Thank you so much, Asha, for providing the video. I had heard about the experiment but didn’t know this record existed. A lot of psychology to unpack. I’m going to think a bit more about your questions before I answer and maybe even watch the video a second time.
wow, It's been years since I've seen this! Literally as a person with green eyes, when I first saw this years ago, I thought it odd that there were only two choices for eye color, and felt left out altogether! But the larger issues still remain. I found Abbie McMillen's comment similarly descriptive of me in my early childhood, and also think that my sense of justice would have probably meant that I didn't participate, or only did so at the margins. The children in the video seemed quite eager to please the teacher, (and they must have been aware they were being filmed) and the social and cultural norms of the time probably demanded a certain amount of obedience. It seemed to me that these children all generally wanted to get along - as they were before this experiment- and the collars, the teachers instructions and the permission to make demeaning comments about the "others" encouraged them to be bold and emulate what the teacher was saying, even if it was different from their normal behavior. These kids felt they had permission from an authority figure to switch their normal behavior and friendships, even though it made them unhappy. And that unhappiness affected their academics as measured by the reading cards. Yet, they appeared to return to being happy when things were back to the status quo after the experiment ended. It is hard for me to try and speculate an answer to the specific questions so I will just make these observations. I wonder what the outcome of this would have been if there were children of color in the experiment - or children with green eyes - who weren't even included.
How does being placed in a “tribe” affect the behavior of the “in” group? What about the “out” group? feeling special and 'better than' seems to encourage the inner bully to flex its muscles and having others doing the same thing around us just encourages us to 'out do' the others.
On Day 2, why do you think the prior day’s out-group members are so willing to switch roles? Did that surprise you? I didn't expect the 'in group' to agree to be the 'out group' so readily, probably less likely to happen these days. Perhaps they figured they could withstand any bullying or didn't expect any bullying from the new 'in group'
Why do you think no one resisted their tribal assignment? What would be the cost of not complying with the tribal norms? (i.e., what do you think would happen if an in-group student decided to cross over and try to be a part of the out-group, or vice versa?) At first it seemed the kids' sense of right and wrong was engaged, but then they followed the teacher's lead in denying the 'out group' their rights. The cost of going counter to the group is too high for most of us, probably a lot of push-back from the 'in group' and then it could get ugly, and few people want to see that outcome. I thought some of the already established friendships would thwart the whole process.
I would not have appreciated going thru such an experiment or having our children subjected to that, I would think it would be scarring, especially for those who were already friends and then saw their friends turn on them so readily.
As a law student you probably learned about the Clark "Doll Tests" in the 40s since they played a part in Brown vs BOE. Before my time, but we studied it one of my undergrad psych classes in '71. But I digress. Again.
Tribalism is a rich field in social psychology. My advisor in my MA program at PLU, Kathleen O'Connor, did all her field work in tribal cultures, and it was fascinating stuff. She mostly focused on gender roles, but the overarching factor she saw, as has everyone who's studied and written on tribal behavior, is how conformity is maintained. Psychologists have done an endless raft of studies of the effects of conformity with modern era undergraduates as test subjects, but those environments lacked what tribal cultures all feature: the belief that non-conformity constitutes an existential threat to the tribe's continuation. It's a primary element in the thinking and behavior of the MAGA cult in all it's shades and iterations. They see themselves, their race, their culture, their religious beliefs, their notions of sexuality and gender, as all under existential threat as the greater part of our society, where any and all once faced enormous social, academic, economic and legal pressure to conform to a white-working class-rural-Christian ethos and identity, has left them and their world view in the dust bin.
That's delusion of course. It's true regular church attendance has dropped and the number of Americans who don't identify as religious has grown, but we had 356,723 US religious congregations in the 2020 count. Up from 344,894 in 2010. Religious books sales were 640MUSD in 2019, 757MUSD in 2022. 2400 religious radio stations. 132 religious TV stations, and every station in America features religious broadcasting as part of its schedule every day of the week. The notion that Christian culture is under existential threat is a notion the church has promoted, encouraged, reinforced from Jesus and the Apostles till today. (A website I discovered while at seminary is called "A Brief History of the Apocalypse" which details all of the times various Christian leaders and cults have identified as the end of the world over the last 2000 years). Nothing creates tribal cohesion like the belief that the tribe is threatened with annihilation, and keeping every member of the tribe in line, adhering to the same rules, regulations and beliefs is critical, at least to maintaining the power of the leadership and its ability to fund raise and direct the efforts of the tribe toward their goals.
