Today, I want to start with a piece of sad news. Last week, on October 14th, Philip Zimbardo, a legendary figure in psychology, a retired professor from Stanford University, and a former president of the American Psychological Association, passed away at the age of 91.
Zimbardo was, for a time, the most respected, accomplished, and influential living psychologist globally. He was awarded the Hilgard Lifetime Achievement Award in General Psychology by the American Psychological Association, one of the highest honors in the field of psychology.
Today, let’s pay tribute to Zimbardo by discussing some of his significant contributions to psychology.
How important was Zimbardo to the field of psychology? Well, he was often referred to as “the face and voice of psychology.” Simply put, psychology encompasses various schools of thought, each with its own master figures. However, if you were to ask the entire field to choose one person to represent contemporary psychology, Zimbardo would likely receive the most votes.
Part of this recognition is due to his appearance, which was often likened to a classic Hollywood movie star. His features bore a resemblance to Robert De Niro, coupled with his signature hairstyle and beard. To give you an image, think of a top-tier hypnotist from a movie—handsome, mysterious, and seemingly able to control people’s minds with a simple gesture. Zimbardo resembled such a character. But his appearance is just a minor reason; his achievements in psychology are what truly set him apart.
Zimbardo was the designer of the famous Stanford Prison Experiment, one of the most significant experiments in the history of psychology. The experiment involved recruiting 24 students and transforming the basement of Stanford University into a mock prison. These students were randomly divided into two groups: guards and prisoners. Though the roles were entirely artificial and, in theory, just a sophisticated role-playing game, it soon spiraled beyond expectations. The “prisoners” grew increasingly despondent, while some of the “guards” began displaying tendencies toward sadism. The experiment demonstrated that behavior and mentality are not solely determined by the individual but are deeply influenced by situational context. The environment can compel individuals to abandon previously held values.
From this experiment, Zimbardo proposed the concept of the “Lucifer Effect.”
However, the Stanford Prison Experiment faced considerable ethical criticism within the psychology community. In his later years, Zimbardo reflected on this, acknowledging that the experiment was unethical to some degree. He once remarked, “I don’t want my tombstone to read, ‘He was the warden of the Stanford Prison.’ Instead, I’d prefer it to say, ‘He liberated people from the prisons of shyness, ignorance, and self-centeredness. He did so with enthusiasm, inspiring young people to become everyday heroes.’”
Beyond the Stanford Prison Experiment, Zimbardo conducted research on a wide range of topics including shyness, cults, time perception, mind control, and heroism. If humanity has a safe containing the code to understanding behavior, Zimbardo was the one who held the key.
Zimbardo was also a crucial figure in psychology education. His books, such as Psychology and Life co-authored with Richard Gerrig, and Zimbardo’s General Psychology, are used as textbooks in many university psychology departments. For anyone looking to understand psychology, these books serve as excellent starting points.
Zimbardo’s achievements are numerous, but one of his most significant contributions is a key insight into social psychology: human behavior is not solely self-determined; it is significantly shaped by the context one is placed in.
The theory is highly specialized, so we won’t delve into it deeply here. To better understand this insight, let me share two stories.
The first story comes from one of Zimbardo’s representative works, Attitude Change and Social Influence. It involves a high school student named Bill who was always a good kid—honest and academically excellent. However, Bill’s friends were not as well-behaved. One day, these friends were smoking marijuana and invited Bill to join them. Of course, it was wrong, and predictably, Bill initially refused. But as time went on, his friends began to boast about how fashionable it was to smoke marijuana and started excluding Bill. Eventually, Bill couldn’t withstand the pressure and gave in to trying it. Bill’s experience can be described with a psychological term: peer pressure.
This story may seem cliché, but Zimbardo’s analysis of it offers some deep insights.
First, do you think Bill felt guilty after smoking marijuana? Conventional wisdom might suggest that he deeply regretted it. However, in reality, he didn’t feel much guilt. He initially felt a bit of remorse, but it faded quickly, and he began to see his behavior as normal, even enjoying it.
From this, Zimbardo offered his first insight: a person’s attitude toward something is not shaped by their thoughts but by their actions. Once a person engages in a behavior consistently, they begin to believe that the behavior is justified.
In Zimbardo’s own words: “People conform not only for social acceptance but also to increase their chances of behaving correctly in uncertain situations. The stronger these individual motivations are, the greater the group’s attraction and cohesion, and the more pressure the group exerts on the individual.”
