E L C

I Nonetheless, the two sides of Sherif,

T and the two periods of his life, are also R The unknown intimately interlinked. Sherif’s academic A work was social in the sense that it was immensely influenced by sociopolitical events. He passionately devoted all his scientific activity to the ideal of universal peace and cooperation. And we can only Aysel Kayaoğlu, Sertan Batur and Ersin Aslıtürk consider the social psychologist understand how that happened if we try and political activist to recover his ‘unknown’ early years in .

Like many of the ‘greats’ of social uzafer Sherif’s life was shaped , Muzafer Sherif is by his experience of a turbulent Sherif’s early years frequently cited in the textbooks for mhistorical period: the final years Muzafer Sherif was born Muzaffer S¸erif his most famous research – on the of the , the rise of the Ba s¸og˘ lu in 1905. He came from a small autokinetic effect, and the Boys’ Turkish Republic, one party regime in town (Ödemi s¸, near Izmir) in 1905, one Camp Studies. At the same time, Turkey, the Great Depression of 1929, of the five children of a wealthy family. his wider intellectual and political Hitler’s rise in Germany, the Second After attending the Elementary School perspective, and his vision of the World War, McCarthyism in the US in of Ödemi s¸ for six years, Sherif, like the discipline as a whole, has generally the 1950s and finally the Cold War children of other well-to-do families, went been ignored Recently, however period (Aslıtürk & Batur, 2007, pp.9-10). to Izmir International College (Çetik, social scientists from across the Sherif developed his 2007). By 1922, when Sherif was 17 years world have started to pay attention in a catastrophic context of war and old, he had lived 11 years of his life in a to Sherif’s critical contribution to ideological conflicts. Moreover, he was country riven by war and ethnic conflict social psychology. Books have been actively involved in the politics of these (see Ahmad, 1993; Zürcher, 1993). He written, symposia organised. So, times, particularly during his years in had witnessed rising nationalisms, during what was Sherif’s wider Turkey. the 1911 Libyan War, the 1912 and 1913 contribution? And what was the Looking at his entire life, one cannot Balkan Wars and the 1914 outbreak of the context from which it arose? help thinking that there are two Sherifs: First World War, during which the one is a brilliant social

psychologist; the other

B s What is the impact of early life of a

n is a political activist ş k o i Muzafer Sherif in Turkey on his later a t who had to flee his n l s ı ğ

e approach to social psychology?

country and died in ı n u ı

q exile. Sherif’s life, like a Why is Muzafer Sherif only known by his y d ı studies on formation of social norms his times, was full of n E r

and inter-group conflict, but not by his difficulties. His life was k m E other work on psychology of race, divided between Turkey n / a t

racism and political psychology? and the US. This sharp a t ü r

separation of life k v between two countries E k s Dost-Gözkan, A.& Sönmez Keith, D. (Eds.) u r e

can be seen as a voyage t c u

r (in press). Norms, group conflict, and l u

u from Muzaffer S¸erif to ş

o social change: Rediscovering Muzafer S s Muzafer Sherif, from a v

e Sherif ’s psychology. new Brunswick, a r ş

one life to another ı

nJ: transaction Publishers. m ü

Nalbantoğlu, H.Ü. (2007). Gene de (Batur & Aslıtürk, z E S

unutulmayan adam. in S. Batur & E. 2007). As Çetik (2007) i aslıtürk (Eds.) Muzaffer Şerif ’e states, for Sherif, there armağan: Muzaffer Şerif ’ten Muzafer was a transition from Sherif ’e (pp.107 –117). : the ‘membership group’ İletişim. to the ‘reference group’. Sherif witnessed the city of Izmir changing hands in 1922

s Ahmad, F. (1993). The making of modern Aslıtürk, E. & Batur, S. (2007). muzaffer Atılgan, G. (2009). Behice Boran: Öğretim manuscripts). university of vienna. e

