Reflections on the Robbers Cave Experiment: Finding Lessons on Political Conflict, Racism, Xenophobia, and Business Environments

Vonwicks C Onyango
{"title":"Reflections on the Robbers Cave Experiment: Finding Lessons on Political Conflict, Racism, Xenophobia, and Business Environments","authors":"Vonwicks C Onyango","doi":"10.54536/ajhp.v1i1.2092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Robbers Cave Experiment in the mid-1950s by Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues advanced the realistic conflict theory, whose main premise is that conflict is inevitable whenever two (or more) in-groups are brought together in mutual competition for scarce resources. This conflict is driven by prejudice and discrimination, and may take on various forms of hostilities and aggressions towards a competing out-group. However, a resolution of the conflict is possible when the two (or more) competing in-groups are forced to work together to attain mutually beneficial superordinate goals. Whereas the Robbers Cave Experiment suffers from serious questions of ethics and confirmation bias, the lessons that draw from the tested hypotheses have remained germane to the understanding of realistic conflict theory. In this study, the author seeks to reflect on this (in)famous experiment and draw poignant comparisons and lessons as they relate to some contemporary examples in political conflicts, racism, xenophobia, business workplaces, and mergers and acquisitions. The author repeatedly acknowledges the blurring influence of the criticisms of the experiment on the clarity of these reflections.","PeriodicalId":492521,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Human Psychology","volume":"207 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Human Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54536/ajhp.v1i1.2092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Robbers Cave Experiment in the mid-1950s by Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues advanced the realistic conflict theory, whose main premise is that conflict is inevitable whenever two (or more) in-groups are brought together in mutual competition for scarce resources. This conflict is driven by prejudice and discrimination, and may take on various forms of hostilities and aggressions towards a competing out-group. However, a resolution of the conflict is possible when the two (or more) competing in-groups are forced to work together to attain mutually beneficial superordinate goals. Whereas the Robbers Cave Experiment suffers from serious questions of ethics and confirmation bias, the lessons that draw from the tested hypotheses have remained germane to the understanding of realistic conflict theory. In this study, the author seeks to reflect on this (in)famous experiment and draw poignant comparisons and lessons as they relate to some contemporary examples in political conflicts, racism, xenophobia, business workplaces, and mergers and acquisitions. The author repeatedly acknowledges the blurring influence of the criticisms of the experiment on the clarity of these reflections.
对Robbers Cave实验的反思:寻找政治冲突,种族主义,仇外心理和商业环境的教训
20世纪50年代中期,Muzafer Sherif和他的同事提出了现实冲突理论,其主要前提是,当两个(或更多)内部群体聚集在一起争夺稀缺资源时,冲突是不可避免的。这种冲突是由偏见和歧视驱动的,并可能对竞争的外部群体采取各种形式的敌对行动和侵略。然而,当两个(或更多)相互竞争的内部群体被迫共同努力以实现互利的上级目标时,冲突的解决是可能的。尽管Robbers Cave实验存在严重的伦理问题和确认偏差,但从经过测试的假设中得出的教训仍然与理解现实冲突理论密切相关。在这项研究中,作者试图反思这个著名的实验,并得出尖锐的比较和教训,因为它们与当代政治冲突、种族主义、仇外心理、商业场所和并购的一些例子有关。作者反复承认,对实验的批评对这些反思的清晰度产生了模糊的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信