Status and power: social roles, the bases of power and the Stanford prison experiment (QCE Psychology Unit 4)
“Describe the effect of status, roles and power on social behaviour; Describe the findings of historical social psychological research, with reference to Haney, Banks and Zimbardo's (1973) research on status, roles and power”
Status is an individual's rank or position within a group, while power is the capacity to influence the thoughts, feelings and behaviour of others. French and Raven identified six bases of power: reward, coercive, legitimate, referent, expert and informational. Social roles are the expected behaviours attached to a position. Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment showed that assigned roles and status can rapidly transform behaviour through role conformity.
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
QCAA wants you to explain how an individual's position in a social structure, their status, and their capacity to influence others, their power, shape behaviour. You need clear definitions, a named framework for the types of power, and a demonstration using a classic study of how status and assigned social roles change what people do. This is the opening topic of Unit 4 and underpins later work on social influence.
The answer
Status and power describe how people are positioned relative to one another in a group and how that position lets them shape others. These concepts explain why the same individual can behave very differently depending on the role and rank they hold.
Status, power and social roles
- Status is the position or rank an individual holds within a group or society, reflecting how much respect, prestige or importance others assign to them. Status can be ascribed (given, such as by age or family) or achieved (earned, such as through accomplishment).
- Power is the capacity of a person to influence the thoughts, feelings or behaviour of others. Higher status often brings greater power, but the two are distinct: power is about influence, status is about position.
- Social roles are the sets of expected behaviours attached to a particular position, such as student, teacher, parent or police officer. People tend to behave in line with the role they occupy, a process called role conformity.
The bases of social power
John French and Bertram Raven identified the sources from which power flows. Knowing these by name strengthens an exam response.
- Reward power. The ability to give desirable outcomes (praise, pay, promotion).
- Coercive power. The ability to punish or impose negative outcomes.
- Legitimate power. Authority granted by a person's position or title, such as a manager or police officer.
- Referent power. Influence based on being liked, admired or identified with, such as a respected role model.
- Expert power. Influence based on superior knowledge or skill, such as a doctor.
- Informational power. Influence based on controlling access to information others need.
The Stanford prison experiment
Philip Zimbardo's 1971 Stanford prison experiment is the classic demonstration of how status and assigned roles transform behaviour. Volunteer students were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners in a simulated prison. Within days, guards became increasingly authoritarian and abusive while prisoners became passive and distressed. The study was halted after six days instead of two weeks. Zimbardo concluded that the situation and the assigned roles, not the personalities of the individuals, drove the behaviour, an example of role conformity and deindividuation. The study is also a key reference point for the ethics of psychological research, given the harm experienced by participants.
How status and power influence behaviour
Status and power change behaviour in several ways. Those with power tend to act more freely and may attend less to others, while those with low status tend to defer, comply and monitor the powerful closely. Assigned roles carry expectations that people internalise quickly, even when the role is artificial, as the prison study showed. This explains how ordinary people can perform harmful acts when placed in a powerful role with apparent legitimacy.
French and Raven's six bases of power are reward, coercive, legitimate, referent, expert and informational. Zimbardo's Stanford prison experiment is the go-to study: random assignment to guard or prisoner roles produced dramatic behaviour change in days, showing that the situation and role, not personality, drove conduct (role conformity).
Putting it together for an exam
A strong answer defines status and power separately, names a base of power relevant to the scenario, and uses a study to show how an assigned role changes behaviour. For example: a guard in Zimbardo's study held legitimate and coercive power through an assigned high-status role, and role conformity led ordinary volunteers to behave abusively within days.
- Treating status and power as the same thing
- Status is your position or rank; power is your capacity to influence others. High status often brings power but they are distinct.
- Forgetting random assignment in Zimbardo's study
- Participants were randomly assigned to roles, which is why the results point to the situation rather than to pre-existing personality.
- Listing only one or two bases of power
- Examiners reward the full French and Raven set: reward, coercive, legitimate, referent, expert, informational.
- Ignoring the ethics
- The Stanford prison experiment is also a standard example of harm to participants and of why ethical safeguards matter.
Exam-style questions
Questions in the style of QCAA exam questions on this dot point, each with a worked answer. They are written by ExamExplained unless tagged "Past paper"; the year shows the paper a question is modelled on.
Practice4 marksThis question refers to the investigation by Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973). Describe how power operated for each group in the investigation.Show worked answer →
Two groups, about 2 marks each, describing the power held and how it was used.
Guards (2 marks): the guards were given high status and legitimate power by their assigned role and uniforms, plus coercive power (the ability to punish). They used this to impose rules, give orders and humiliate prisoners, and their power grew as they exercised it.
Prisoners (2 marks): the prisoners held little or no power. Stripped of status, identity and control by their assigned low-status role, they became increasingly powerless, dependent and submissive, complying with the guards and showing learned helplessness and distress.
Practice4 marksThis question refers to the investigation by Haney, Banks and Zimbardo (1973). Infer the variable affecting the behaviour of each group, providing one example of an affected behaviour for each group.Show worked answer →
Variable (the inference): the assigned social role and status (the situation), not personality, drove the behaviour, because participants were randomly assigned to be guards or prisoners.
Guards (2 marks): the high-status guard role led to authoritarian and abusive behaviour, for example imposing harsh punishments, issuing degrading orders and asserting control over prisoners.
Prisoners (2 marks): the low-status prisoner role led to passivity and distress, for example becoming submissive, showing emotional disturbance, or rebelling early and then becoming helpless. This is role conformity to the assigned social role.