Relational Attributions

While the self concept of an individual may lead them to believe that their behavior would conform to personal principles regardless of the situation, the Stanford Prison Experiment demonstrates the control of context on behavioral responses. The state of affairs is often the result of a dynamic interaction between people and circumstances. (Zimbardo, 2007) Without direct experience in a set of conditions, it may be difficult to make accurate predictions regarding the actions of an individual person.

In order to interpret events, people create causal attributions that establish perceptions of significance and meaning. (Eberly, Holley, Johnson, & Mitchell, 2011) The perceptions regarding causal origins influence subsequent behaviors and cognitions. (Eberly et al., 2011) This explanation typically includes an internal or external locus of control. (Eberly et al., 2011) Dispositional attributions emphasize the significance of personal qualities in the cause of a behavior. (Zimbardo, 2007) In contrast, situational descriptions recognize the contribution of circumstance in the generation of individual actions. (Zimbardo, 2007)

However, the distinction between personal and circumstantial controls is not always clear when behaviors are embedded within an organizational structure. (Eberly et al., 2011) Systems of power translate an ideology into specific operating procedures. (Zimbardo, 2007) Organizational authorities construct a hierarchy of dominance by establishing systemic conditions. (Zimbardo, 2007) In this context, relational attributions explain an event as resulting from the dynamics of interactions. (Eberly et al., 2011) The foundation of this type of causal origin is not reducible to either individual alone. (Eberly et al., 2011) Rather, the relationship between individuals determines the nature of results. (Eberly et al., 2011) An organization designs relational properties to produce specific patterns of behavior in order to construct and maintain systems of power.

Valid generalizations may predict behavioral responses when the conditions are sufficiently similar in different scenarios. Given the nearly unanimous conformity of all individuals to the various categories in the Stanford Prison Experiment, one may assume with some degree of certainty that most people would behave similarly when placed in this context. Although there may be a variety of expressions, the results of this analysis indicate that the majority of individuals internalize the normative expectations of their role within an organization. This internalization represents the assumption of a defined identity. (Zimbardo, 2007) The categories of prisoner, guard, administrator and researcher include specific behavior prescriptions that are imposed on people in order to maintain the functionality of an organization. While a person may intend on protesting against the features and dynamics of a system, the hierarchical power structure includes methods of normalization that promote conformity and compliance.

References

Eberly, M. B., Holley, E. C., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011) Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 731-753. doi: 10.5465/amr.2009.0371

Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New York