In any community being seen as outside the majority can and does result in loss of employment, social ostracism and even violence against non-conformists. I think studying Nazi Germany's Third Reich, Fascist Italy and Spain, the Soviet Union from revolution through Stalin, North Korea under the Kims, and various apocalyptic religious cults like Heaven's Gate and Jonestown, will give us a bead on what we're faced with and how extreme it is apt to become if not vigorously resisted. "Red Scarf Girl" by Ji-li Jiang, a book about her experiences during the cultural revolution of China, gives us a lot of first hand information on why people conform to thinking they know perfectly well is wrong, inhumane. unjustified and hypocritical in order to protect themselves from group sanction, even just for a sense of belonging, and are willing to do the most despicable things without any sense of wrongdoing as long as the identity group approves.
Here's an easy one-pager for you from Kent State on social control in cults. I think it sums up a lot of what to look for in the cult of Trump. Enjoy!
I had vague recollections watching this video in school also. Immediately reminded me of two books; The Sneetches by Dr Suess, and The Third Wave about the high school history teacher demonstrating with his class how facism could take hold in a group.
Like The Third Wave, I think the kids in the video go along with what they are told because it's coming from an authority figure. The in-group certainly likes being told they're smarter and get privleges.
And while the out-group is disadvantaged, they still go along with it because of the authority figure, and because they are part of a group as well. I wonder how this class dynamic would have been different if only one or two students were singled out as the in- or the out-group.
Lately i've been pondering the question' "how far does mis/disinformation date back, "automatically we think the Russians started mis/disinformation,
But if we look into history and Religion as a point of reference' "the Roman Empire' and the "Pagan Anti-Christ Constantine, we the first people in history to use malign, misinformation, where they edited and altered the Bible to fit there Political ideology, where their was 12 Disciples, but in the Bible theirs only four, "so mis/disinformation has been around for along time, we just didn't realise it.
I had never seen this video before!Some emojis to describe my reactions: 😳&🫣&🤯& 😬&🤔.
1. Being placed in a tribe affected the “in” groups behaviors by: boosting their confidence and their academics and made them aggressive/bullies and dismissive of the “out” group. The “out” group lost confidence and academics suffered. I think they accepted being lower status and bullied, even though they didn’t like it.
2. The out group was elated to switch roles (reminds me of Maga). They were free of the weight of suppression. Their boost in confidence was instantaneous. They seemed to like the feeling of power and superiority.
3. No one resisted because they were doing what they were told by an authority figure. In school (especially back then) there were consequences for not complying. My teachers and principals had paddles. The principal had one with holes in it for less resistance.
Their group mates would also have ridiculed them. Maybe.
This video brings together so much of what we’ve discussed as a class and what’s going on in the world today. Look forward to the discussion!
This is a perfect illustration of the song from South Pacific which says that you've got to be taught before it's too late, before you are six or seven or eight, to hate all the people your relatives hate. You've got to be carefully taught. These 3rd graders are in that age range where they can be taught to hate without reflection. If something like blue eyes/brown eyes took place in any of the classes I remember (starting around 5th grade when I was 10) we would have resisted it as nonsensical. At my current ripe old age of 73, I can't imagine what it would be like to be placed in a "tribe" based on some physical characteristic. Although now, that I stop to think about it, there is a lot of body-shaming that puts people into tribes because they are "fat" or "flat" or otherwise don't measure up to some arbitrary factor that defines attractiveness. And reflecting back further, I may have been classified as a "nerd" or a 'dweeb" but if I was, I wasn't aware of it.
Personally I was horrified by the experiment. It seemed over the top, like cutting butter with a chain saw. But then, I’ve never been a third grade teacher, and it’s been seven decades since I was in 3rd grade. Maybe some kids really are doltish followers who need this sort of cruelty to understand some basic moral principles? However, based on my memories from grades k-6, I’m pretty sure my sense of injustice at the time would have led me to be the rebel kid who flatly refused to go along with the experiment. I would have judged the teacher harshly, probably reported this stunt to my parents, and encouraged my mom to have a discussion with the principal. (By grade 3 it would not have been the first time.) But I wouldn’t have tried to switch groups. I would have folded my arms and stood stubbornly to the side through the entire debacle.