c Turkey . london; new york: şerif’ten muzafer Sherif ’e: Giriş. in S. üyesi, siyasetçi, kuramc ı [Behice Batur, S. (in press). muzafer Sherif in FBi n

e routledge. Batur & E. aslıtürk (Eds.). Muzaffer Boran: academician, politician, files. in a. dost-Gözkan & S. Sönmez r e

f Aslıtürk, E. (in press). muzafer Sherif in Şeri f’e armağan: Muzaffer Şeri f’ten theoretician]. istanbul: yordam. keith (Eds.) Norms, groups, conflict, e

r america: Confidence, crisis and Muzafer Şeri f’e (pp.9 –20). istanbul: Batur, S. (2013). Muzaffer Şeri f’in Türkçe and social change: Rediscovering beyond. in a. dost-Gözkan & d. İletişim. metinleri neden okunmal ı? muzaffer Muzafer Sheri f’s psychology . new Sönmez keith (Eds.) Norms, group, Aslıtürk, E. & Cherry, F. (2003). muzafer şerif Sempozyumu , 3–4 november, Brunswick , nJ: transaction. conflict, and social change: Sherif: the interconnection of politics Ödemiş, izmir. Batur, S. & Aslıtürk, E. (Eds.) (2007). Rediscovering Muzafer Sheri f’s and profession. History and Batur, S. (2014). a young scientist in a Muzaffer Şeri f’e armağan: Muzaffer psychology . new Brunswick , nJ: Philosophy of Psychology Bulletin, 15 , changing world: muzafer Sherif’s Şeri f’ten Muzafer Şeri f’e. istanbul: transaction. 11 –16. early years in turkey. (unpublished İletişim.

830 vol 27 no 11 november 2014 camps, conflict and collectivism

Ottoman Empire was an ally of against the economic crisis, and Germany. He had lived through in 1935 the Comintern took the deportation of Armenians in a decision to promote broad 1915 (even in a little place like popular fronts with social Ödemi s¸ some 1500 people were democratic parties in order to expelled – see Kévorkian, 2006), form a worldwide anti-fascist and between 1918 and 1924, front. These developments while in Izmir, he had witnessed constituted a convenient milieu the occupation of the city by for communist ideas in the US, Greek soldiers, and then especially among academic circles. reoccupation by Turkish soldiers Like other Turkish intellectuals during the Turkish National who visited the US in those years Independence War. Sherif saw his (Atılgan, 2009), Sherif is thought survival as a ‘miracle’ (Trotter, to be influenced by this context 1985). and to have developed a Marxist After graduating from social analysis to stand beside his International College in 1924, psychological gestaltism. He was Sherif enrolled in the Philosophy influenced by the Deweyian Department at Istanbul University. socialist journal Social Frontier , He also participated in political which supported collectivism debates on the modernisation against individualism, and on his (which Sherif strongly supported) return to Turkey he continued to and westernisation processes in promote both the journal and the new Turkish society. In this Dewey’s ideas (Sherif, 1937b). context, the young student Sherif fell out with Allport became interested in McDougall’s both personally and intellectually ‘hormic psychology’ (which, in and so transferred from Harvard contrast to behaviourism, to Columbia, where he completed emphasised the purposive and his PhD with . His goal-directed nature of human Photo from 1944 including Behice Boran and thesis was titled ‘A study of some action). Sherif translated Muzafer Sherif social factors in perception’ (1935). McDougall’s Physiological His main question was ‘What is the Psychology (1905) into Turkish and psychological basis of social norms or also, by way of comparison, the Harvard, Sherif visited Europe in 1932. frames of reference, and how do they behaviourism chapter of Ogden’s Meaning Under the influence of two of his work?’ (p.10). The work has since gained of Psychology (1926). After graduating, teachers, and Caroll Pratt, foundational status in social psychology Sherif went to the US for his MA and PhD he went to in order to attend the through its publication, in 1936, as A studies. lectures of Köhler. Here he witnessed the Psychology of Social Norms . Sherif’s MA years were the time of rise of Nazism (Granberg & Sarup, 1992). After the doctorate Sherif returned to the Great Depression in the US. Under Intellectually, Sherif’s letters to Allport Turkey where his politics, his psychology, the influence of Gordon Allport at reveal that he was planning to work on a and the links between them, became ever Harvard, he widened the scope of his social psychological theory of (social) more clearly defined. He was in contact intellectual interests towards other fields perception based on gestalt principles with the Communist Party of Turkey. of social sciences. During this period (Samelson, 2007). During the years of WWII, he published Sherif was moving away from McDougall’s In the autumn of 1933 Sherif went in Adımlar [Steps] journal with Behice intentionalism towards a focus on the back to Harvard for his PhD. He Boran, another Marxist sociologist and social structuration of perception and contributed to the work of important political figure after the war. understanding. This change led him to and Gordon Allport on radio psychology Sherif struggled against the rising tide of experimental studies of ‘prestige- (Cantril & Allport, 1935) and developed and racism in Turkey (e.g. Sherif, suggestion’ which became the subject a psychology of slogans (Sherif, 1937a). 1943a, 1944). Like many, he believed in of his MA thesis (Batur, 2014). In terms of sociopolitical developments, modernisation, but he was distinctive After finishing his MA degree at there were Roosevelt’s New Deal policies both in distinguishing modernisation

