Psychological Study: The Robber's Cave Experiment and Conflict

This report analyzes Muzafer Sherif's Robber's Cave Experiment, which explored intergroup conflict and cooperation. The experiment involved two groups of boys who initially bonded but became competitive when resources were scarce. The study demonstrated how competition and perceived threats can lead to hostility, even among individuals from similar backgrounds. The report discusses the experiment's findings, including the impact of competition, group identity, and the potential for conflict resolution through superordinate goals and empathy. It also references Cohen and Insko's work, which provides methods for mitigating conflict, such as strong leadership, outgroup empathy, and coordination. The report highlights the experiment's relevance to real-world conflicts, drawing parallels to class struggle as described by Marx, and emphasizes the role of resource scarcity in fueling intergroup tension. The report concludes by showing how Sherif's experiment and related studies offer insights into understanding and managing conflict in various contexts.

Running head: ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
Scarcity of resources leads to conflict between groups or inter group conflict is the
appropriation of the central idea espoused by social psychologist Muzafer Sherif in his Robber’s
Cave Experiment. This theorization had been used as the basis later on for developing conflict
theories (Sherif 1954). He had derived the theory on the basis of a field experiment at the
Robber’s Cave State Park, Oklahoma, in the United States America. He had as his sample two
groups of young boys who were neither less nor more than twelve years of age, the total strength
of both the groups taken together were twenty two in number. The boys were totally unfamiliar
with each other while they came from similar background, belonging to racially white
community and were economically a part of the middle class background. In terms of faith they
followed Protestantism and were members of nuclear families. The goal given to them was to
bond with another member in the collectivity and form a pair for the purpose of pursuing a
common goal. It was natural that they did not know much of each other in the initial period and
that was the reason why they were made to indulge in activities which would bind them together,
by means of certain activities like playing basketball, swimming et cetera (Fine 2004). Finally
having realized of the commonality and having developed a sense of bonding, the boys had
formed themselves into two groups, the Rattlers and the Eagles. They had got their respective
emblems etched on to their t-shirts as a mark of solidarity and group identity. Sheriff had
conducted competition between them and he had observed the kind of threats of both verbal and
physical in nature were posed by each of the groups towards the other groups. None of the boys
belonged to a background which would have driven to a behavior similar to a rogue or a street
gang member, they belonged to cultured and well bred background. However, the sense of
competition and the urgency to safeguard the group interest against the onslaught of another
group had driven them to such uncouth and uncivilized behavior (Sherif 1988). The example of

2ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
the rivalry between the whites and the black with regard to the latter taking away the jobs from
former can be cited to demonstrate the validity of Sherif’s experiment in the real world (Doede
2016).
Basing upon the idea of conflict provided by Sherif, Cohen and Insko (2008) had
developed a plan of reducing the propensity of the magnification of the conflict situation with
particular reference to the political situation in the Middle East specially focusing upon the Arab
Israeli conflict. Cohen and Insko (2008) opines that the shortage of resources is inevitable but
that does not imply that a common ground cannot be reached or that conflicts cannot be
reconciled. Cohen and Insko (2008) had provided for three methods in which the conflict can be
meted out. Firstly, citing the signing of the Oslo 2 Peace Accord between the Israeli Prime
Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, Cohen and Insko
(2008) say that it was the first attempt in the peace process between the belligerent factions. That
was possible because there was strong and independent leadership in the two nations. Secondly,
Cohen and Insko (2008) cite the sentiment of peace between the Arab and Israeli public of the
respective nations shall be beneficial in making way for peace processes to be a success. This has
been termed by Cohen and Insko (2008) as outgroup empathy. Though this the importance of the
civil society in influencing the decision of the leaders has been necessitated. The more the Arabs
felt empathetic towards the Israelis, the more shall the move towards the end of conflict shall be
driving towards success. The third and the final method of meting out conflict as per Cohen and
Insko (2008) is through coordination and superordinate goals. This particular method of meting
out of the conflict is somewhat utopian as it calls for moving beyond the obsession with the
parochialities and the pettiness of life and focusing upon the greater goals of life which focuses

3ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
upon laying importance on the greater goals that are supposed to benefit the global communion
of humanity (Sherif and Cohen 2008).
Sherif’s experiment has a Marxist undertone to it as it shows rivalry between two classes
over the resources similar to what Marx had said about the class struggle between the capitalists
and the proletariats. The article of Cohen and Insko (2008) also has a Marxist undertone as it
talks of doing away with the parochialities and ushering in the celebration of greater humane
ideals for mitigating conflicts just as Marx had opined that for removing class struggle private
property should be abolished and communal ownership of resources must be facilitated. This is
how the Robber’s Cave experiment, the article by Cohen and Insko (2008) are related to each
other and the world at large (Kamenka 2015).

4ROBBER’S CAVE EXPERIMENT
References
Sherif, M., 1988. The robbers cave experiment: Intergroup conflict and cooperation.[Orig. pub.
as Intergroup conflict and group relations]. Wesleyan University Press.
Sherif, M., 1954. Experimental study of positive and negative intergroup attitudes between
experimentally produced groups: Robbers cave study.
Cohen, T.R. and Insko, C.A., 2008. War and peace: Possible approaches to reducing intergroup
conflict. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), pp.87-93.
Doede, M.S., 2016. Black jobs matter: Racial inequalities in conditions of employment and
subsequent health outcomes. Public Health Nursing, 33(2), pp.151-158.
Kamenka, E., 2015. The Ethical Foundations of Marxism (RLE Marxism). Routledge.
Fine, G.A., 2004, December. Review Essay: Forgotten Classic: The Robbers Cave Experiment.
In Sociological Forum (Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 663-666). Springer Netherlands.