ARTICLE

 

Revisiting the Stanford Prison Experiment from the Perspective of the Social Model of Disability: A Teaching Experience

 

 

Müjde Koca-Atabey

Ankara Medipol University, Turkey. mujde.koca.atabey@gmail.com, cemilemujde.atabey@ankaramedipol.edu.tr; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8782-2960

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

This article aims to revisit the Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) from the perspective of disability studies. The SPE is an issue that inevitably comes to light while teaching Social Psychology and how it contributes to a different course titled Psychological, Social and Cultural Aspects of Disabilities. The SPE presents a pioneering piece of research within Social Psychology. Similarly, the social model has reformed the concept of disability. The SPE and further studies demonstrate the importance of social forces in shaping human behaviour; that is, they explore how good people might turn evil in particular circumstances. The social model of disability emphasises the role of social oppression in creating disability. As these two courses contribute to each other, it is discussed that an appropriate level of analysis within the discipline of psychology has much to contribute to the inherently interdisciplinary field of disability studies and vice versa. Interdisciplinary curriculums might be a step towards inclusive higher education.

Keywords: Stanford Prison Experiment; disability in Turkey; disability and higher education; social model of disability; teaching psychology and disability studies

---

 

 

Introduction

This article aims to provide a reanalysis of the famous Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) in relation to disability studies, more specifically in relation to the social model of disability. I am a social psychologist, and a disabled academic, whose main research and teaching specialism is the field of disability studies. I teach courses within both disciplines. This article reflects an analysis that arises while teaching Social Psychology, and how this teaching contributes to a different course titled Psychological, Social and Cultural Aspects of Disabilities. The course Social Psychology is a compulsory second-year undergraduate course; the disability studies course is a third-year elective course. The "aggression" chapter of the Social Psychology course provides an answer to an important question of mine: Do these seemingly different disciplines have more in common than would first appear? I think there is an implicit relationship between these two diverse topics. Converging evidence in the literature in this respect might be valuable and could lead to further analysis. However, before addressing these issues, it is important to highlight the fundamental features of the SPE and the social model of disability.

In the experiment, a mock prison was created in the basement of the Stanford Psychology Department. The participants were selected via an advertisement. Twenty-four university students were randomly assigned as guards or prisoners. The "police", who were in fact confederates, arrested the prisoners. The participants were provided appropriate uniforms and began to live in a simulated prison environment that was created by the researchers (Haney, Banks, and Zimbardo 1973; Zimbardo 1973). The simulation was truly successful as, over time, the guards and prisoners did not refer to their experience as an experiment or simulation (Zimbardo 2006; 2007). Zimbardo (2007, 444) stated that "[i]t was a prison run by psychologists rather than by the State". Although the experiment was initially designed to last two weeks, it was ceased on the sixth day due to increased violence among the guards towards prisoners and increased psychological distress among prisoners. It was stated that the system, not the individuals' dispositions, created the unforeseeable circumstance. The 24 participants were selected among 75 applicants, as they were the ones who were psychologically healthiest; so, a sadistic character or a kind of psychopathology could not be the underlying reason for the violence or distress (Zimbardo, Maslach, and Haney 2000). Therefore, that hypothesis, which might argue in favour of personality characteristics, was disregarded (Zimbardo 2007). It was discussed that similar to that experimental setting, the real-life violence within prisons is created by the system. More specifically, limited supervision and lack of education are the sources of violence, not a few bad apples or bad barrels. For instance, it might be instructive to consider what happened in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The night shifts were especially critical in terms of displaying the harshest forms of abuse (Banuazizi and Movahedi 1975; Zimbardo 1973; 2007). Hence, it was concluded that in such a circumstance the most important feature is a system that creates and maintains a specific situation. The system is the issue that creates the evil, as the Lucifer effect indicates (Zimbardo 1973; 2007). In order to reduce this kind of prison abuse, Zimbardo (2006; 2007) repeatedly favoured greater prisoner-guard surveillance.

