The Robbers Cave experiment demonstrated that an attempt to simply bring hostile groups together is not enough to reduce intergroup prejudice. Rather, this experiment confirmed that
groups must cooperate and have common goals to truly build peace. Thus, although contact is vital to reducing tensions between groups, interdependence is essential for establishing lasting intergroup harmony.
This experiment is a classic in social psychology and is important because it has implications for reducing conflict between real social groups. In addition, this study has implications for a number of prominent social psychological theories, including realistic conflict theory and social identity theory.
Robbers Cave Experiment Background
The purpose of this study was to create conflict and hostility between groups, and then employ interventions designed to reduce it. Researchers accomplished this goal by sending two groups of adolescent boys to a remote location where both the creation and resolution of intergroup conflict could be manipulated. Twenty-two 11-year-old boys were transported to a summer camp located in Oklahoma’s Robbers Cave State Park (hence the name by which this experiment has come to be known). All the boys were similar on important demographic features, with each exhibiting satisfactory academic performance and coming from stable, middle-class families. In addition, the boys did not know one another and had no idea that they were about to participate in a psychology experiment. Researchers divided the boys into two equal-sized groups that were taken to opposite sides of the camp. These groups were initially unaware of each other’s existence, but this soon changed.
The study took place in three separate stages that were approximately 1 week apart: (1) group formation, (2) intergroup competition, and (3) intergroup cooperation...
Robbers Cave Experiment Implications and Importance
The Robbers Cave experiment has had an enormous impact on the field of social psychology.
First, this study has implications for the contact hypothesis of prejudice reduction, which, in its simplest form, posits that contact between members of different groups improves how well groups get along. This experiment illustrates how contact alone is not enough to restore intergroup harmony. Even after the competition between the boys ended, the hostility did not disappear during future contact. Competition seemingly became incorporated into the groups’ identities. The hostility did not finally calm down until the context changed and cooperation between groups was required. Thus, beyond mere contact, groups also need to be interdependent and have common goals.
Second, this study validated the claims of realistic conflict theory, which specifies that prejudice and discrimination result when groups are placed in competition for valuable resources. The boys in this experiment clearly demonstrated that competition breeds intergroup hostility. More importantly, however, this study highlights the significance of the social context in the development of prejudice and discrimination. The boys selected to participate in this study were well-adjusted and came from stable, middle-class families. Thus, it is unlikely that individual characteristics such as socioeconomic status and family life were responsible for the observed effects because these factors were held constant. Rather, the context of intergroup relations (i.e., competition) led to the observed conflict and hostility. This suggests that prejudice is largely a product of social situations and that individual pathology is not necessary to produce outgroup hatred. Therefore, the results of this experiment speak to a number of social psychological theories that emphasize the importance of the social context in understanding group prejudice, such as social identity theory and self-categorization theory.
Key Takeaways of The Robbers Cave Study
Muzafer Sherif argued that intergroup conflict (i.e., conflict between groups) occurs when two groups are in competition for limited resources. This theory is supported by evidence from a famous study investigating group conflict:
- The Robbers Cave Experiment (Sherif, 1954, 1958, 1961).In the Robbers Cave field experiment, 22 white, 11-year-old boys were sent
to a special remote summer camp in Oklahoma, Robbers Cave State Park.
- The boys developed an attachment to their groups throughout the first week of the camp by doing various activities together like hiking, swimming, etc.
- The boys chose names for their groups, The Eagles and The Rattlers.
- During a four-day series of competitions between the groups prejudice began to become apparent between the two groups (both physical and verbal).
- During the subsequent two-day cooling off period, the boys listed features of the two groups. The boys tended to characterize their own in-group in very favourable terms, and the other out-group in very unfavourable terms.
- Sherif then attempted to reduce the prejudice, or inter-group conflict, shown by each group. However, simply increasing the contact of the two groups only made the situation worse.
- Alternatively forcing the groups to work together to reach common goals, eased prejudice and tension among the groups.
- This experiment confirmed Sherif's realistic conflict theory (also called realistic group conflict theory), the idea that group conflict can result from competition over resources.
- In the mid-1950's Muzafer Sherif and others carried out the Robbers Cave experiment on intergroup conflict and co-operation as a part of research programme at the University of Oklahoma.
The hypotheses tested were:
- When individuals who don't know each other are brought together to interact in group activities in order to achieve common goals, they will produce a group structure with hierarchical statuses and roles within it.
- When two in-groups, once formed, are brought into functional relationship under conditions of competition and group frustration, attitudes and appropriate hostile actions in relation to the out-group and its members will arise; these will be standardised and shared in varying degrees by group members.
