Sherif et al - Robber's Cave Study Flashcards

1
Q

What were the aims of Sherif et al - Robber’s Cave?

A
  • To test the idea that strangers will form cohesive groups when introduced to each other and set a shared goal.
  • To look at the idea that if you create an
    in-group/out-group situation and the create conflict between them, prejudice will arise.
  • To see if prejudice would be reduced if the two groups were set superordinate goals that required their cooperation.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Describe the sample of Sherif et al - Robber’s cave

A

22 White, protestant boys from Oklahoma, America

11 - 12 years old

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What were the boys screened for before the Sherif et al study?

A

To make sure there were no problems at home or other factors that might account for individual differences in behaviour and attitude.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Did any of the boys in Sherif et al study know each other?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Were the boys in sherif et al matched? If so what on?

A

Yes

IQ and sporting ability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What happen in the 1st stage of Robber’s cave?

A

The two groups were kept separate for a week to allow group identities to form.
Each team came up with a name (Eagles and Rattlers)
At the end of the week, the groups became aware of the other.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What were the names of the groups in Robber’s cave?

A

The Eagles

The Rattlers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What happened during stage 2 of Robber’s cave?

A

The groups were introduced.
Tournaments were set up such as basketball, tug of war and a swimming gala.
This was done to create frustration towards the other group.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What data was collected during stage 2 of Robber’s cave?

A

Recordings of adjectives used to describe the other team and those used to describe people in their own team.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What happened during stage 3 of Robber’s Cave?

A

The researchers wanted to see if they could reduce hostility between the groups.
At first, they were brought into contact through watching a film together.
Superordinate goals were introduced (eg fixing the water supply)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are superordinate goals?

A

Goals that would require both groups to cooperate in order to complete. They provide benefits to both groups.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What were the results of stage 1 of Robber’s cave?

A

The boys bonded quickly and settled into their group identities. They expressed dislike of the other group when made aware of them.

Eagles - more competitive
rattlers - more derogatory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What were the results of stage 2 of Robber’s cave?

A

Introduction to the other group lead to hostility. Both groups developed negative attitudes towards each other.

Called each other names (sneaks, stinkers, smart alecs) and raided the other group’s hut.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What were the results of stage 3 of Robber’s cave?

A

Social contact (watching the film together) did not reduce hostility - lead to further name-calling

Superordinate goals did reduce hostility - the more they worked together the less abusive they became

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What were the conclusions of Robber’s cave - Sherif et al?

A

Competition is a factor that leads to discrimination between groups, but some discrimination happens without competition.

When groups work together on superordinate goals, prejudice and discrimination can be reduced.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe the generalisability of Robber’s cave? Does it have good generalisability?

A

small sample size - weakness
ethnocentric - weakness
androcentric - weakness

17
Q

Describe the reliability of Robber’s cave? Is it a strength or weakness?

A

Control - strength
Standardised procedure - strength

Tyerman and Spencer - found hostility did not emerge and competition didn’t lead to hostility when they performed a replication with scouts - weakness

18
Q

What can the results of Sherif et al’s study be applied to?

A

Football violence - negative attitude to other teams and their supporters, especially if from the same area

Gang violence - Superordinate goals can be used by police to reduce hostility and violence between gangs

19
Q

Does Sherif et al - Robber’s cave have validity?

A

Ecologically valid - Summer camps are very common for American kids

Task validity - normal summer camp activities such as sports and camping

20
Q

Describe the ethics of Robber’s Cave

A

Parents got informed consent - strength

Boys could leave if they were homesick - strength

Risk of physical or physiological harm due to violence and name-calling - weakness