The social model of disability originated in Britain in 1975, contemporaneously to the SPE, which was conducted in 1971. The fundamental principles of the social model framework are described as follows:

It is society which disables physically impaired people. Disability is something imposed on top of our impairments, by the way we are unnecessarily isolated and excluded from full participation in society. (UPIAS and the Disability Alliance 1976, 4)

The model argued for a clear distinction between impairment and disability. It was argued that an inability to walk or to speak is an impairment. However, an inability to enter a building due to the steps or an inability to communicate due to a lack of technical aids is a disability (Morris 1993). In addition, the social model denied the established equation between illness and disability and put forth that it was not the doctors but the disabled people themselves who are the experts of the disability phenomena (Oliver 1996). Using the term "disabled people" rather than "people with disabilities" was a deliberate attempt to emphasise society's role in disabling people. According to this model, disability cannot be understood outside its social context (Koca-Atabey 2013; Marks 1997; Morris 1993; Oliver 1990; 1996). It was also discussed that since disability is a context-dependent phenomenon, all people are disabled in some respect (Taylor 2017). Valeras (2010) stated that disability might be conceptualised within a continuum and people might feel disabled or non-disabled depending on the circumstances.

 

Psychology and Disability Studies

As a pioneering social psychologist, Zimbardo (2007) criticised psychology for missing the big picture. According to him, clinical psychology and personality psychology are dispositionally oriented; they ask the question of whom to blame or to provide credit. In this sense, psychology becomes too specific and does not really ask big questions. Madsen (2014) stated that psychology should be much more in line with historical and cultural reality. Psychology is also criticised as discussing disability in a biased manner. As an ordinary human experience, disability receives relatively little attention within the psychology literature (Asch and McCarthy 2003) and is ignored within the curriculum (Dunn 2016). With an emphasis on issues such as loss, adjustment and psychopathology, these two disciplines, namely psychology and disability studies, have a troubled relationship (Reeve 2006). Disability-related material within introductory psychology textbooks is also limited and stereotypical in nature (Goldstein, Siegel, and Seaman 2010). Within the US undergraduate psychology curriculum, disability is mostly discussed in relation to the medical model (Rosa et al. 2016). It might be considered that disability is not included appropriately within the psychology curriculum. On the other hand, there are promising discussions about embracing both fields. For instance, community psychology is offered as an appropriate tool to integrate disability studies (Dowrick and Keys 2001; Goodley and Lawthom 2005; 2011).

Community psychology provides a paradigm shift from an individualistic, deficit approach to a systemic approach (Nel, Lazarus, and Daniels 2010). Dunbar-Krige and Pillay (2010) argued that the inability of mainstream psychology to address the needs of different groups led to the emergence of community psychology, which provides an appropriate basis for disability research. Similarly, Simpson and Thomas (2015) argued that clinical psychology and disability studies have much in common. A positive psychology of rehabilitation is also proposed (Dunn and Dougherty 2005). Livneh and Martz (2016) recently stated that the psychosocial adaptation to disability is conceptually linked with positive psychology. According to this view, emphasising the strengths and capacities of disabled people is essential. Rather than normalisation, optimisation of lives is crucial (Naidoo 2006). Within the framework of hedonic psychology, Amundson (2010) suggested that nondisabled estimators should not be used to score the quality of life of disabled people. Maslov (2012) argued that describing blindness as darkness is merely the construction of sighted people. This is in line with Hull's (2001) case, which concluded that sighted people's brains function differently to blind people's brains. Blindness entails more than losing sight, so it is not easily simulated although it may seem to be. A sighted person who closes his or her eyes would still have the shapes, figures and colours in mind. In fact, in a meeting of the American Psychological Association (APA), Zimbardo et al. (2003) argued that disability is something different than being blind, deaf or paralysed. Disability has a complex structure and is related to community, culture, economics, politics, and also global interdependencies. These arguments are in line with the basic arguments of the social model, which describes disability as a fact of life, a different life experience that might be interesting and affirmative (French and Swain 2004; Morris 1991; Oliver 1996). It was suggested that if psychology emphasises the individual in context (Forshaw 2007) or engages more on a societal and political level to influence change (Simpson and Thomas 2015), the relationship between the two disciplines might be more intimate. Watermeyer (2012) argued that disability studies ignored questions regarding the psychological and emotional aspects of experience for a long time with the fear of musicalising the phenomena. However, the possible contributions of the discipline were left out, resulting in an incomplete picture.

