Tajfel / Sherif et al

HideShow resource information
When did Tajfel et al: 'Intergroup Discrimination' take place?
1970
1 of 19
What was the aim of the study?
To see whether two clear groups would favour their own group over others even when not in competition.
2 of 19
Describe the sample.
64 British 14-15 school boys
3 of 19
How were the Ptps decieved?
They were told the study was about vision
4 of 19
Outline the study
They were shown dots on a screen, asked to estimate how many there were, split into two groups randomly and told that points meant money and to allocate them to each other.
5 of 19
What were the three conditions?
1) the choice between two boys in the in-group. 2) the choice between two boys in the out-group. 3) the choice between one boy from the in-group and one boy from the out-group
6 of 19
Where did the study take place?
At a university
7 of 19
Describe the results.
the boys chose to give points to those in their own group and whether they were under or over-estimators made no difference
8 of 19
Describe the conclusion.
Ptps will display favouritism to those in their own group and against those in another group despite not being in competition
9 of 19
Evaluate the ethical strengths and weaknesses.
-nobody was put in harm. -consent was gained. -no informed consent. -Ptps deceived on many things. -they were in a school-type situation so may have been reluctant to withdraw.
10 of 19
Evaluate the methodological strengths.
-strict controls on what information the boys were given about the study. -Ptps were randomly assigned into groups. -replicas of the study have been done which tested other samples, improving validity.
11 of 19
Evaluate the methodological weaknesses.
-sample can't be generalised well. -not a natural setting so Ptps couldn't respond naturally. -nature of the task implied competition thus causing Ptps to discriminate.
12 of 19
When did the Sheriff et al: 'Robbers Cave Study' take place?
1954
13 of 19
What was the aim of the study?
to see whether strangers brought together with common goals would form close relationships and then when in competition be hostile towards each other.
14 of 19
Describe the sample.
22 12-year-old boys who were lower-middle class, protestant Americans by volunteer sample.
15 of 19
Describe the results.
Group preference was shown by each group during competition and the final stage reduced hostility
16 of 19
Describe the conclusion.
Inter-group conflict is caused by competition which increases prejudice
17 of 19
Evaluate the ethical strengths and weaknesses.
-camp counsellors ensured that Ptps were put in no harm. -Ptps returned to initial state by the final stage. -no informed consent gained. -Ptps deceived on the role of researchers.
18 of 19
Evaluate the methodological strengths and weaknesses.
-field study so good ecological validity. -Ptps unaware they were being observed which improved validity as they wouldn't display socially desirability behaviours. -no control group. -Ptps not generalisable due to restricted sample.
19 of 19

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What was the aim of the study?

Back

To see whether two clear groups would favour their own group over others even when not in competition.

Card 3

Front

Describe the sample.

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

How were the Ptps decieved?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Outline the study

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Social resources »