THE STANFORD PRISON and MARSHMALLOW EXPERIMENTS

To begin, Stanford has had the #1 Psychology Department in the country for a very long time:  Both from Google AI:

The top five psychology departments in the 1970 report were: [1]

Stanford University
University of Michigan
University of California, Berkeley
Harvard University
University of Illinois [1]

Stanford University's psychology department ranked #1 in multiple major national and global evaluations for 2026:

• Times Higher Education (THE) Subject Rankings 2026: Ranked #1 in the U.S. (and #2 globally) for psychology.
U.S. News & World Report: Ranked #1 (tie) for graduate/overall psychology programs with a peer assessment score of 4.7.
QS World University Rankings by Subject 2026: Ranked #3 globally for psychology. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

Between 1970 and 1972 Stanford conducted two controversial experiments:

• In the 1971 prison experiment, Google AI said:

The Stanford Prison Experiment Conclusion is that ordinary people can quickly conform to brutal, deindividualized social roles when placed in a powerful institutional situation. [1, 2]

• The marshmallow experiment occurred in 1970, and again in 1972:

The original conclusion of the Stanford marshmallow experiment—conducted by psychologist Walter Mischel in the late 1960s and 1970s—was that the ability to delay gratification is a powerful indicator of future success. [1, 2, 3]

Many consider the Stanford (or Zimbardo) Prison Experiment to be disturbing.  You can watch that video.  There was also a full-length film, with Billy Crudup (left) as Dr. Philip Zimbardo.  Rotten Tomatoes ratings of 84/75.  From Wikipedia:

• 
  In 1971, Stanford psychology professor Philip Zimbardo (that's him to the right in 1971) managed a research team, designed to be a 2-week simulation of a prison environment.  Funded by the U.S. Office of Naval Research.

• 
  To quote Zimbardo (that's him in 2015):  We wanted to see what the psychological effects were of becoming a prisoner or prison guard. To do this, we decided to set up a simulated prison and then carefully note the effects of this institution on the behavior of all those within its walls.^[7]
• Male college students were recruited, and were to be paid $15/day for 1-2 weeks.  Doesn't soundlike much, but this amount is today the equivalent of $120/day.
• Experiment was conducted in Jordan Hall, Stanford's psychology building occupied by graduate students.
• Zimbardo took on the role of prison superintendent.
• Palo Alto police were actually used to mock arrest individuals for armed robbery and burglary, including using the police department for fingerprinting, mug shots, etc.
• Prisoners were given numbers, for the whole point was to dehumanize them.
• One student actually suffered a mental breakdown on Day 2 and was released.  Later said he faked this to study for his Graduate Record Exam.
• A second did break down and was released.
• 
  Guards were encouraged to talk "tough" and maintain law and order, but not to inflict any harm.
• On day 5, one of Zimbardo's colleagues visited the prison, and she expressed her concern about conditions. 
• There were other cautions, so Zimbardo ended the experiment on Day 6, more than a week earlier than expected.
• There followed several debriefing sessions.
• The BBC in 2001 conducted a similar study, which was made into a documentary series called The Experiment.

• 
  When acts of prisoner torture and abuse by US military personnel at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq were publicized in March 2004, Zimbardo was struck by the similarity with his own experiment. He was dismayed by official military and government representatives shifting the blame for the torture and abuse onto "a few bad apples", rather than acknowledging systemic problems.^[40] Zimbardo was then quoted saying "I argue that we all have the capacity for love and evil—to be Mother Theresa, to be Hitler or Saddam Hussein. It's the situation that brings that out".^[40]
• A 2007 study on prison-life examined the potential relationship between participant self-selection and the disposition toward aggressive behaviors. They found that when responding to an advertisement, participants "were significantly higher on measures of aggressiveness, authoritarianism, Machiavellianism, narcissism, and social dominance than those who responded to a parallel ad that omitted the words 'of prison life,' and they were significantly lower in dispositional empathy and altruism".^[61]
• Zimbardo passed away in 2024, but National Geographic, just a month after, released a 3-part documentary titled The Stanford Prison Experiment:  Unlocking the Truth.

• 
  Finally:  The Stanford Prison Experiment lasted less than a week in 1971, but its claims about human nature endured for decades. Now, a new Netflix series is bringing one of psychology’s most controversial studies, and some of the biggest concerns surrounding it, back into the spotlight.  The New Stanford Prison Experiment was just released this week.  There are 6 episodes.  But Rotten Tomatoes reviewers only gave it at 33 rating. This is an unscripted reality competition series.

Another Stanford psychologist, Walter Mischel, ran  the Stanford Marshmallow Test, suggesting that self-discipline at an early age (4-5) can lead to later success.  I later found a review entitled 40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One quality Are More Likely to Succeed.  I've found that this Power of Delayed Gratification worked for me.  To quote:

The children who were willing to delay gratification and waited to receive the second marshmallow ended up having higher SAT scores, lower levels of substance abuse, lower likelihood of obesity, better responses to stress, better social skills as reported by their parents, and generally better scores in a a range of other life measures.

Does this mean that a child who can't delay gratification will ultimately fail in life?  Well, maybe not.  A 2020 study challenged the original contention.  Yet, that paper came from the Templeton World Charity Foundation, and is linked to a philosophy that is steeped in conservative religion.  Science has been critical of much that the Templeton Prize offers.  But what has religion to do with psychology and success or not?  Philosophers have long wrestled with that question.

That experiment occurred more than half a century ago.  You can read the details in Wikipedia.  I include a few summaries.

• A replication attempt with a sample from a more diverse population that was over 10 times larger than the original study showed only half the effect of the original study. The replication suggested that economic background, rather than willpower, explained the other half.^[6][7] The predictive power of the marshmallow test was challenged in a 2020 study.^[8][9]Work done in 2018 and 2024 found that the marshmallow test "does not reliably predict adult functioning".^[10]

• 
  From Google AI:

The scientific consensus today is that the original conclusion of the Stanford marshmallow study—that a child's innate willpower or self-control is a powerful, lifelong predictor of future success—was largely overstated and misunderstood. [1, 2]

So as successful as Stanford University has been, there have been failures.  Maybe the ultimate boo boo was perpetrated by Elizabeth Holmes.  She began studying in the Stanford chemical engineering department 44 years after me. I thus have a special interest in her, for all those years later, I recognize some names from that school. I began my life at Stanford in 1958, 68 years ago.  Tomorrow the story of Elizabeth Holmes.

-