 

The Stanford Prison Experiment and the Social Model of Disability

The SPE clearly showed that human nature could be shaped by social circumstances (Drury et al. 2012). Therefore, the inevitable relationship between Zimbardo's main argument, the power of situation (Slavich 2009), and the social model of disability becomes much clearer. He specifically stated the following:

The dispositional approach is to the situational as a medical model of health is to a public health model. A medical model tries to find the source of the illness, disease, or disability within the affected person. By contrast, public health researchers assume that the vectors of disease transmission come from the environment, creating conditions that foster illness. Sometimes the sick person is the end product of environmental pathogens, which unless counteracted will affect others, regardless of attempts to improve the health of the individual. For example, in the dispositional approach a child who exhibits a learning disability may be given a variety of medical and behavioral treatments to overcome that handicap. But in many cases, especially among the poor, the problem is caused by ingesting lead in paint that flakes off the walls of tenement apartments and is worsened by conditions of poverty-the situational approach. (Zimbardo 2007, 8)

If we rediscuss the point and replace Zimbardo's phrase "public health" with "social model", we might reveal Zimbardo as a disability studies scholar, and this might not be that wrong. Zimbardo further stated that "everyone will be a prisoner or guard at some point in their life, because a guard is simply someone who limits the freedom of another person. Parents, spouses, and bosses do this all the time. And the recipients of this behavior? Well, they are the prisoners" (cited in Slavich 2009, 292). In a disabling society it is possible to conceptualise disabled people as prisoners and nondisabled authorities as guards. They are the people who tell the nondisabled what/how to do and what/how not to do. In fact, Finkelstein (2001) stated that in unchanged societies, disabled people are living in a social prison. The similarities do not end there. The SPE was regarded as a turning point in relation to the death of an outdated understanding of rehabilitation. Until that experiment, it was thought that prisons were places that rehabilitate criminals (Haney and Zimbardo 1998). Similarly, with the emergence of the social model, the old-fashioned, medical-based rehabilitation practices became unpopular. This kind of rehabilitation practice aimed to fix the body to fit the environment (Imrie 1997) and regarded rehabilitation as a tool for social control (Kumar 2011). Alternatively, within the social model of disability, the active participation of disabled people themselves is encouraged (for a discussion, see Shakespeare and Watson 1997). On the other hand, both the SPE and the social model of disability have important political dimensions and implications. For instance, the SPE enabled a discussion in relation to the prison system in the United States and all over the world. On the other hand, the social model served as an important framework to empower disabled people. Similarly, the social model, which originated in the United Kingdom, had significant international implications (Haney and Zimbardo 1998; Oliver 2013).

 

Conclusion

One might argue that the SPE was a single experiment but that the social model of disability is a huge social, academic and political movement. Even though this is the case in a literal sense, it is also possible to argue that the effects of the SPE are wide, varied and continuous. One of the first things that the search engines offer when you type "experiment" is the SPE (Taylor 2013). On the other hand, I am fully aware that the SPE and the social model of disability are widely criticised. For instance, it was stated that the SPE was not called an experiment because it did not test any hypotheses, identify variables, have control groups or apply the relevant statistical tests (Brannigan 2009). Similarly, Mastroianni (2015) argued that Zimbardo has a narrow situationist approach. On the other hand, the social model was criticised for creating a polarisation and a dichotomy (i.e. between impairment and disability) or being socially reductionist (Marks 1997), simplistic and misleading in some respects (Anastasiou and Kauffman 2013; Shakespeare 2004; 2006). However, these critics do not devalue the importance of the above matters.

