Debate Around Leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020) REPLY

首页> 外文期刊>The American psychologist >Debate Around Leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020) REPLY

【24h】

Debate Around Leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020) REPLY

机译：斯坦福监狱实验中的领导地位辩论：回复津巴巴州和哈尼（2020年）和Chan等人。（2020）回复

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

Access to the Stanford University archive has revealed new material that makes it possible to debate the precise nature and causes of events in the Stanford Prison Experiment. What the authors see as important is that these materials show the experimenters engaged in processes of identity leadership, which encouraged guard cruelty by presenting it as necessary for the achievement of noble collective goals. However, the authors encourage students, teachers, and researchers to engage with this new material themselves to explore alternative perspectives on what actually occurred in the study.

机译：进入斯坦福大学档案馆透露了新材料，使得可以辩论斯坦福监狱实验中的事件的精确性质和原因。作者认为这是重要的是，这些材料显示了从事身份领导流程的实验者，这将通过在实现高尚集体目标的必要方面提出守卫镇压。然而，作者鼓励学生，教师和研究人员与这项新材料一起互动，以探讨研究中实际发生的替代观点。

著录项

来源
《The American psychologist》 |2020年第3期|共2页
作者

展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类心理学;
关键词
leadership; followership; social identification; Stanford Prison Experiment; open science;

机译：领导;追随者;社会识别;斯坦福监狱实验;开放科学;

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Debate Around Leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020) REPLY [J] . The American psychologist . 2020,第3期

机译：斯坦福监狱实验中的领导地位辩论：回复津巴巴州和哈尼（2020年）和Chan等人。（2020）回复
2. A reply to Fossen et al. (2020) comment to 'Neoproterozoic magmatic arc systems of the central Ribeira belt, SE-Brazil, in the context of the West-Gondwana pre-collisional history: A review' [J] . Heilbron Monica, Valeriano Claudio de Morisson, Peixoto Caroline, Journal of South American earth sciences . 2021,第Mara期

机译：回复Fossen等人。（2020）评论在西吉纳的背景下的中央Ribeira Belt，Se-Brazil的“Neoproterozoice岩石系统的评论：评论”
3. Reply to Norini and Groppelli's comment on “Estimating the depth and evolution of intrusions at resurgent calderas: Los Humeros (Mexico)” by Urbani et al. (2020) [J] . Urbani Stefano, Giordano Guido, Lucci Federico, Solid Earth . 2021,第5期

机译：回复诺里尼和Groppelli关于“估计复陪岛侵犯侵入的深度和演变：Los Humeros（墨西哥）”由Urbani等。（2020）
4. 1 H. Miyake et al., JCG 456, 155 (2016). 2 K. Uesugi et al., APEX 12, 065501 (2019). 3 上杉他, 第67回応用物理学会春季学術講演会 15p-A302-7 (2020). 4 K. Uesugi et al., APL 116, 062101 (2020). [C] . 藤岡洋, 上野耕平, 小林篤 . -1

机译：1 H. Miyake et al., JCG 456, 155 (2016). 2 K. Uesugi et al., APEX 12, 065501 (2019). 3 上杉他, 第67回応用物理学会春季学术讲演会15p-A302-7 (2020). 4 K. Uesugi et al., APL 116, 062101 (2020).
5. Reply to Brzozek et al. Comment on Choi et al. Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 17 8079 [O] . Joel M. Moskowitz, Seung-Kwon Myung, Yoon-Jung Choi, 2021

机译：回复Brzozek等。评论Choi等人。手机使用和肿瘤风险：系统审查和荟萃分析。 int。 J. Environ。 res。公共卫生2020178079
6. The SPE Remains Debunked: A Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) [O] . Thibault Le Texier 2020

机译：SPE仍然被揭露：回复津巴巴州和哈尼（2020年）

Debate Around Leadership in the Stanford Prison Experiment: Reply to Zimbardo and Haney (2020) and Chan et al. (2020) REPLY

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