Robbers Cave Experiment / Realistic Conflict Theory - Simply Psychology
https://www.simplypsychology.org/robbers-cave.html
Contact Hypothesis
In psychology and other social sciences, the contact hypothesis suggests that intergroup contact under appropriate conditions can effectively reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members. Following WWII and the desegregation of the military and other public institutions, policymakers and social scientists had turned an eye towards the policy implications of interracial contact. Of them, social psychologist Gordon Allport united early research in this vein under intergroup contact theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_hypothesis
The Robbers Cave experiment also allows us to evaluate social psychology’s contact hypothesis. According to the contact hypothesis, prejudice and group conflict can be reduced if members of the two groups spend time with one another, and that contact between groups is especially likely to reduce conflict if certain conditions are met. In the Robbers Cave study, the researchers found that simply bringing the groups together for fun activities was not enough to reduce conflict. However, conflict was successfully reduced when the groups worked together on common goals—and, according to the contact hypothesis, having common goals is one of the conditions that makes it more likely that conflict between the groups will be reduced. In other words, the Robbers Cave study suggests it’s not always enough for groups in conflict to spend time together: instead, the key may be to find a way for the two groups to work together.
What Was the Robbers Cave Experiment in Psychology?
https://www.thoughtco.com/robbers-cave-experiment-4774987
Summary
While the Robbers Cave experiment is not without criticism, it did have an important influence on our understanding of intergroup conflict. The results supported Sherif’s Realistic Conflict Theory, which suggested that intergroup conflicts arise from competition for resources and opposing goals. The study also reveals how such conflicts contribute to things like prejudice and stereotyping.
The study also hints that one of the best ways to overcome such conflicts is to focus on getting people to work together toward a shared goal. Through this type of socialization, out-group conflicts, prejudice, and discrimination can be effectively reduced.
The Robbers Cave Experiment: Realistic Conflict Theory
https://www.explorepsychology.com/robbers-cave-experiment/
Mason then proceeds to use the outcome of this experiment as a basis for concluding that human beings have;
a deep-seated, psychological motive [to sort into groups]. Once we are in a group, we think our group is the best and we think that the other groups are less good. And if we're in competition with those groups, we begin to hate them.
One consequence of this conclusion becomes that the aggressive efforts being made by factions to encourage polarization are understood as being in the context of reinforcing the putatively natural human tendency to sort into antagonistically competitive groups.
https://tertulia-moderna.blogspot.com/2020/11/what-does-robbers-cave-experiment.html
The Robber’s Cave study is on a par with Stanley Milgrim’s ‘Obedience Experiments’ and Philip Zimbardo’s infamous prison study at Stanford University (Craig Haney, Curtis Bank & Philip Zimbardo, 1973), both for its sheer audaciousness and what it tells us about situational pressures to produce normative influence.
Muzafer Sherif had been a growing force in the development of Social Psychology ever since his ‘autokinetic effect’ experiments in 1935 had developed the concept of conformity that would come to be known as informational influence. In fact, Sherif could be considered one of the founders of Social Psychology. His work was also highly thought of by interactionist sociologists, becoming the first psychologist to receive the Cooley-Mead Award for contributions to Social Psychology from the American Sociological Association.
By the end of the 1940s his interest in understanding social processes, particularly social norms and social conflict had led him to conceive of developing a field experiment in which pubescent boys would be nurtured into forming 2 distinctive teams with strong group identities to see how conflict between the 2 groups could be exacerbated and then reduced. This would be the basis of the famous and challenging Robber’s Cave study of 1954 (Muzafer Sherif et al, 1961).
https://www.integratedsociopsychology.net/society/prejudice-discrimination/robbers-cave/
Realistic Conflict Theory is a “Realist” theory because it proposes that conflict between groups isn’t based on something irrational but on an actual need for resources. It’s a “conflict” theory because it rejects the idea (common in the ‘60s) that groups could share and cooperate.
https://www.psychologywizard.net/realistic-conflict-theory-ao1-ao2-ao3.html
https://www.psychologywizard.net/sherif-ao1.html
Realistic Conflict Theory
Realistic conflict theory (RCT), also known as realistic group conflict theory (RGCT), is a social psychological model of intergroup conflict. The theory explains how intergroup hostility can arise as a result of conflicting goals and competition over limited resources, and it also offers an explanation for the feelings of prejudice and discrimination toward the outgroup that accompany the intergroup hostility. Groups may be in competition for a real or perceived scarcity of resources such as money, political power, military protection, or social status.
Feelings of resentment can arise in the situation that the groups see the competition over resources as having a zero-sums fate, in which only one group is the winner (obtained the needed or wanted resources) and the other loses (unable to obtain the limited resource due to the "winning" group achieving the limited resource first). The length and severity of the conflict is based upon the perceived value and shortage of the given resource. According to RCT, positive relations can only be restored if superordinate goals are in place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realistic_conflict_theory
Realistic Group Conflict Theory (RGCT)
RGCT is a well-established theory with robust research support from both laboratory and field studies. It is used to understand many of the local and global intergroup conflicts that besiege the world. That a solution to end conflict is incorporated within this theory makes it one of the most applicable and compelling social psychological theories existing today.