Disability in Turkey is a chaotic phenomenon. A charity-based approach is prevalent (Bezmez 2013). The society does not treat disabled citizens as equal partners (Tufan 2008). It provides an unwelcoming environment to the disabled body (Bezmez and Yardimci 2016). The medical model is dominant (Sakiz and Woods 2014; Sakiz et al. 2015). Campbell (2009) argued that disability status is not a personal and private issue. This is the opposite in Turkey; disability is a person's own problem. The medical and individual nature of disability creates tension among disabled people. Their rights are neglected and the support that they require is based on arbitrary and unsteady rules and regulations. Not surprisingly, as an academic field disability studies has a limited space in Turkey. Psychology, on the other hand, is an increasingly popular discipline and the number of psychology departments is rapidly growing. In 2011, there were 64 departments; there were only six in 1990 (Sümer 2016). According to recent statistics, there were 79 undergraduate programmes in 2015. It was raised to 119 in 2019 (Çirakoglu 2019). In recent years, it is not that easy to investigate the quality or the quantity of the psychology departments in Turkey. There is more than one programme (i.e. one in Turkish, one in English) within some universities. Within this mass, disability is an underrepresented topic and to the best of my knowledge, the Psychological, Social and Cultural Aspects of Disabilities course was the first disability-related course offered to psychology students in Turkey (see Appendix A¹ for the syllabus). Disability as a human experience is related to all sub-fields of psychology. One of the aims of the social model is to provide an inclusive education (e.g. Oliver and Barnes 2010; Riddick 2001); emphasising similarities between these two literatures might contribute to this higher-order objective.

My article integrates two seemingly diverse literatures. Levels of analysis are important features of psychology (Dunn 2015; Slavich 2009; Talasli personal communication), and with an appropriate level of analysis psychology could fruitfully contribute to the inherently interdisciplinary field of disability studies, within both the research and teaching aspects. Currently, I include a specific section (titled "Psychology and Disability Studies: Past, Present and Future", see Appendix A for a tentative syllabus) in my disability studies course to draw attention to the similarities between the two fields. Within the same vein, the disability studies' perspective could make the psychology curriculum more inclusive. Although inclusion is mostly discussed in relation to curriculum (Bunbury 2018; Hopkins 2011), an interdisciplinary curriculum is not widely discussed. Bearing in mind that embedding disability studies into curriculums is a long and laborious process (Treby, Hewitt, and Shah 2006), disability studies and higher education both need continuous attention and the former's inclusion might result in effective and more inclusive curriculums.

 

References

Amundson, R. 2010. "Quality of Life, Disability and Hedonic Psychology". Journal for the Study of Social Behaviour 40 (4): 374 -92. https://doi.org/10.1111j.1468-5914.2010.00437.x.         [ Links ]

Anastasiou, D., and J. M. Kauffman. 2013. "The Social Model of Disability: Dichotomy between Impairment and Disability". Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (4): 441-59.         [ Links ]

Asch, A., and H. McCarthy. 2003. "Infusing Disability Issues into the Psychology Curriculum". In Teaching Gender and Multicultural Awareness: Resources for the Psychology Classroom, edited by P. Bronstein and K. Quina, 253-69. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10570-018.         [ Links ]

Banuazizi, A., and S. Movahedi. 1975. "Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison: A Methodological Analysis". American Psychologist 30 (2): 152-60. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076835.         [ Links ]

Bezmez, D. 2013. "Urban Citizenship, the Right to the City and Politics of Disability in Istanbul". International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37 (1): 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01190.x.         [ Links ]

Bezmez, D., and S. Yardimci. 2016. "Rehabilitation Technology and the Reproduction of Bodily Normality: A Critical Analysis of Robotic Gait Training in Turkey". Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 18 (4): 343-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2015.1114964.         [ Links ]

Brannigan, A. 2009. "The Defense of Situationalism in the Age of Abu Ghraib". Review of The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, by Philip Zimbardo. Theory and Psychology 19 (5): 698-700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309341924.         [ Links ]

Bunbury, S. 2018. "Disability in Higher Education-Do Reasonable Adjustments Contribute to an Inclusive Curriculum?" International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1503347.