Just watched it again and agree that some of the reactions were to please the teacher. And obviously it was a daunting task she took on. It was interesting that she felt the children’s personalities changed within minutes. It would have been good to hear what discrimination was in place at the time to have all white kids in class (also a pretty small number in total—or was a group out of a larger class selected for the experience?). But a good start for National Brotherhood Week I guess. It would be interesting to follow up now with some of them (like that British show that follows different people and checks in on them every seven years I think). I don’t think I’ve answered the specific questions, but it has definitely given me more to ponder.
Fascinating and instructive video. I was twelve years old when Dr. King was assassinated, so just a few years older than these third graders.
1. In group: They felt empowered to treat the out group badly, calling them names (“brown eyes”) and in one case a group of girls ganged up on an out group member, hitting her and verbally abusing her. Academic performance by the in group improved. Out group: academic performance declined, they felt unfairly treated, and apparently behaved in a docile manner toward the in group.
2. I think they had at least two motivations to become in group members, including the opportunity for revenge and the opportunity to feel better about themselves.
3. First of all, each group of students desired to please their teacher. Beyond that, each group had a sense of bonding and shared experience. In group members had no need to switch groups, and if an out group member tried to switch, he/she wouldn’t be accepted by the in group and would be ostracized by the out group, further reducing his/her status. As a practical matter, an out group member would be unable to switch to the in group because eye color is unchangeable.
Just realized I did have one comment. I wish the collars didn’t feature so much because the children were affected by that as well. Perhaps both groups should have worn the identifying collars matching their eye color, or preferably armbands of blue or brown instead.
Thank you so much, Asha, for providing the video. I had heard about the experiment but didn’t know this record existed. A lot of psychology to unpack. I’m going to think a bit more about your questions before I answer and maybe even watch the video a second time.
wow, It's been years since I've seen this! Literally as a person with green eyes, when I first saw this years ago, I thought it odd that there were only two choices for eye color, and felt left out altogether! But the larger issues still remain. I found Abbie McMillen's comment similarly descriptive of me in my early childhood, and also think that my sense of justice would have probably meant that I didn't participate, or only did so at the margins. The children in the video seemed quite eager to please the teacher, (and they must have been aware they were being filmed) and the social and cultural norms of the time probably demanded a certain amount of obedience. It seemed to me that these children all generally wanted to get along - as they were before this experiment- and the collars, the teachers instructions and the permission to make demeaning comments about the "others" encouraged them to be bold and emulate what the teacher was saying, even if it was different from their normal behavior. These kids felt they had permission from an authority figure to switch their normal behavior and friendships, even though it made them unhappy. And that unhappiness affected their academics as measured by the reading cards. Yet, they appeared to return to being happy when things were back to the status quo after the experiment ended. It is hard for me to try and speculate an answer to the specific questions so I will just make these observations. I wonder what the outcome of this would have been if there were children of color in the experiment - or children with green eyes - who weren't even included.
How does being placed in a “tribe” affect the behavior of the “in” group? What about the “out” group? feeling special and 'better than' seems to encourage the inner bully to flex its muscles and having others doing the same thing around us just encourages us to 'out do' the others.
On Day 2, why do you think the prior day’s out-group members are so willing to switch roles? Did that surprise you? I didn't expect the 'in group' to agree to be the 'out group' so readily, probably less likely to happen these days. Perhaps they figured they could withstand any bullying or didn't expect any bullying from the new 'in group'
Why do you think no one resisted their tribal assignment? What would be the cost of not complying with the tribal norms? (i.e., what do you think would happen if an in-group student decided to cross over and try to be a part of the out-group, or vice versa?) At first it seemed the kids' sense of right and wrong was engaged, but then they followed the teacher's lead in denying the 'out group' their rights. The cost of going counter to the group is too high for most of us, probably a lot of push-back from the 'in group' and then it could get ugly, and few people want to see that outcome. I thought some of the already established friendships would thwart the whole process.
