Sherif et al

Question 1

What was the aim of the study?

Answer 1

• To find out what factors make two groups develop hostile relationships and then to see how this hostility can be reduced.

Question 2

What is the IV of the study?

Answer 2

• The IV is the stage of the experiment: (1) ingroup formation, (2) friction phase and (3) integration phase

Question 3

What design is the study?

Answer 3

• Repeated Measures Design

Question 4

What is the DV of the study?

Answer 4

• Intergroup behaviour was measured by observing the boys behaviour and friendship patterns and tape recording their conversations and recording the phrases they used
• also the boys filled out questionnaires on their attitudes to their own group and the other group.

Question 5

What was the sample like?

Answer 5

• 24 participants (11 year old boys)
• selected by opportunity sample
• They were split into two evenly matched groups of boys ‘Rattlers’ and ‘Eagles’.
• Two boys left later from Eagles due to home sickeness
• Sample reduced to 22

Question 6

What was the procedure?

Answer 6

• Arrived on separate buses, settled into their cabins on two sites
• unaware of the other group
• Junior camp counselors and senior ones (participant observers) stayed 12 hrs with the boys - not allowed to influence the boys

Question 7

What was the ingroup formation phase?

Answer 7

• lasted a week each
• Each group had a task to accomplish (e.g. treasure hunts)
• Boys gave their group names and discovered the existence of the other group
• They requested for a baseball game with the other group.

Question 8

What was the friction phase?

Answer 8

• Involved in a tournament between two groups (sports such as baseball, tug-of-war, scavenger)
• also experimental tests like bean counting
• Trophies and prizes were promised for the winners

Question 9

What was the Integration phase?

Answer 9

• Sherif tried to bring the two groups together by allowing them to have dinner together, watch films together.
• When this failed, he blocked the water pipe to the camp, the boys had to work together to find the missing portion.
• Other tasks involved choosing films to watch, pulling a ‘broken truck’, pitching tents with missing parts.

Question 10

What were the Results?

Answer 10

• Boys required little encouragement to be competitive
  Outgroup friendships at the end of the friction phase
• Rattlers - 6.4%
• Eagles - 7.7%
  Outgroup friendships at the end of the Integration phase
• Rattlers - 36.4%
• Eagles - 23.3%

Question 11

What were the conclusions?

Answer 11

• Proving his hypothesis about In group behaviour - especially RCT
• The groups formed quick with hierarchies and leaders
• Competitiveness situations - In group solidarity increases as does out group hostility
• Mere presence by itself doesn’t reduce out group hostility
• Friction is reduced when the two groups are forced to cooperate

Question 12

How did the groups form identity?

Answer 12

• By having a camp flag

Question 13

What percentage has friendships had their own group by the end of stage 2?

Answer 13

• 93%