Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Classic Study: Sherif et al (1954): Robber's Cave Experiment …
Classic Study
: Sherif et al (1954): Robber's Cave Experiment
Aim
To study the
origins of prejudice
arising from the
formation of social groups
by looking at social organisation and effects of group practices
To make
one group of young boys frustrated because of the other group
, to see if
negative attitudes
developed and how to
reduce
it
Sample
22 young boys aged 11
Didn't know each other
prior to the study
All from
Protestant Oklahoma families
Procedure
Before it began, they were matched and placed into two groups based on IQ test results, ratings from teachers about their behaviour and sporting ability
A nominal fee was charged for the children to attend the camp
Not informed they were being used for research, to obtain 'true' results
Data Collection
Observation
Participant observers allocated to each group for 12 hours a day
, they were trained not to influence the boys' decisions but to help them once a decision was made. They
measured use of derogatory terms
and used observation and rating of stereotyping.
Socio-metric analysis
Issues such as
friendship patterns
were noted and studied.
Tape recordings
-
Words and phrases
used to describe their own group were studied
-
Adjectives and phrases were recorded
to see if they were derogatory and behaviour was observed.
Experimental
Boys had to collect beans and estimate how many each person got. They tended to
overestimate the amount from their own group
and
underestimate the amount of from the other group
(the number was actually the same).
Stage 1: In-group formation
Groups were kept apart for one week to help the formation of groups norms and relations
Had to work as a group to achieve common goals involving cooperation
Data gathered by observation, including ratings of emerging relationships, socio-metric measures and experimental judgments
Status positions and roles were also monitored
Stage 2: Inter-group relations (friction phase)
After 1 week, each group was told about one another and a tournament was set up with competitive activities
Points and rewards could be earned for the groups
After hearing about one another, they became hostile and wanted to play each other in a baseball tournament
Stage 3: Inter-group relations (integration)
Researchers wanted to achieve harmony between the groups by introducing
super-ordinate goals (groups would have to work together to achieve the goals)
They introduced tasks that simply brought the groups together so they could communicate when they didn't work to reduce hostility
The super-ordinate goals included:
Fixing a water tank and pump when water supply was threatened, they were informed vandals had damaged it in the past (the staff turned off the valve and placed boulders on it)
Watching a movie together that both groups had to chip in to pay for
An organised trip to Cedar Lake, where the truck 'developed' a problem, causing both groups to work together to start it again
Results
Stage 1
Boys had set group names:
Rattlers and Eagles
-
Group leader + all other status positions were arranged in the first week
Differences in the groups were due to location of the cabins as groups developed similarly
The Rattlers
often talked about The Eagles
The
Eagles did not refer to the Rattlers
so often, but they
wanted to play competitive games
with them
-
Knowing the other group existed was enough for hostility to develop
Stage 2
Wanted to play baseball as a
group competition
The Rattlers were
excited and discussed issues such as protecting their flag
The Eagles
weren't as excited,
but
made comments
such as 'we will beat them'
The Eagle selected as the
baseball captain became the group leader for all Eagles in stage 2
, even though he was not the group leader in Stage 1
Evidence of
name calling
when the groups met (what they said, who they were friends with and practical issues such as burning of a flag)
-
Clear negative attitudes towards the out-group members
Stage 3
Hostility remained at the beginning
, each group remained separated when they watched the movie
Eventually agreed to go halves for the movie even though one group had fewer members, but they still
cooperated to arrive at one final decision
that they were happy with
Worked together on
super-ordinate goals
as they tried fixing the water pump and celebrated together when they succeeded
Use of rope to pull the truck out which needed all the boys to work as one group
Friendships differed between stage 2 and 3
, more
out-group members were chosen as friends
by the end of stage 3
(Rattlers = 6.4% at the end of stage 2 and 36.4% at the end of stage 3)
(Eagles = 7.5% at the end of stage 2 and 23.3% at the end of stage 3)
Evidence that friction was reduced by the super-ordinate goals
Conclusions
Groups developed
social hierarchies
and shared group norms, even though these were
not stable throughout the study
When the groups were placed in competition, i
n-group solidarity and inter-group increased
as boys overestimated the abilities of their own group whilst minimising abilities of out-group members
Sherif argued that mere contact between the groups was not enough reduce hostility, but solved problems when working together
Friction was eventually reduced
although
more than one super-ordinate goal was needed to achieve co-operation between the groups
Evaluation
Weaknesses
Carol and Melvin Ember (1992) observed that in tribal societies, intergroup hostility increases when social or natural conditions mean competition for resources are necessary
During periods of f
amine or natural disasters, warfare was likely to ensue access to available scarce resources
Similar studies suggested that
a low population and abundant land means there is less hostility
, whereas a
large population with little land means conflict and violence arise
This correlative evidence doesn't mean we can establish competition is responsible for prejudice as
other factors can be involved
Strengths
High level of
control and careful planning
at each stage
Staff were participant observers in the study so that the
boys were unaware their behaviour was being monitored
, and staff were only permitted to intervene when they was a risk to safety. This was to
ensure the staff didn't direct the boys' behaviour
High ecological validity, behaviour observed between the boys was relatively naturally occurring
Location
Took place in a
Boy Scouts America camp at Robbers Cave State Park
, Oklahoma, which was
isolated
and suitably laid out, allowing researchers to
keep the groups apart or working together