Campbell, F. A. K. 2009. "Having a Career in Disability Studies without Even Becoming Disabled! The Strains of the Disabled Teaching Body". International Journal of Inclusive Education 13 (7): 713-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903046002.         [ Links ]

Çirakoglu, O. C. 2019. "Psikoloji Lisans Egitiminde Sorunlar Öneriler Çaliçtayi". [Workshop: Problems and Suggestions in Psychology Undergraduate Education]. Ankara, Turkey, July 12, 2019.

Dowrick, P. W., and C. B. Keys. 2001. "Community Psychology and Disability Studies". Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community 21 (2): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v21n02_01.         [ Links ]

Drury S., S. A. Hutchens, D. E. Shuttlesworth, and C. L. White. 2012. "Philip G. Zimbardo on His Career and the Stanford Prison Experiment's 40th Anniversary". History of Psychology 15 (2): 161-70. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025884.         [ Links ]

Dunbar-Krige, H., and J. Pillay. 2010. "Community Psychology in Educational Contexts". Education as Change 14 (1): 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/16823206.2010.517908.         [ Links ]

Dunn, D. S. 2015. The Social Psychology of Disability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.         [ Links ]

Dunn, D. S. 2016. "Teaching about Psychosocial Aspects of Disability: Emphasizing Person-Environment Relations". Teaching of Psychology 43 (3): 255-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628316649492.         [ Links ]

Dunn, D. S., and S. B. Dougherty. 2005. "Prospects for a Positive Psychology of Rehabilitation". Rehabilitation Psychology 50 (3): 305-11. https://doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.50.3.305.

Finkelstein, V. 2001. "The Social Model of Disability Repossessed". Manchester Coalition of Disabled People. Accessed March 11, 2020. https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/finkelstein-soc-mod-repossessed.pdf.

French, S., and J. Swain 2004. "Controlling Inclusion in Education: Young Disabled People's Perspectives". In Disabling Barriers-Enabling Environments, edited by J. Swain, S. French, C. Barnes, and C. Thomas, 169-75. London: Sage Publications.         [ Links ]

Forshaw, M. 2007. "In Defence of Psychology: A Reply to Goodley and Lawthom". Disability and Society 22 (6): 655-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590701560287.         [ Links ]

Goldstein, S. B., D. Siegel, and J. Seaman. 2010. "Limited Access: The Status of Disability in Introductory Psychology Textbooks". Teaching of Psychology 37 (1): 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903426290.         [ Links ]

Goodley, D., and R. Lawthom. 2005. "Epistemological Journeys in Participatory Action Research: Alliances between Community Psychology and Disability Studies". Disability and Society 20 (2): 135-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590500059077.         [ Links ]

Goodley, D., and R. Lawthom. 2011. "Disability, Community and Empire: Indigenous Psychologies and Social Psychoanalytic Possibilities". In "Creating Inclusive Communities", edited by A. Azzopardi, special issue, International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (1): 101-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2010.496200.         [ Links ]

Haney, C., C. Banks, and P. Zimbardo. 1973. "Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison". International Journal of Criminology and Penology 1 (1): 69-97.         [ Links ]

Haney, C., and P. Zimbardo. 1998. "The Past and Future of U.S. Prison Policy. Twenty-Five Years after the Stanford Prison Experiment". American Psychologist 53 (7): 709-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.7.709.         [ Links ]

Hopkins, L. 2011. "The Path of Least Resistance: A Voice-Relational Analysis of Disabled Students' Experiences of Discrimination in English Universities". International Journal of Inclusive Education 15 (7): 711-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110903317684.         [ Links ]

Hull, J. M. 2001. "Recognizing Another World". National Journal for People with Disability 3 (2): 23-26.         [ Links ]

