Sherif Study (Classic) Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What happened in stage 2?

A

-They held a sporting tourdement where they did activites such as baseball, tug of war and counting beans.
-Introduced competition to the boys and started name calling (cheat, stinker, sneak) and physical fights started.

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

What methods were used to observe the boys behaviour?

A

-Observation
-Sociometric analysis
-Experimenting
-Tape recordings

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

Where did the study take place?

A

Robbers cave state park, Oklahoma.

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

What happened in stage 1?

A

-Groups were kept apart for 1 week and di activites such as hiking and camping.
-The groups had given themselves names: eagles and rattlers.

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

What were the three stages of the study?

A

-In-group formation
-Friction phase
-Integration phase.

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

What were the boys grouped from?

A

-IQ
-Sporing ability

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

Where were all the boys from?

A

America, Oklahoma

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

What shared characteristic did the boys have?

A

All prodestants

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

What was Sherif’s sample?

A

22, 11 year old boys

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

What was the aim of the study?

A

To test the development of in-group behaviour to include out-group hostility through competition and how this can be reduced.

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

What did the reasearches introduce to reduce prejudice/hostility?

A

Superordinate goals- where everyone has a collective goal to work on and therefore work together.

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

What happened in stage 3?

A

-Introduced superordinate goals to improve everyone’s relations (e.g: making the camp truck break down so they had to fix it).

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

What were the results between stage 2 and 3 between the rattlers and the eagles?

A

-Rattles increased for 6.4: in stage 2 to 36.4% in stage 3 for out-group friendships.
-Eagles increased from 7.5% in stage 2 to 23.2% in stage 3 for out group friendships.

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

What is the conclusion?

A

-When there was a lot of competition between the two groups there was a lot of physical fighting and name calling due to the researchers creating prejudice.
-Prejudice can be reduced by introducing superordinate goals.

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

What bias is the study high in?

A

Beta bias
-Generalises all individuals but they don’t know females would react this way or be less aggressive as males have a higher level of testosterone which makes someone more aggressive.

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

What is beta bias?

A

The tendency to minimise differences between genders.

17
Q

What was the prizes for the winning group in the tordument?

A

Pen knives - created more competion.

18
Q

Why is the study not very generalisable?

A

-Andocentric sample- can’t represnt women.
-All prodestants so have shared characteristics.
-Ethnocentric sample- all from America/Oklahoma.

19
Q

Why is the study reliable?

A

Quite standerdies as the tasks and enviroment are kept the same for each participant.

20
Q

Why is the study applicable to real life situation?

A

Superordinate goals can be useful in real life to reduce reduce prejudice.

21
Q

Why is the study valid?

A

-Didn’t know they were being observed so there are less demand characteristics, ppts are less likely to change behaviour.
-Triangulation of data- many techniques used so high validity.
-High ecological validity- in a summer camp, naturalistic setting.
High mundane realism- sporting tasks.

22
Q

Why is the study low in validity?

A

-Low mundane realism for counting beans tasks, can influence unnatural behaviour.

23
Q

What is the triangulation of data?

A

Multiple measure to measure the same thing (all different means low validity).

24
Q

What ethical guidelines are not followed?

A

Consent- cannot get informed consent as no one knew about the observation.
Deception- not aware of observation
Protection from harm- has physical fights, name calling can cause psychological harm which is a product of the researcher causing prejudice.

25
Q

What does it mean if a study is low in ethics?

A

Lowers credibility.