Sherif et al 1954

Question 1

background

Answer 1

• intergroup study looking at what causes groups to change their behaviours when they come into contact with each other
• explores Sherif’s theory of realistic conflict, looking at what happens when groups are forced to co-operate.

Question 2

aim

Answer 2

• to find out what factors make two groups develop hostile relationships, and how hostility is reduced
• to see if two groups of boys can be manipulated into conflict through competition and then conflict resolution by working together

Question 3

iv

Answer 3

• the iv was the stage of the experiment
  1. ingroup formation
  2. friction phase
  3. integration phase
• repeated measures design

Question 4

dv

Answer 4

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

Question 5

sample

Answer 5

• 24 ppts who were selected by opportunity sampling
• split into two evenly-matched groups of boys (11 years old)
• rattlers and eagles
• two boys left later (eagles) due to homesickness, reducing sample to 22

Question 6

procedure - beginning

Answer 6

• the boys arrived on separate bus and settled into two diff. cabins
• unaware of other group
• junior camp counsellors supervised activities, senior camp counsellors (ppt observers) stayed with boys for 12 hours per day
• Sherif did not want his observers to influence the boys in anyway.

Question 7

procedure - phase 1

Answer 7

• in-group formation lasted a week
• each group had tasks to accomplish (eg treasure hunt)
• during this time the boys gave their group names and discovered the existence of the other group
• they immediately requested a baseball game against the other group

Question 8

procedure - phase 2

Answer 8

• the friction phase involved a tournament between the two groups
• e.g. sports, scavenger hunts but also experimental tests (bean counting competition)
• a trophy was promised for winners alongside other prizes like knives and medals

Question 9

procedure - phase 3

Answer 9

• in the integration phase Sherif tried to bring the two groups together
• attempted mere contact (eating together etc) but this failed
• he took a different approach, blocking the water pipe to the camp which forced the boys to work together to find the broken portion of pipe.

Question 10

results - in-group formation

Answer 10

• sherif found that the boys required little encouragement to be competitive, as soon as they found out about the other group they wanted a baseball match

Question 11

results - friction phase

Answer 11

• in the friction phase, the groups met for baseball and began name calling immediately
• the eagles burnt the rattlers flag, rattlers retaliated by doing the same
• out group friendships at the end of friction phase = rattlers (6.4%) eagles (7.7%)

Question 12

results - integration phase

Answer 12

• in the integration phase, the shared meals turned into food fights
• the fixing of pipe produced co-operation but another fight followed
• each shared task led to reduced hostility, by the end rattlers shared the $5 they had to buy drinks for everyone
• outgroup friendships at the end of integration phase = rattlers (36.4%), eagles (23.2%)

Question 13

conclusions

Answer 13

• proves hypothesis of in-group behaviour - realistic conflict theory
• the groups formed quickly with hierarchies without encouragement from adults
• mere presence itself doesn’t reduce outgroup hostilities - need for cooperation