• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

继续认识到非人环境的力量:评论哈斯拉姆等人(2019 年)和勒泰克西埃(2019 年)的观点。

Continuing to acknowledge the power of dehumanizing environments: Comment on Haslam et al. (2019) and Le Texier (2019).

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Stanford University.

Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz.

出版信息

Am Psychol. 2020 Apr;75(3):400-402. doi: 10.1037/amp0000593.

DOI:10.1037/amp0000593
PMID:32250143
Abstract

Decades after it was conducted, the Stanford Prison Experiment endures as a classic, dramatic demonstration of the potentially destructive psychological dynamics that can be created when one group of people is given nearly total power over a group of derogated others in a powerful, dehumanizing environment such as prison. The authors of the study value the intellectually engaged alternative perspectives that continue to be used to discuss its unsettling results but reject those that are ad hominem, misleading, inaccurate, and unscientific. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

几十年过去了,斯坦福监狱实验仍然是一个经典的、戏剧性的例子,它展示了当一群人在一个强大的、非人性化的环境(如监狱)中对被贬低的另一群人拥有几乎完全的权力时,可能会产生潜在的破坏性心理动态。这项研究的作者重视那些不断被用来讨论其令人不安的结果的、具有思想深度的替代视角,但拒绝那些人身攻击、误导、不准确和不科学的视角。(PsycInfo 数据库记录(c)2020 APA,保留所有权利)。

相似文献

1
Continuing to acknowledge the power of dehumanizing environments: Comment on Haslam et al. (2019) and Le Texier (2019).继续认识到非人环境的力量:评论哈斯拉姆等人(2019 年)和勒泰克西埃(2019 年)的观点。
Am Psychol. 2020 Apr;75(3):400-402. doi: 10.1037/amp0000593.
2
Identity leadership is manifested via integrative complexity: Comment on Haslam et al. (2019).身份领导表现为整合复杂性:评 Haslam 等人(2019 年)。
Am Psychol. 2020 Apr;75(3):403-405. doi: 10.1037/amp0000618.
3
Debate around leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020).斯坦福监狱实验中的领导力争议:回应津巴多和哈尼(2020)与陈等人(2020)。
Am Psychol. 2020 Apr;75(3):406-407. doi: 10.1037/amp0000627.
4
Debunking the Stanford Prison Experiment.斯坦福监狱实验的破解。
Am Psychol. 2019 Oct;74(7):823-839. doi: 10.1037/amp0000401. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
5
Rethinking the nature of cruelty: The role of identity leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment.重新思考残忍的本质:身份领导在斯坦福监狱实验中的作用。
Am Psychol. 2019 Oct;74(7):809-822. doi: 10.1037/amp0000443. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
6
Beyond the banality of evil: three dynamics of an interactionist social psychology of tyranny.超越平庸之恶:暴政的互动主义社会心理学的三种动态机制
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007 May;33(5):615-22. doi: 10.1177/0146167206298570. Epub 2007 Apr 17.
7
Perceived parental acceptance-rejection mediates or moderates the relation between corporal punishment and psychological adjustment: Comment on Gershoff et al. (2018).感知到的父母接纳-拒绝在肉体惩罚与心理适应之间起中介或调节作用:评 Gershoff 等人(2018 年)。
Am Psychol. 2019 May-Jun;74(4):500-502. doi: 10.1037/amp0000437.
8
The past and future of U.S. prison policy. Twenty-five years after the Stanford prison experiment.美国监狱政策的过去与未来。斯坦福监狱实验二十五年后。
Am Psychol. 1998 Jul;53(7):709-27. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.53.7.709.
9
Palliative and end-of-life care in prisons: a content analysis of the literature.监狱中的姑息治疗与临终关怀:文献内容分析
Int J Prison Health. 2014;10(3):172-97. doi: 10.1108/IJPH-05-2013-0024.
10
Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment: could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty?重温斯坦福监狱实验:参与者的自我选择会导致残忍行为吗?
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007 May;33(5):603-14. doi: 10.1177/0146167206292689. Epub 2007 Apr 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Is History the Same as Evolution? No. Is it Independent of Evolution? Certainly Not.历史是否与进化相同?不。它是否与进化无关?当然不是。
Evol Psychol. 2022 Jan-Mar;20(1):14747049211069137. doi: 10.1177/14747049211069137.