Classic Study: Sherif et al (1961) Robber's Cave

Aim
1. To investigate relations between groups.
  1. Specifically to see whether strangers brought together into a group with common goals will form a close group, and to see whether 2 such groups brought into contact and competition will become hostile towards each other.
Procedure
1. Participants
  1. 22, twelve year old boys
  2. White, American, Middle-class protestants
  3. They were transported in 2 groups to the Robber's Cave National Park in Oklahoma
    1. At the camp, the 2 groups lived seperately
2. Field study
3. 3 stages
  1. 1. In-group Formation
    1. For 5 days each group was given tasks to carry out together in order to help them bond
      1. Each group was given a name- Eagles and Rattlers, to help further strengthen their group identity
  2. 2. In-group Relations, The Friction Phase
    1. Over the next 4 days, friction between groups was encouraged by means of competitions between the groups for attractive prizes E.g. penknives
  3. 3. Inter-group Relations, The Integration
    1. This stage was designed to reduce the tension between the groups, they were brought together, initially to watch films and then to take part in joint problem-solving activities
      1. In one of these activities the water supply was blocked by 'vandals', and the 2 groups worked together to remove the blockage
        In another, the groups had to pool their money to pay for a film all the boys wanted to watch
        In the 3rd activity the groups worked together to free a truck apparently stuck in the mud
Results
1. Stage 1
  1. The boys bonded within their groups and, although they had not met, each group expressed dislike for the other group
2. Stage 2
  1. Competition led to immediate hostility
    1. The Eagles refused to eat with the Rattlers
    2. When together the groups shouted insults at each other and were reported by observers to come close to physical violence
    3. Both groups raided the others huts and burned their flags
    4. Prizes awarded were stolen
3. Stage 3
  1. Early activities in stage 3, which involved getting the groups together without competition, didn't reduce hostility, however the joint problem solving task did
    1. Following these, both groups opted to share a bus home and the Rattlers spent a $5 prize won in one competition on drinks for both groups
Conclusion
1. Some hostility was observed between the groups as soon as they were aware of each other.
  1. Once competition was introduced this became more intense.
    1. This suggests that competition is a factor in leading to discrimination between groups, but that some discrimination takes place without competition
      1. However, when groups work together on cooperative tasks that benefit both of them, prejudice and discrimination can be reduced
Evaluation
1. Strengths
  1. All same age and background
    1. fair
  2. Can control the variables
  3. If repeated in the same way, different prizes would get similar results
  4. Can be applied to lots of situations
    1. E.g. Bradford Race Riots
  5. High historical validity
  6. Field experiment (natural setting so shows real behaviour)
    1. Covert
    2. High ecological vaidity
  7. Stopped before physical harm was done
2. Weaknesses
  1. All 12 year olds
    1. May not apply to other ages
  2. Small sample
    1. Low population validity
  3. Gender & culture bias
  4. All same background
  5. Ignores individual differences
  6. Not all prejudice may come from competition
    1. Reductionist
  7. Could have demand characteristics
  8. Experimenter bias
  9. Ethics
    1. No consent
    2. No debrief
    3. Deception
    4. Possible psychological harm

Nächster

Classic Study: Sherif et al (1961) Robber's Cave

Beschreibung

Zusammenfassung der Ressource

ähnlicher Inhalt

	Erstellt von Ella Middlemiss vor etwa 8 Jahre