First, students could have been given detailed information about the research and its procedures in advance. However, Dr. Zimbardo himself was unaware of how individuals would react in a given situation, which made it difficult for him to establish any details about the study. This information could have been included in consent forms and repeated before the experiment began, so that participants could understand what they were getting themselves into. Dr. Zimbardo should have assigned a research assistant to act as prison superintendent to avoid conflicts of interest. The guards should have been trained before starting the experiment and informed about the daily tasks they had to perform. This would have ensured a controlled experimental environment. Participants should have been debriefed after the experiment and referred to a counselor to ensure their psychological well-being. I believe that the sum of all these approaches would certainly have improved the experiment and minimized any harm to the participants. We cannot isolate the best approach from the ones listed above, as each plays an important role in the experiment. These approaches should be implemented with extreme caution, as the reputation of the institutions associated with the research would be compromised