sherif et al

Question 1

aim

Answer 1

to see how in-group behaviour and hostility towards an out-group developed due to the effects of competition and how friction could be reduced.

Question 2

sample

Answer 2

• 2 groups of 12 year old boys
• all white, middle class, protestant, with a 2 parent background
• matched on IQ and sporting ability
• screened to eliminate problems at home and difficulties with attitude

Question 3

procedure

Answer 3

1. In group formation
   - groups kept separate
   - encouraged to bond by activities like hiking and swimming
   - formed group names “Rattler’s” and “Eagles”
   - when made aware of each others presence Rattlers said things like “they better not be swimming in our swimming hole”
2. Competition stage
   - to cause friction between 2 groups
   - played competitive games like tug of war
   - winning team won a trophy
3. Integration phase
   - to reduce friction between 2 groups
   - promote unity
   - made to do tasks that had a common goal and required cooperation from both groups (superordinate goals)
   - e.g. water shortage problem and broken down camp truck

Question 4

results

Answer 4

1. at the end of the friction phase out-group friendship choices for the Eagles was 7.5% and 6.4% for the Rattlers
2. the boys called their own in-groups favourable terms but the out-group things like “sissies” and “stinkers”.
3. at the end of the integration phase out-group friendship choices for the Eagles were 23.2% and 36.4% for the Rattlers

Question 5

conclusions

Answer 5

1. competition between 2 groups can cause conflict which leads to prejudice and discrimination
2. more contact does not reduce friction and prejudice
3. superordinate goals reduce friction