I would not have appreciated going thru such an experiment or having our children subjected to that, I would think it would be scarring, especially for those who were already friends and then saw their friends turn on them so readily.
Hi Asha:
As a law student you probably learned about the Clark "Doll Tests" in the 40s since they played a part in Brown vs BOE. Before my time, but we studied it one of my undergrad psych classes in '71. But I digress. Again.
Tribalism is a rich field in social psychology. My advisor in my MA program at PLU, Kathleen O'Connor, did all her field work in tribal cultures, and it was fascinating stuff. She mostly focused on gender roles, but the overarching factor she saw, as has everyone who's studied and written on tribal behavior, is how conformity is maintained. Psychologists have done an endless raft of studies of the effects of conformity with modern era undergraduates as test subjects, but those environments lacked what tribal cultures all feature: the belief that non-conformity constitutes an existential threat to the tribe's continuation. It's a primary element in the thinking and behavior of the MAGA cult in all it's shades and iterations. They see themselves, their race, their culture, their religious beliefs, their notions of sexuality and gender, as all under existential threat as the greater part of our society, where any and all once faced enormous social, academic, economic and legal pressure to conform to a white-working class-rural-Christian ethos and identity, has left them and their world view in the dust bin.
That's delusion of course. It's true regular church attendance has dropped and the number of Americans who don't identify as religious has grown, but we had 356,723 US religious congregations in the 2020 count. Up from 344,894 in 2010. Religious books sales were 640MUSD in 2019, 757MUSD in 2022. 2400 religious radio stations. 132 religious TV stations, and every station in America features religious broadcasting as part of its schedule every day of the week. The notion that Christian culture is under existential threat is a notion the church has promoted, encouraged, reinforced from Jesus and the Apostles till today. (A website I discovered while at seminary is called "A Brief History of the Apocalypse" which details all of the times various Christian leaders and cults have identified as the end of the world over the last 2000 years). Nothing creates tribal cohesion like the belief that the tribe is threatened with annihilation, and keeping every member of the tribe in line, adhering to the same rules, regulations and beliefs is critical, at least to maintaining the power of the leadership and its ability to fund raise and direct the efforts of the tribe toward their goals.
In any community being seen as outside the majority can and does result in loss of employment, social ostracism and even violence against non-conformists. I think studying Nazi Germany's Third Reich, Fascist Italy and Spain, the Soviet Union from revolution through Stalin, North Korea under the Kims, and various apocalyptic religious cults like Heaven's Gate and Jonestown, will give us a bead on what we're faced with and how extreme it is apt to become if not vigorously resisted. "Red Scarf Girl" by Ji-li Jiang, a book about her experiences during the cultural revolution of China, gives us a lot of first hand information on why people conform to thinking they know perfectly well is wrong, inhumane. unjustified and hypocritical in order to protect themselves from group sanction, even just for a sense of belonging, and are willing to do the most despicable things without any sense of wrongdoing as long as the identity group approves.
Here's an easy one-pager for you from Kent State on social control in cults. I think it sums up a lot of what to look for in the cult of Trump. Enjoy!
https://www-s3-live.kent.edu/s3fs-root/s3fs-public/file/Diefenderfer%20Social%20Control%20and%20Cults%202021%20-%20Morgan%20Diefenderfer.pdf?VersionId=46JSmRdV5Zq1QiQr0kZCK_jkqpAisSEf#:~:text=Within%20Cults%2C%20or%20New%20Religious,an%20ability%20to%20hold%20ideologies
I had vague recollections watching this video in school also. Immediately reminded me of two books; The Sneetches by Dr Suess, and The Third Wave about the high school history teacher demonstrating with his class how facism could take hold in a group.
Like The Third Wave, I think the kids in the video go along with what they are told because it's coming from an authority figure. The in-group certainly likes being told they're smarter and get privleges.
And while the out-group is disadvantaged, they still go along with it because of the authority figure, and because they are part of a group as well. I wonder how this class dynamic would have been different if only one or two students were singled out as the in- or the out-group.
