Psychology●●●●●Difficulty 3 of 5

Can a summer camp turn two groups of boys into enemies, and back into friends?

In 1954 researchers disguised as camp staff watched two teams of boys go from strangers to flag-burning rivals, and then tried to make peace.

▶ Start the story

Yes, according to one of the best-known demonstrations in social psychology, though the way it was run is now questioned. In 1954 Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif took 22 boys aged eleven and twelve, who had never met, to a summer camp in Robbers Cave State Park, Oklahoma. The researchers posed as camp staff and quietly watched.

First the boys were kept in two groups that did not know about each other. They hiked, swam and chose names: the Eagles and the Rattlers. Then the researchers brought the teams into contact through a four-day competition with prizes for the winners. The prejudice began as taunting and name-calling, and it escalated to one team burning the other's flag and ransacking its cabin. The groups became too aggressive to control, and the researchers had to separate them. By then, 93 percent of the boys' friendships were within their own team.

The three stages at camp
  1. Step 1: Two separate groups

    Eagles and Rattlers, unaware of each other

  2. Step 2: Competition for prizes

    Name-calling, flag burning, cabin raiding

  3. Step 3: Contact alone

    Made matters worse

  4. Step 4: Superordinate goals

    Cooperating eased the conflict

Making peace was harder than it looks. Simply bringing the teams together made matters worse. What worked, the Sherifs found, was giving both teams superordinate goals, common goals that could only be reached by cooperating. That reduced conflict significantly more effectively than communication or contact alone.

Today the story is told with more caution. The 1954 camp and an earlier, abandoned attempt in 1953 have come under scrutiny for the way the scientists manipulated and provoked the children, and for possible confirmation bias by Sherif.

Quiz me

0/3

  1. 1.What happened when the researchers simply brought the two groups into contact?
  2. 2.Why did the Sherifs conclude individual differences were not needed to explain the conflict?
  3. 3.What does Michael Billig's criticism suggest about the experiment?

Recap

Competition made the boys enemies, contact alone did not fix it, and common goals did, though the study's methods are now questioned.

💡 A trick to remember it · Prizes build walls, shared jobs build doors.

Surprising fact · The 1954 camp followed an abandoned 1953 attempt, and critics say the scientists provoked the children.

Sources (2)

No source, no claim. Every fact in this lesson (14 claims) cites at least one of these.

  1. [1]Realistic conflict theory · Wikipedia
  2. [2]Muzafer Sherif · Wikipedia
More lessons in 🧠 Psychology (3) See all psychology lessons →

One more light on your map.

Get one lesson like this every day, about the things you love. Free, in two or five minutes.

Get the share card for this lesson ↗