Classic study: Sherif et al. (1954/1961)

Question 1

Evaluate Sherif

3

Answer 1

^Int validity. Researchers observed, interviewed potential ppt until found final 22, allocated across 2 groups = even match of personalities/skill. >Ppt variables

> Ext reliability. Spencer et al. failed to replicate findings found, when studying sea scout troop, ingroup solidarity in each patrol didn’t ^ and diff patrols interacted well as a troop, not hostile during comp

Superordinate goals = >prejudice. Bridgeman used super goals - jigsaw classroom (intervention tackle racial prejudice). Students took responsibility for diff parts of project. ^Academic performance for black minority students, reach potential

Question 2

What was Sherif’s aim?

1

Answer 2

• How comp of group goals leads to prejudiced attitudes to outgroup, ^ingroup solidarity/cooperation

Question 3

What was Sherif’s procedure?

6

Answer 3

• 22 middle-class protestant, boys from Oklahoma
• 2 groups (equal ability)
• Stage 1 (group formation) - non-comp activities e.g. tent pitching, canoeing
• Stage 2 (friction) - learned of others existence created tourney w prizes (only 1 winner) e.g. tug of war
• Stage 3 (>friction) - ^social contact e.g. watch movie together
• Superordinate goals introduced e.g. mending broken water supply/start broken down truck

Question 4

What did Sherif find?

3

Answer 4

• Stage 1: leaders/name of groups established, social norms diff e.g. rattlers = tough, E = not
• Stage 2: ^hostility quick e.g. raided each others cabin, fights
• Stage 3 - After getting truck going boys made dinner together, >hostility, ^outgroup friendships

Question 5

What did Sherif conclude?

2

Answer 5

• Intergroup comp = in favouritism/solidarity, outhostility

- Superordinate goals = >prejudice effectively