Imrie, R. 1997. "Rethinking the Relationships between Disability, Rehabilitation, and Society". Disability and Rehabilitation 19 (7): 263-71. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289709166537.         [ Links ]

Koca-Atabey, M. 2013. "A Personal Validation of the Social Nature of Disability: Different Environments, Different Experiences". Disability and Society 28 (7): 1027-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.820535.         [ Links ]

Kumar, A. 2011. "Disability, Rehabilitation and Social Control: A Foucauldian Perspective". International Journal of Human Sciences 8 (2): 400-9.         [ Links ]

Livneh, H., and E. Martz. 2016. "Psychosocial Adaptation to Disability within the Context of Positive Psychology: Philosophical Aspects and Historical Roots". Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 26 (1): 13-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-015-9601-6.         [ Links ]

Madsen, O. J. 2014. "Psychology Oblivious to Psychology: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Psychology in Society". Theory and Psychology 24 (5): 609-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354314543969.         [ Links ]

Marks, D. 1997. "Models of Disability". Disability and Rehabilitation 19 (3): 85-91. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289709166831.         [ Links ]

Maslov, K. S. 2012. "The Rarity of Silence-or-What Can We Hear from History". Culture and Psychology 18 (4): 510-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X12456721.         [ Links ]

Mastroianni, G. R. 2015. "Obedience in Perspective: Psychology and the Holocaust". Theory and Psychology 25 (5): 657-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354315608963.         [ Links ]

Morris, J. 1991. Pride against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability. London: Women's Press.         [ Links ]

Morris, J. 1993. Independent Lives? Community Care and Disabled People. London: Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23136-2.         [ Links ]

Naidoo, P. 2006. "Potential Contributions to Disability Theorizing and Research from Positive Psychology". Disability and Rehabilitation 28 (9): 595-602. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930500219027.         [ Links ]

Nel, W., S. Lazarus, and B. Daniels. 2010. "Education Support Services Policy and Practice in South Africa: An Example of Community Psychology in Action?" Education as Change 14 (1): 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/16823206.2010.517910.         [ Links ]

Oliver, M. 1990. The Politics of Disablement. Critical Texts in Social Work and the Welfare State. Basingstoke: Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20895-1_8.         [ Links ]

Oliver, M. 1996. Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Palgrave.         [ Links ]

Oliver, M. 2013. "The Social Model of Disability: Thirty Years On". Disability and Society 28 (7): 1024-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2013.818773.         [ Links ]

Oliver, M., and C. Barnes. 2010. "Disability Studies, Disabled People and the Struggle for Inclusion". British Journal of Sociology of Education 31 (5): 547-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2010.500088.         [ Links ]

Reeve, D. 2006. "Towards a Psychology of Disability: The Emotional Effects of Living in a Disabling Society". In Disability and Psychology: Critical Introductions and Reflections, edited by D. Goodley and R. Lawthom, 94-107. London: Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-12098-4_7.         [ Links ]

Riddick, B. 2001. "Dyslexia and Inclusion: Time for a Social Model of Disability Perspective?" International Studies in Sociology of Education 11 (3): 223-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210100200078.         [ Links ]

Rosa, N. M., K. R. Bogart, A. K. Bonnett, M. C. Estill, and C. E. Colton. 2016. "Teaching about Disability in Psychology: An Analysis of Disability Curricula in US Undergraduate Psychology Programs". Teaching of Psychology 43 (1): 59-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620885.         [ Links ]

Sakiz, H., and C. Woods. 2014. "From Thinking to Practice: School Staff Views on Disability Inclusion in Turkey". European Journal of Special Needs Education 29 (2): 135-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.882058.         [ Links ]

Sakiz, H., C. Woods, H. Sart, Z. Erçahin, R. Aftab, N. Koç, and H. Sariçam. 2015. "The Route to 'Inclusive Counselling': Counsellors' Perceptions of Disability Inclusion in Turkey". International Journal of Inclusive Education 19 (3): 250-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.929186.         [ Links ]

