Social Psychology PSY-328
msdarlingdru1
Replytopowerpoint2Dr.H.pptx
Sherif's Robbers Cave Experiment Classic Study Group Project
Amanda Brady, Geneva Harsey, Danielle Hawkins, & Denise Jones
Introduction Video
This video is a brief introduction to the Sherif’s Robbers Cave Experiment. (CCHP UA, 2015)
Geneva: I thought this video would be best to be a short introduction that briefly explains the experiment.
2
Two Halves…
Muzafer Sherif
He was born in a little town called Ödemiş in Turkey in 1905
He witnessed many horrific events throughout his life such as the Libyan War and the rise of Nazi Germany
He attended Harvard for his MA and was guided by Gordan Allport
He transferred to Colombia for his PhD where he studied under Gardner Murphy
Died in Alaska in 1988
(Kayaoğlu, Batur, & Aslıtürk, 2014)
Carolyn Wood
She was born in 1922 in rural Loogootee, Indiana
She was extremely determined and worked her way through school
She received her MA within a year from the University of Iowa under the funding of Dr. Wendell Johnson
Was assigned to be Research Associate from 1959-1965
Was a strong advocate for women’s studies in psychology
Died on July 23, 1982
(Shaffer & Shields, 1984)
Make a Whole
Carolyn Woods and Muzafer Sherif married in 1945
Both Wrote Attitudes and Attitude Change, which was considered a “citation classic” (p. 177)
Had three daughters by 1955
Wrote Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation in 1961 about their famous Robbers Cave Experiment
Muzafer consistently asked Carolyn to be coauthor on works they had completed together, with little success
Both taught together at Pennsylvania State University until Carolyn’s death
(Shaffer & Shields, 1984)
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA-NC
Reason for the Experiment
The Sherifs decided to complete their experiment by using twenty-one 11 year-old boys to create conflict and hostility among the two groups. He used boys that came from middles class families. All of them were similar, all boys were good in academic standing, and the boys did not know each other. The reason for the experiment was for the children to build peace, so the Sherifs used conflict and hostility in these three stages. (iResearch.Net, 2019)
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA-NC
The Experiment
The Robbers Cave experiment took place in three stages, and each stage was one week apart.
The first stage was called Group Formation and it was to build encouragement, so they played games together.
The second stage was Intergroup Completion. This was to build competition. Whoever won got rewarded. This created the conflict among the two groups. The children began fight and show aggression among the winning and losing teams.
The final stage was Intergroup Cooperation. It was designed to reduce the hostility and aggression that was built up between the groups. The Sherifs used tactics like watching movies, sharing food, and doing things together; however, that did not work, so he used another tactic like helping other people (those who needed help) so they could work as a team, and that seemed to work.
(iResearch.Net, 2019)
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY
Complications with the Experiment
The experiment contained a biased sample: it included white 12-year-old boys. No other races, genders, or ages were included in the experiment. Due to the biased sample, it will be hard to generalize these results to everyone.
There were also ethical issues with the experiment:
The participants were deceived about the purpose of the experiment.
The participants were also not protected from physical or psychological harm.
The study also didn’t reflect real life events. The competition and the groups were artificial.
This however doesn’t mean the entire experiment was invalid, but these are some commonly expressed critiques about the experiment.
(McLeod, 2008)
Discussion
This experiment was meant to evaluate how easily conflict can form between groups who are competing for the same thing. While it is true that conflict is easily formed between groups in society, the experiment is not as spontaneous as real life. It was manipulated and the sample biased. The young men used in the experiment had nearly everything in common with each other. This study helped to prove how easily groups can form and how hard it can be for them to dissipate. When this experiment is reviewed today, there is more focus placed on how nasty groups of people can become in such a relatively short amount of time. The entire study shouldn’t be disregarded simply because the sample isn’t representative of society. The bias does hurt the ability for the study’s results to be generalized to society of course.
Feedback
Report an inappropriate content
Please select one of the options below.
Thanks for your feedback.
Please select the problem with the content.
Not Relevant
Offensive
Adult
Child Sexual Abuse
Try Visual Search
Search with a picture instead of text
Drag one or more images here orbrowse
Drop images here
OR
Paste image or URL
Take photo
Click a sample image to try it
The photos you provided may be used to improve Bing image processing services.
To use Visual Search, enable the camera in this browser
Edit messageDone
This text uses language we can’t share.
Sorry, you can’t say Microsoft or Bing here.
Share
Gmail
Messenger
Get a linkLink copied to clipboard
Outlook
Skype
OneNote
Cancel
Bibliography
Pictures Retrieved From:
iResearch.Net. (2019). Robber's Cave Experiment . Retrieved from Psychology:
All others were used under Creative Commons.
Bibliography
CCHP UA. (2015, September 25). 5 Minute History Lesson, Episode 3: Robbers Cave. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PRuxMprSDQ
iResearch.Net. (2019). Robber's Cave Experiment . Retrieved from Psychology: http://psychology.iresearchnet.com/social
psychology/social-psychology-experiments/robbers-cave-experiment/
Kayaoğlu, A., Batur, S., & Aslıtürk, E. (2014, November). The unknown Muzafer Sherif. Retrieved from Academia :
https://www.academia.edu/17458579/The_Unknown_Muzafer_Sherif
Shaffer, L. S., & Shields, S. A. (1984). Carolyn Wood Sherif (1922-1982). American Psychologist, 39(2), 176-178. doi: https://doi
org.saintleo.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.2.176
