Shockingly (pun intended), most people did as they were told. The experiment uncovered that, when asked to do something by a figure of high authority, no matter the favor, one will usually do it, even if it means sacrificing your morals to meet the expectations of said figure of authority. We see this phenomenon in Abu Ghraib: when levels of torture hit their peak just after evidence was found that suggests that US Secretary of Defense approved the torture within the prison (Zinn) . This means that the US officials in charge of running the prison were told by their authority that the torture they were performing on the imamates was approved, thus supporting their actions.
Soldiers are trained into obedience. When one enlists in the United States Military, active duty or reserve, they take an oath that states: “ I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States… I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me” (United States Military Oath) In 2002, President George W. Bush reassured US citizens with a speech after the terrorist attacks of 9-11. In his speech he said that the US government will make every effort to “smoke [suspected terrorists and members of al Qaida] out of their holes.” This set an ideological climate for our military that effectively dehumanized suspected terrorists. In other words, it fabricated the “barrel” for the tortures in Abu Ghraib. Rather then evil individuals ,the US military personnel responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib were products of their social environment.
People perpetrate evil when in an evil environment. However, like most things, evil has an opposing force. Love, kindness, and other pieces of morality we were all raised to inhabit. When individuals are placed in a positive, peaceful environment they will, as a result, perform peaceful and positive actions. Robert Kennedy once said “Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total, of all those acts will be written in history.” If we, as the people who witness history, can create more positive global environment, then the events that we contribute to history will in result, be more peaceful and positive.
Citations:
Zimbardo, Philip G.. The Lucifer effect: understanding how good people turn evil. New York: Random House, 2007. Print.
Zinn, Howard. A people's history of the United States: 1492-2001. New ed. New York: seven stories press, 1980. Print.
Roper Center (2009). "Job Performance Ratings for President Bush". Retrieved March 9, 2009.
America's Navy Reserve." - A Global Force for Good: NavyReserve.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. http://www.navyreserve.com
Reflection
In this project we, the honors students, were asked to choose an event in US history and do a 5 month independent study project. I chose to research Abu Ghraib, specifically why the tortures who were once described as "kind" and "understanding" then changed into murderers, tortures, and rapists inside of the prison. I chose this topic because while reading Howard Zinn's A peoples history of the United States I found that the chapter that talked about the prison was really interesting to me. My main research question was: What role does social psychology play in the Abu Ghraib prison?
This project proved to be really challenging on many levels. It was really emotionally taxing not only because the project was academically tedious but also because it was really challenging to read about such terrible events in my country's history that made me feel ashamed to be an American. It took a lot of perseverance on my part to go through the processes of researching about the terrible events that happened within the prison. One specific source that proved to be really emotionally challenging was watching the movie The ghosts of Abu Ghraib. The movie had a lot of personal stories of the inmates that showed a lot about how terrible it was on the morality side of things. However, it was really rewarding to know that I chose a really rigorous topic and got through it to create a political cartoon, a systhasis essay, 5-5 paragraph research notes and two historical thinking charts.
Someone wise once said that everything great can be improved. If I were to improve one aspect of my project I would do a 6th draft of my finial political cartoon. I would spacifically work on my shading techniques for my background. I would do this through advocating to my art teacher for tips of how to improve upon my skills. One aspect that had extensive reflinement was my final essay. I went though 7 rounds of critique from my teacher, my adviser, my friends, my family and a co-worker. In the beginning I was struggleing a lot with conclusion and transitional sentences, and not over-complicating my ideas. However, thorough many rounds of critique I gained pride for my essay by the time exhibition rolled around.
If I were to help next years honors students with their projects I would tell them to pace themselves with all work and to choose a topic they feel passionate about. We started this project in early October and we ended it in late February and 95% of the work we did was all independent. Because of this we really needed to pace ourselves and set small achievable goals at the beginning of the week independently. One specific time where this proved to be really beneficial was when I was writing my final essay. I started about a month before exhibition and I set small goal to create a structured outline for my writing the first week so the following weeks I could focus on finding specific evidence for my paragraphs or finding quotes that support my claims. I would also advise next years students to choose a topic they feel passionate about. I knew that I was really passionate about human rights and psycology so I found a topic that captured both. Because of all of these aspects that went into my project I feel genuinely proud of my project.
This project proved to be really challenging on many levels. It was really emotionally taxing not only because the project was academically tedious but also because it was really challenging to read about such terrible events in my country's history that made me feel ashamed to be an American. It took a lot of perseverance on my part to go through the processes of researching about the terrible events that happened within the prison. One specific source that proved to be really emotionally challenging was watching the movie The ghosts of Abu Ghraib. The movie had a lot of personal stories of the inmates that showed a lot about how terrible it was on the morality side of things. However, it was really rewarding to know that I chose a really rigorous topic and got through it to create a political cartoon, a systhasis essay, 5-5 paragraph research notes and two historical thinking charts.
Someone wise once said that everything great can be improved. If I were to improve one aspect of my project I would do a 6th draft of my finial political cartoon. I would spacifically work on my shading techniques for my background. I would do this through advocating to my art teacher for tips of how to improve upon my skills. One aspect that had extensive reflinement was my final essay. I went though 7 rounds of critique from my teacher, my adviser, my friends, my family and a co-worker. In the beginning I was struggleing a lot with conclusion and transitional sentences, and not over-complicating my ideas. However, thorough many rounds of critique I gained pride for my essay by the time exhibition rolled around.
If I were to help next years honors students with their projects I would tell them to pace themselves with all work and to choose a topic they feel passionate about. We started this project in early October and we ended it in late February and 95% of the work we did was all independent. Because of this we really needed to pace ourselves and set small achievable goals at the beginning of the week independently. One specific time where this proved to be really beneficial was when I was writing my final essay. I started about a month before exhibition and I set small goal to create a structured outline for my writing the first week so the following weeks I could focus on finding specific evidence for my paragraphs or finding quotes that support my claims. I would also advise next years students to choose a topic they feel passionate about. I knew that I was really passionate about human rights and psycology so I found a topic that captured both. Because of all of these aspects that went into my project I feel genuinely proud of my project.