Sherif et al (1954/61) Classic Study Flashcards
Background?
Sherif et al’s work involved a series of experiments investigating the behaviour of 10-12 year old boys at summer camps.
Aims?
> To investigate relations between groups - to see whether strangers brought into a group with common goals will form a close group
And to see whether conflict will arise when the groups are brought into contact and competition
Also saw if it was possible to reduce the hostility
How many participants and how old?
22 participants, 11 year old boys from an opportunity sample of 200
How much was the fee that was paid and why was it paid?
$25 so that the parents wouldn’t visit the boys
Background of the participants?
Middle class, psychologically well adjusted, American protestants from families living in Oklahoma
They were matched on…
IQ and sporting ability
How was their behaviour recorded?
Tape recorder, friendship patterns were noted and studied
What were observers trained for?
To not influence the boys’ decisions but to hep once a decision had been reached
What happened in stage 1?
> Unaware of each other
5 days worth of bonding activitied
Status positions and roles recorded
Made aware after a week
What happened in stage 2?
> Tournament set up
>Baseball, bean collecting experiment - had to estimate how many beans collected, points
What happened in stage 3?
> Brought together to communicate
>Joint problem solving activites - superordinate goal e.g blocked water supply, put money together to watch a film
Results of stage 1?
> Gave themelves names - Rattlers/Eagles
Appointed a leader
Expressed dislike for the other group -“They had better not be swimming in our swimming hole”
Wanted competition
Results of stage 2?
> Competition = Hostility
Eagles refused to eat with Rattlers
Name calling, close to physical violence
“Stinkers” “Sissies”
Tended to oversetimate how many beans collected in their own group/ underE other group
When asked who their friends were in stage 2…
93% selected exclusively from the ingroup
Results of stage 3?
> Bringing them together w/out competiton didn’t reduce hostility
“Ladies first” when they watched a movie together
Joint problem solving activties did reduce hostility - shared a bus home, Rattlers spent $5 prize on everyone
Their friendship choices by stage 3 were…
36.4% out group friendship
Conclusions….
> Some hostility as soon as they were aware of each other
Competition increased hostility
Discrimination takes place without competition
Cooperative tasks reduce hostility
People tend to overestimate abilities of their own group
There were controls such as
the careful sampling of the boys and the briefing of observers so they all followed the same procedures allowing cause and effect conclusions to be drawn
Very controlled structure to the experiment, specific stages, detailed info which means
it can be replicated and is therefore reliable
Several data collection methods such as
observation and tape recordings, the findings of each agreed with each other so there is reliability as there is consistency in findings
Application to real life?
Can demonstrate to society that the mere formation of two groups is enough to produce prejudice, offers a way to reduce prejudice and how it is created
Ecological validity is likely to be high because
they weren’t aware that they were taking part in an experiment so the behaviour is likely to be natural and an accurate reflection of their behaviour in similar settings
Unethical in the sense that there was no…
informed consent obtained as the boys weren’t aware they were taking part, decpetion too, weren’t aware of their right to withdraw, debriefing not mentioned
Limited sample, all boys, American, protestant, middle class…
some of these factors may have contributed to the findings meaning the same results may not be true of others outside the sample; girls or other cultures for eg
Interviews with some of the boys after the experiment suggest that they were aware of audio recording in the dining hall and staff taking notes, also
some researchers didn’t leave the boys to be as independent as they should have, makes the results questionnable
May be gender biased as
only boys used
Why could it be an issue that all the boys were athletic?
They could have been naturally competitive which could have created a degree of conflict
How did they reduce the influence of individual differences?
They were matched and there was a specific criteria - all boys, same age, similar IQ, social class and religion
