Social studies (Milgram, Sherif and Reicher and Haslam)

Question 1

What is the name and date of the social classic study?

Answer 1

Sherif et al (1954)

Question 2

What is the aim of the social classic study?

Answer 2

To investigate inter group relations over a period of time when various induced situations were introduced
How could conflict be resolved.

Question 3

Who were the participants in the social classic study? What participant design was used?

Answer 3

22 boys of 11-years old who were described as ‘normally adjusted’ from middle class Protestant families from Oklahoma City. The boys were not acquainted with each other. Opportunity sample.

Question 4

Describe the procedure of stage one of the social classic study.

Answer 4

First 5-6 days. The two groups are kept separate from each other and each group took part in activities designed to encourage in-group formation. Researchers observed the verbal and non-verbal communication and the relationships that emerged.

Question 5

Describe the procedure of stage two of the social classic study.

Answer 5

Day 6-12. Boys were brought in to contact with each other during competitions as part of a camp tournament. Each group member had to contribute and they were all subjected to situations that they would find frustrating and believed were caused by the other group.

Question 6

Describe the procedure of stage three of the social classic study.

Answer 6

Final 6-7 days. Took part in conflict resolution through the introduction of common goals to ensure cooperation

1) fixing the water tank
2) a joint camp over where they had to work together for food and sleeping gear
3) starting the broken down bus

Question 7

What were the results of the social classic study?

Answer 7

Stage 1: boys formed their own sets of group norms and rules. They created names for their groups (Eagles and Rattlers) and developed an ‘us’ and ‘them’ attitude.
Stage 2: boys began to fight, name call and the Eagles burned the Rattlers’ flag. They called them stinkers, braggers and sissies. 93% of friendships were in group
Stage 3: no name calling and noticeable reduction in hostility. Groups asked to sit together on the coach.

Question 8

What is the conclusion of the social classic study?

Answer 8

Strong in group identities were formed initially and with the introduction of competition, negative out group bias quickly emerged. Introduction of superordinate goals had a cumulative effect in reducing negative out-group bias. Supports the realistic conflict theory

Question 9

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of generalisability.

Answer 9

The participants were all 11-years old, White, middle class and American. The findings cannot be used to represent other age groups, genders, backgrounds or cultures. This limits the generalisability of findings as they only apply to a small proportion of the sample.
Also, was done in 1954 when society had very different views so it is not easy to generalise findings to todays society.

Question 10

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of reliability.

Answer 10

The design of the study was a field study which means that it lacks control over variables. This means that we can’t achieve a standardised procedure despite standardised elements.

Question 11

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of opposing research.

Answer 11

Tyerman and Spencer followed a very similar procedure using English boy scouts who did know each other. Competition between them remained friendly throughout and friendship ties across the groups was not affected.

Question 12

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of applications.

Answer 12

The study demonstrates the potential origins of prejudice and how it can be reduced in a school. Aronson’s jigsaw technique says that if a large task can be broken down in to smaller parts, divided out to each person, prejudice will be reduced.

Question 13

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of validity.

Answer 13

High in ecological validity as for the boys, this was a natural environment. The tasks were also typical of a sports camp.

Question 14

Evaluate the social classic study in terms of ethics.

Answer 14

Sherif used deception to keep the true aim of the study from the boys. Also, the aim of the study was to cause hostility which could have led to psychological harm.

Question 15

What is the name and date of the social contemporary study?

Answer 15

Reicher and Haslam (2006)

Question 16

What is the aim of the social contemporary study?

Answer 16

The aim of the study was to simulate an institution that reinforced inequality between groups and to investigate whether inequalities were accepted or resisted. They wanted to test whether unequal roles were a natural consequence of group formation.

Question 17

Who were the participants in the social contemporary study? What participant design was used?

Answer 17

Reicher and Haslam set up an experimental case study to examine the intergroup relations between a dominant and subordinate group. Researchers advertised for male participants in national newspapers. 27 males went on after initial personality and mental health tests to be assessed by a clinical psychologist. Medical records, police checks and character references for each participant were obtained. A final sample of 15 men were selected that represented a range of ages, social class and ethnic diversity.

Question 18

Describe the setting of Reicher and Haslam

Answer 18

The institutional setting was created to have prisoner and guard quarters. Prisoners quarters had cells that could be locked, showers and an exercise yard. The guards quarters had a dormitory, mess room and bathroom.

Question 19

Describe the procedure of the social contemporary study.

Answer 19

The 15 male participants were randomly assigned to the role of prisoner or guard using a careful matching process. The men were first divided in to five groups. From each group one guard was chosen and the remaining two participants were assigned the role of prisoner.
The guards were invited to a hotel the evening before to receive information about their role and to draw up prisoner rights and were told that violence wouldn’t be tolerated.
Nine prisoners arrived one at a time and had their head shaved and were given a prison uniform. They were informed of the prison rules and rights.
The guards were informed that their selection was based on their trustworthiness and initiative but that the researchers may have mistakenly assigned one of them to be a prisoner. They were asked to look for guard like characteristics among the prisoners.
The tenth prisoner entered on day 5 and was a trade union representative.

Question 20

How was behaviour monitored in the social contemporary study.

Answer 20

Behaviour was monitored using visual and audio recording and their physiological state was assessed using daily questionnaires to measure social identification, compliance, citizenship and depression levels. Levels of cortisol were assessed through saliva swabs.

Question 21

What were the results of the social contemporary study?

Answer 21

In phase one the prisoners were dissatisfied with their subordinate positions and as individuals sought promotion, no shared sense of identity was established. Once the permeability of roles was removed, the prisoners develop a sense of shared identity.
The guards were reluctant to use their status. On day 6, the prisoners broke out and occupied the guards quarters.
In phase two, a commune was established or equal governance and this led to a reduction in hostility with a whole group identity.
Prisoners were dissatisfied with the new regime. Levels of authoritarianism rose and the study was stopped.

Question 22

What is the conclusion of the social contemporary study?

Answer 22

People do not inevitably conform to the roles they have been assigned but a range of factors determine whether or not people identify with their role.
When groups fail to form a social identity they are more ready to accept the ideals of a different social group.

Question 23

Evaluate the social contemporary study in terms of generalisability.

Answer 23

The study lacks generalisability as only a very small number of participants were selected. Some of these men had particularly strong personalities which had the potential to influence the dynamics of the group. It wasn’t possible to control for all personality traits. The study only involved men.

Question 24

Evaluate the social contemporary study in terms of validity.

Answer 24

A criticism of the study is that it failed to manufacture any real situations of inequality between the prisoner and guard groups. Despite setting up the environment to favour the guards, with better food and housing conditions, the guards had no real power of authority. This limits the validity of the study.
Multiple ways of assessing the behaviour and mental states of the participants that meant they could be sure their experimental manipulations did have an effect on the behaviour of the participants. It was significant that the offer and retraction of the promotion had a direct causal effect.

Question 25

Evaluate the social contemporary study in terms of reliability.

Answer 25

The participants were fully aware that their behaviour was being recorded which could have resulted in artificial behaviour and social desirability bias. It is not socially desirable to be an oppressor but it is to be a rebel, this could explain the guards reluctance.

Question 26

Evaluate the social contemporary study in terms of ethics

Answer 26

Significant ethical issues associated with created groups in a situation where one group can exert power and have the capacity to sanction a subordinate group. Reicher and Haslam used a range of safeguards to ensure that the experimental procedures were approved by two ethical committees and that the participants were monitored at all times. Their selection process was extensive and key figures were able to stop the study if they had concerns.