The Robbers Cave Experiment – Conflict between groups

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.

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 program at the University of Oklahoma.

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. They all shared a Protestant, two-parent background. The boys were randomly divided by the researchers into two groups, with efforts being made to balance the physical, mental and social talents of the groups.

Neither group was aware of the other’s existence.

At the camp the groups were kept separate from each other and were encouraged to bond as two individual groups through the pursuit of common goals. 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, and stenciled them onto shirts and flags. The now-formed groups came into contact with each other, competing in games and challenges, and competing for control of territory.

During a four-day series of competitions between the groups prejudice began to become apparent between the two groups (both physical and verbal). A series of competitive activities were arranged with a trophy being awarded on the basis of accumulated team score.

The Rattlers’ reaction to the informal announcement of a series of contests was absolute confidence in their victory. They ended up putting their Rattler flag on the pitch.

At this time, several Rattlers made threatening remarks about what they would do if anybody from The Eagles bothered their flag.

Situations were also devised whereby one group gained at the expense of the other. For example, one group was delayed getting to a picnic and when they arrived the other group had eaten their food.

At first, this prejudice was only verbally expressed, such as taunting or name-calling.

As the competition wore on, this expression took a more direct route.

The Eagles burned the Rattler’s flag. Then the next day, the Rattler’s ransacked The Eagle’s cabin, overturned beds, and stole private property.

The groups became so aggressive with each other that the researchers had to physically separate them.

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 favorable terms, and the other out-group in very unfavorable terms.

Keep in mind that the participants in this study were well-adjusted boys, not street gang members.

This study clearly shows that conflict between groups can trigger prejudice and discriminatory behavior.

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.

Sherif and colleagues tried various means of reducing the animosity and low-level violence between the groups. Alternatively forcing the groups to work together to reach common goals, eased prejudice and tension among the groups.

The Robbers Cave experiments showed that superordinate goals (goals so large that it requires more than one group to achieve the goal) reduced conflict significantly more effectively than other strategies.

There were several superordinate goals.

The first superordinate goal to be introduced, concerned a common resource used by both groups. Their water supply, which had suddenly stopped flowing. Upon investigations of the extensive water lines by the Eagles and the Rattlers as separate groups, they discovered that an outlet faucet had a sack stuffed into it.

Almost all the boys gathered around the faucet to try to clear it. Suggestions from members of both groups concerning effective ways to unblock the obstruction were thrown in from all sides simultaneously which led to cooperative efforts clearing the obstacle itself. The joint work on the faucet lasted over 45 minutes. When the water finally came on there was common rejoicing.

The Rattlers did not object to having the Eagles get ahead of them when they all got a drink, as the Eagles did not have canteens with them and were thirstier.

No protests or “Ladies first” type of remarks were made!

There is a lot of evidence that when people compete for scarce resources (e.g. jobs, land etc.) there is a rise in hostility between groups. For example, in times of high unemployment there may be high levels of racism among white people who believe that black people (or asylum seekers) have taken their jobs.

This experiment is very useful, because many groups in conflicts can be prevented from making a huge damage, if there is a determination to stop conflicts.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top