This theory emerged in the 1960s to describe how perceived competition for limited resources can lead to hostility between groups. Unlike theories that use psychological factors such as personality or value differences to explain conflict and prejudice, RGCT focuses on situational forces outside the self. When valuable resources are perceived to be abundant, then groups cooperate and exist in harmony. However, if valuable resources are perceived as scarce (regardless of whether they truly are), then these groups enter into competition and antagonism ensues between them. The resources in question can be physical (such as land, food, or water) or psychological (such as status, prestige, or power).
One group need only believe that competition exists for hostile feelings and discriminatory behavior to follow. For example, if ethnic group A believes that members of ethnic group B pose a threat to them by “stealing jobs,” then regardless of whether this is true, ethnic group A will feel resentment and hostility. The extent to which ethnic group A holds any power to follow through on its hostile feelings determines if unfair or discriminatory behavior toward ethnic group B will occur. At the very least, negative stereotypes about the other group will be created and mistrust and avoidance will result. How long and how severe the conflict becomes is determined by the perceived value and scarcity of the resource in question.
RGCT is unique because it does not discuss any personal features of the individuals engaged in the conflict. Other psychological theories use personality factors (such as authoritarianism) or ideologies (such as social dominance orientation) to explain why these hostilities exist. In RGCT, if individuals in a group believe that the two groups share a zero-sums fate, meaning that the other group’s success feels like a failure or loss for one’s own group, then no matter what outside group members say or do, feelings of resentment and discriminatory behavior will result. As the conflict unfolds, the members of each group will close ranks with their fellow members and will come to believe that their fate is connected with each other.
Realistic Group Conflict Theory Classic Study
Muzafer Sherif’s Robbers Cave experiment is a demonstration of this theory. Sherif is credited as one of the most important social psychologists of his time. With his colleagues, he set up a 2-week experiment involving White, middle-class, 12-year-old boys at a summer camp. At first, the boys interacted only with their own group members because Sherif wanted them to develop a sense of group identity. The boys did develop a group identity and called themselves the Eagles or the Rattlers. In the second phase of the study, the boys were introduced to the other group and were required to engage in a series of competitive activities. Rewards and prizes were handed out to the winning team. Sherif and his colleagues purposely set up these games and rewards so that the boys would have reason to compete intensely. During these fierce competitions, both groups became suspicious of and hostile toward one another. As tensions increased, the boys demonstrated allegiance to their group by discouraging one another from establishing friendships across group lines. No one wanted to be seen as a traitor, so the boys stuck to their own groups. Hostility increased to the point that physical fights and acts of vandalism broke out. Despite direct interventions by adults, the two groups could not seem to reconcile.
Unity was restored only when Sherif and colleagues created situations requiring both groups of boys to depend on each other to achieve important goals equally valued by both groups. In other words, harmony was restored when both groups were equally invested in achieving a goal that required everyone’s help and cooperation. For example, Sherif set up a situation in which a truck carrying their food supply broke down and the help of all the boys was needed to bring the food to camp. After completing a series of such tasks requiring interaction and everyone’s involvement, positive behavior toward the other group members increased. The boys began to behave more like individuals rather than group members and formed friendships across group lines. Psychologically, they began as two distinct groups, but when the perception of threat was replaced by cooperation and interdependence, the groups reestablished themselves as one large group. Therefore, the group distinctions made between Eagles and Rattlers disappeared and everyone felt as if they belonged to the same group.
A real-life Lord of the Flies: the troubling legacy of the Robbers Cave
experiment
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/apr/16/a-real-life-lord-of-the-flies-the-troubling-legacy-of-the-robbers-cave-experiment
How to Prevent Interoffice Competition from Ruining Your Culture
https://gothamculture.com/2016/09/08/prevent-interoffice-competition-ruining-culture/
Visiting Robbers Cave: A History of Psychology Roadtrip
https://ahp.apps01.yorku.ca/2013/07/visiting-robbers-cave-a-history-of-psychology-roadtrip/
https://thislandpress.com/2012/10/18/robbers-cave-revisited/
The View From the Boys - Gina Perry looks at how Sherif’s participants saw
his studies
https://www.bps.org.uk/volume-27/edition-11/view-boys
Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment
Muzafer Sherif, O. J. Harvey, B. Jack White, William R. Hood, Carolyn W.
Sherif (1954/1961) [p. 69] CHAPTER 4
https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Sherif/chap4.htm