Interesting Fact ;
Lately i've been pondering the question' "how far does mis/disinformation date back, "automatically we think the Russians started mis/disinformation,
But if we look into history and Religion as a point of reference' "the Roman Empire' and the "Pagan Anti-Christ Constantine, we the first people in history to use malign, misinformation, where they edited and altered the Bible to fit there Political ideology, where their was 12 Disciples, but in the Bible theirs only four, "so mis/disinformation has been around for along time, we just didn't realise it.
History is Interesting' wouldn't you agree.
I had never seen this video before!Some emojis to describe my reactions: 😳&🫣&🤯& 😬&🤔.
1. Being placed in a tribe affected the “in” groups behaviors by: boosting their confidence and their academics and made them aggressive/bullies and dismissive of the “out” group. The “out” group lost confidence and academics suffered. I think they accepted being lower status and bullied, even though they didn’t like it.
2. The out group was elated to switch roles (reminds me of Maga). They were free of the weight of suppression. Their boost in confidence was instantaneous. They seemed to like the feeling of power and superiority.
3. No one resisted because they were doing what they were told by an authority figure. In school (especially back then) there were consequences for not complying. My teachers and principals had paddles. The principal had one with holes in it for less resistance.
Their group mates would also have ridiculed them. Maybe.
This video brings together so much of what we’ve discussed as a class and what’s going on in the world today. Look forward to the discussion!
This is a perfect illustration of the song from South Pacific which says that you've got to be taught before it's too late, before you are six or seven or eight, to hate all the people your relatives hate. You've got to be carefully taught. These 3rd graders are in that age range where they can be taught to hate without reflection. If something like blue eyes/brown eyes took place in any of the classes I remember (starting around 5th grade when I was 10) we would have resisted it as nonsensical. At my current ripe old age of 73, I can't imagine what it would be like to be placed in a "tribe" based on some physical characteristic. Although now, that I stop to think about it, there is a lot of body-shaming that puts people into tribes because they are "fat" or "flat" or otherwise don't measure up to some arbitrary factor that defines attractiveness. And reflecting back further, I may have been classified as a "nerd" or a 'dweeb" but if I was, I wasn't aware of it.
Personally I was horrified by the experiment. It seemed over the top, like cutting butter with a chain saw. But then, I’ve never been a third grade teacher, and it’s been seven decades since I was in 3rd grade. Maybe some kids really are doltish followers who need this sort of cruelty to understand some basic moral principles? However, based on my memories from grades k-6, I’m pretty sure my sense of injustice at the time would have led me to be the rebel kid who flatly refused to go along with the experiment. I would have judged the teacher harshly, probably reported this stunt to my parents, and encouraged my mom to have a discussion with the principal. (By grade 3 it would not have been the first time.) But I wouldn’t have tried to switch groups. I would have folded my arms and stood stubbornly to the side through the entire debacle.
Just watched it again and agree that some of the reactions were to please the teacher. And obviously it was a daunting task she took on. It was interesting that she felt the children’s personalities changed within minutes. It would have been good to hear what discrimination was in place at the time to have all white kids in class (also a pretty small number in total—or was a group out of a larger class selected for the experience?). But a good start for National Brotherhood Week I guess. It would be interesting to follow up now with some of them (like that British show that follows different people and checks in on them every seven years I think). I don’t think I’ve answered the specific questions, but it has definitely given me more to ponder.
Fascinating and instructive video. I was twelve years old when Dr. King was assassinated, so just a few years older than these third graders.
1. In group: They felt empowered to treat the out group badly, calling them names (“brown eyes”) and in one case a group of girls ganged up on an out group member, hitting her and verbally abusing her. Academic performance by the in group improved. Out group: academic performance declined, they felt unfairly treated, and apparently behaved in a docile manner toward the in group.
2. I think they had at least two motivations to become in group members, including the opportunity for revenge and the opportunity to feel better about themselves.
3. First of all, each group of students desired to please their teacher. Beyond that, each group had a sense of bonding and shared experience. In group members had no need to switch groups, and if an out group member tried to switch, he/she wouldn’t be accepted by the in group and would be ostracized by the out group, further reducing his/her status. As a practical matter, an out group member would be unable to switch to the in group because eye color is unchangeable.
Just realized I did have one comment. I wish the collars didn’t feature so much because the children were affected by that as well. Perhaps both groups should have worn the identifying collars matching their eye color, or preferably armbands of blue or brown instead.