Sherif et al (1954/1961)

Aim

First phase of study

Judging social evaluations

Procedure continues

Procedure

Conclusions

Final phase

Revelations

Sample

Happy endings

22 middle class, Protestant, 11 year old boys from Oklahoma. All socially and emotionally well adjusted. Didn't know each other prior

To see whether strangers brought together into a group with common goals will form a close group and to see if two such groups brought into competition will be hostile.

Observed the formation of group structure. They were housed in a bunkhouse and were able to choose their 'buddies'

After a few days, they seperated the kids into 2 groups, breaking up buddies

The boys were given a range of activities

Campout and Hikes

Task were divided and each group developed its own jargon, jokes, secrets and methods to perform task

They maintained social control through ostracism and ridicule

Each group selected a group name and symbol for t-shirts

Eagles

Rattlers

To test what the boys thought of each other, the researchers invented a game of target practice. The judgement of accuracy was made by the peers.

However the board was secretly wired to give an objective judgement of accuracy

Boys overestimated the efforts of highly-regarded boys and underestimated lowly-regarded boys.

In the second phase, the researchers introduced conflict through games

Tournament started in good spirits but soon became hostile

Calling names: 'stinker', 'sneak' and 'cheat'.

The boys refused contact with opposing group and their 'buddies

They gave negative rating to other group, when asked to give ratings to boys in other group

Soon after, name-calling, scuffles and 'raids

Stealing the other teams flag and setting fire to it

The researchers realised they have confirmed their hypothesis surprisingly easily, so a further hypothesis is developed.

This was "working in a common endeavour should promote harmony".

Established subordinate goal

Established natural and urgent situations

Interrupting water supply

Truck breakdown

By the end of the camp, boys were actively seeking opportunities to mingle together

The boys also made less negative rating of the opposite groups

People over-estimate the abilities of ingroup members

Contact between two groups is not enough to reduce hostility

Working together towards a common goal reduces tension

Leader-follower relationships develop as a result of having to solve problems through combined action