Evidence and stories about evidence: Stanford Prison Experiment under criticism

The Stanford Prison Experiment conducted by Philip G. Zimbardo is probably the most recognizablestudy in the area of social psychology. The summer of 2018 proved to be exceptionally unfavourableto this scientific endeavour. The experiment was showered with strong criticisms to the extent thatsome voices were raised to withdraw the research from psychology textbooks; the study was no longerdescribed as ‘shocking’, but rather as a ‘sham’ or ‘lie’. At a closer look, it turns out that the wholecriticism can be traced back to one source article which contains unevenly distributed arguments.Some of them are relevant and new, but others can be described as hyperbolas, simplifications andrepetitions of frequent allegations. An attentive and critical look at Zimbardo’s Stanford PrisonExperiment and arguments against it helps to develop a more complex, but also more interestingperspective. It could serve as an example of a fierce, fascinating fight for a politically and sociallyimportant cause. In this fight, both sides remain faithful to their stance rather than to the facts. It isalso a story about the problem of reporting science in a sensational way.