Räuberhöhle

In 1954, what began as summer camp amidst Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma emerged as a famous field study on social identity and intergroup relations.

Building upon previous work, Muzafer Sherif and colleagues tested the realistic conflict theory—a notion that individuals who must contend for scarce resources—either perceived or real—begin to exhibit competitive tendencies and negative attitudes as a result.

Before arriving, researchers carefully selected 22 fifth-grade boys of similar sociocultural and personal backgrounds and randomly assigned them to one of two groups.

All subjects were unknown to each other, as well as unaware of the experiment’s purpose and that they would be conspicuously observed and recorded by the researchers who were disguised as “camp staff” members.

During the first in-group formation phase, the 11- to 12-year-olds arrived on separate buses—without knowing that the others existed, since they were housed at isolated sites. They were directed to bond within their group while participating in activities, like hiking and canoeing.

Throughout their first week together, the boys became connected and established group norms, singing songs and playing games, as well as their identities. They’re now the Eagles and Rattlers.

To set-up the next part, the Rattlers were allowed to wander near the ball field, within distance to hear the Eagles playing. At practice the very next day, the Rattlers outwardly declared the field “theirs”.

For the second stage, the intergroup friction phase, the staff officially announced the presence of another group. This revelation elicited heightened awareness of “us” versus “them”, and both teams charged ahead with enthusiastic rivalry.

In a series of events, the groups would compete in a tournament of activities, like baseball and tug-of-war. While most of the outcomes were determined by the victorious team, a few occasions, such as cabin inspections, were judged by the staff to keep the point totals tight and the teams motivated to win.

Over the next week, both sides participated in numerous incidents of name-calling and humiliation—even campers who weren’t as active in the physical participation.

As the days passed, the losers’ frustrations turned more physical: The Eagles burned the Rattler’s flag, and in turn, the members retaliated; sportsmanship was on the decline, as the smell of victory approached; and unfair tactics caught the confident Rattlers off balance.

The mood, now hostile, fostered ransacking of the cabins—beds were overturned and property was stolen, including comic books. And sure enough, the raids became a reciprocal occurrence as the tournament was coming to an end.

Who would prevail hinged on the last event, a treasure hunt. Unbeknownst to the campers, the winning team was determined by the researchers, who manipulated the routes.

In the days following victory and defeat, the researchers devoted time for everyone to cool off and enjoy in-group activities—including civilized swimming time at the beach.

At the end of the second phase, the groups were once again placed within physical proximity to each other, and their behavior was observed. Their responses confirmed tendencies to classify their own in-group favorably—indicating positive group relations—and the out-group unfavorably—highlighting the persistence of the negative intergroup attitudes.

For the final stage, the intergroup integration phase, researchers crafted numerous non-competitive situations where the two would have to work together to achieve common objectives—superordinate goals—in an effort to reconcile the groups’ attitudes and behaviors. For example, the camp truck was stuck and they all had to pull the vehicle to get it to start.

Soon enough, the division of “us” versus “them” disappeared, along with the intergroup hostility. The boys ended their stay with positivity—leaving camp on one bus.

In the end, using cooperation to accomplish shared goals may dissolve perceived enemies into friends and break down social barriers that could fuel conflict.