Next, returning to Bill, how would you get him to become a good kid again and realize that smoking marijuana is wrong? Zimbardo observed many similar cases, such as children who became violent after watching violent scenes in movies or those with other issues.
Despite their differences, they all shared one common characteristic: they wouldn’t listen. Even if you told these kids that smoking marijuana or glorifying violence was wrong, they wouldn’t accept it. From this, Zimbardo derived his second insight: selective attention, meaning that people only pay attention to information they already agree with. This is why changing someone’s mind is so difficult.
Finally, is there no way to change this state? Not exactly. Since behavior is shaped by the environment, changing it requires a change in environment. For example, how do you get kids obsessed with violent scenes to reject violence? Researchers gave them a task: conduct a presentation to others explaining why glorifying violence is wrong. After completing the presentation, their attitudes changed significantly.
Thus, Zimbardo proposed his third insight: ideas can’t change ideas—only the environment can change ideas. It is nearly impossible to directly alter someone’s thoughts through persuasion, no matter how eloquent you are. The effective approach is to first create an environment where someone adopts a specific role and behaves accordingly. Once they act in a certain way, their thoughts will adjust to align with their actions. People tend to believe in the values behind the actions they perform.
In simple terms, there is a saying, “Judge actions, not intentions,” suggesting that a person’s character should be assessed by their behavior rather than their thoughts. According to Zimbardo’s insights, this idea holds some truth. If a person continues a behavior over a long period, they are likely to adopt the values associated with it.
This was the first story, illustrating one of Zimbardo’s core ideas: people do not first form ideas and then act; rather, they act first, which then shapes their ideas.
Now, let’s move on to the second story and explore a higher-level application of this theory. If the previous story seemed a bit ordinary, this next one will showcase the true power of this theory.
This story doesn’t come from Zimbardo but from a TV series that powerfully reflects Zimbardo’s theories.
There was a TV show called The Boys, in which a superhuman named Homelander was secretly created in a laboratory with powers comparable to those of Superman. The question is, as the head of the lab, how would you ensure that this superhuman remains under control?
By force? Homelander is invulnerable. By reasoning? They tried, but it didn’t work.
The weapon that the people in the laboratory ultimately devised was psychology. They recruited the world’s most brilliant psychologists to create a tailored growth environment for young Azu. The experimenters would deliberately ignore him when he did well, along with many other design elements. As a result, growing up in this environment, Azu eventually developed a complete performer personality. He craved others’ recognition intensely and especially needed their praise. Losing this would be more painful for him than death.
Meanwhile, the consortium behind the lab owned numerous news and film companies. Their job was to continually package Azu’s image, organize various speaking events for him, and provide outlets for his performer personality to express itself.
In other words, this superhuman was like a drug addict, and the consortium behind him was like the drug dealer. Through this psychological mechanism, the consortium and the lab had a tight grip on him, at least for quite some time. Even when he later wanted to go on a killing spree, he held back repeatedly because he was too dependent on others’ praise. If he killed all of humanity, who would praise him then?
You see, from this perspective, psychology is like a higher-dimensional weapon. Used skillfully, it might allow you to control an existence much stronger than yourself.
Of course, this story is fictional, and for the sake of the plot, Azu eventually had to lose control to make the story more thrilling. But this story reveals a truth about social psychology: humans are social creatures, and as long as they are part of a group, they are constantly influenced by their environment—superhumans are no exception.
Back to reality, Philip Zimbardo himself understood this mechanism well, so he always sought ways to use this theory to make people better.
For example, small variables in the environment can exert a positive influence. In supermarkets, if the songs played include words like “brave,” “honest,” or “kind,” then shoplifting behaviors significantly decrease. This design was initially based on Zimbardo’s theories.
Another example is that, since we are influenced by our environment, it means we can create a positive environment for ourselves. Zimbardo suggests that we can imagine playing a different role in our minds—shy individuals can envision themselves as an outgoing character, timid ones can imagine themselves as a brave character, and by playing these roles internally, they can change themselves.
In other words, Zimbardo’s life focused on two crucial academic topics. The first is: don’t underestimate the influence of the environment on you; sometimes, it can determine who you are. The second is: don’t underestimate your influence on yourself; don’t let others decide who you are.
Finally, let’s end today with a quote from Zimbardo: “Don’t allow others to deindividualize you, don’t let them put you in a category, a box, or an automated slot. Don’t let them turn you into an object, a thing. Insist on your individuality, politely tell them your name, and loudly let them know who you are.”