Shakespeare, T. 2004. "Social Model of Disability and Other Life Strategies". Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 6 (1): 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410409512636.         [ Links ]

Shakespeare, T. 2006. Disability Rights and Wrongs. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203640098.         [ Links ]

Shakespeare, T., and N. Watson. 1997. "Defending the Social Model". Disability and Society 12 (2): 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599727380.         [ Links ]

Simpson, J., and C. Thomas. 2015. "Clinical Psychology and Disability Studies: Bridging the Disciplinary Divide on Mental Health and Disability". Disability and Rehabilitation 37 (14): 1299-304. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.961656.         [ Links ]

Slavich, G. M. 2009. "On 50 Years of Giving Psychology Away: An Interview with Philip Zimbardo". Teaching of Psychology 36 (4): 278-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280903175772.         [ Links ]

Sümer, N. 2016. "Rapid Growth of Psychology Programs in Turkey: Undergraduate Curriculum and Structural Challenges". Teaching of Psychology 43 (1): 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628315620886.         [ Links ]

Taylor, A. 2017. "When Fact Conceals Privilege: Teaching the (Shared?) Reality of Disability". Educational Theory 67 (2): 131-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12239.         [ Links ]

Taylor, S. 2013. "Stanford Prison Experiment". YouTube video, 8:23. Uploaded by J. Taylor-Campbell, October 29. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAX9b7agT9o.

Treby, E., I. Hewitt, and A. Shah. 2006. "Embedding 'Disability and Access' into the Geography Curriculum". Teaching in Higher Education: Critical Perspectives 11 (4): 413-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600874169.         [ Links ]

Tufan, i. 2008. "Prejudices against, and Social Responsibilities towards, the Disabled". Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 36 (1): 67-76. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2008.36.L67.         [ Links ]

UPIAS (The Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation) and the Disability Alliance. 1976. "Fundamental Principles of Disability". UPIAS: London. Accessed March 10, 2020. https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/UPIAS-fundamental-principles.pdf.

Valeras, A. 2010. " 'We Don't Have a Box': Understanding Hidden Disability Identity Utilizing Narrative Research Methodology". Disability Studies Quarterly 30 (3/4). Accessed March 10, 2020. http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1267.         [ Links ]

Watermeyer, B. 2012. "Is It Possible to Create a Politically Engaged, Contextual Psychology of Disability?" Disability and Society 27 (2): 161-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2011.644928.         [ Links ]

Zimbardo, P. G. 1973. "On the Ethics of Intervention in Human Psychological Research: With Special Reference to the Stanford Prison Experiment". Cognition 2 (2): 243-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(72)90014-5.         [ Links ]

Zimbardo, P. G. 2006. "On Rethinking the Psychology of Tyranny: The BBC Prison Study". British Journal of Social Psychology 45 (1): 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466605X81720.         [ Links ]

Zimbardo, P. 2007. The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. New York, NY: Random House.         [ Links ]

Zimbardo, P. G., C. Maslach, and C. Haney. 2000. "Reflections on the Stanford Prison Experiment: Genesis, Transformations, Consequences". In Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm, edited by T. Blass, 193-237. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.         [ Links ]

Zimbardo, P. G., H. Haywood, L. Mona, and K. J. Hagglund. 2003. "Enriching Psychological Research on Disability". In Bridging Gaps: Refining the Disability Research Agenda for Rehabilitation and the Social Sciences: Conference Proceedings, edited by F. E. Menz and D. F. Thomas, 19-32. Accessed March 10, 2020. http://zimbardo.com/downloads/2003%20Disability%20Chapter.pdf.

 

 

1 Editorial Note - Education as Change generally does not publish appendices. This article, however, presents a compelling case for incorporating Disability Studies in university Psychology curricula in Turkey. We have decided to include the original appendix because it is central to the argument presented by the author. - Na-iem Dollie, Chief Editor, Education as Change

 

 

Appendix A - Click to enlarge