Cantril, H. & Allport, G.W. (1935). The Granberg, D & Sarup, G. (1992). muzafer psychology . london: J.m. dent. of social psychology]. in S. Batur & E. psychology of radio. new york: Harper Sherif: Portrait of a passionate Ogden, C.K. (1926). The meaning of aslıtürk (Eds.) Muzaffer Şeri f’e & Bros. intellectual. in d. Granberg & G. psychology . new york/london: armağan: Muzaffer Şeri f’ten Muzafer Cherry, F. (1995). The stubborn particulars Sarup (Eds). Social judgment and Harper & Bros. Şeri f’e (pp.131 –135). istanbul: of social psychology: Essays on the : Essays in honor of Rohrer, J.H. & Sherif, M. (Eds.) (1951). İletişim. research process. london: routledge. Muzafer Sherif (pp.3 –54). new york: Social psychology at the crossroads. Sherif, M. (1935). a study of some social Çetik, M. (2007). muzaffer şerif karanlık Springer -verlag. new york: Harper. factors in perception. Archives of odada: türkiye yılları. in S. Batur & Kévorkian, R. (2006). Le génocide des Samelson, F. (2007). muzaffer şerif’in Psychology, 187 , 1 –60. E. aslıtürk (Eds.) Muzaffer Şeri f’e Arméniens []. sosyal psikoloji görüşlerinin doğuşu Sherif, M. (1936). A psychology of social armağan: Muzaffer Şeri f’ten Muzafer Paris: Odile Jacob. üzerine bir not [a note on the norms. Oxford: Harper. Şeri f’e (pp.23 –54). istanbul: İletişim. McDougall, W. (1905). Physiological emergence of muzafer Sherif’s views Sherif, M. (1937a). the psychology of

read discuss contribute at www.thepsychologist.or g. uk 831 camps, conflict and collectivism

from westernisation and in challenging Princeton, he produced his clearest top-down models of social change. statement of the social basis of human At the social psychological level, psychology. This was The Psychology of Sherif honed the idea that human Ego Involvements , published in 1947 – just thoughts, goals and desires (our ego before the Cold War gained momentum functions, in his terms) are not inborn or and a period in which anti-fascist, anti- absolute, but take shape in society. It is racist and Marxist ideas were popular in not that people are inherently social scientific academic circles in US. individualistic and antagonistic, thus In the book Sherif and Cantril compared legitimising a society based on private Soviet and American societies, arguing property as a reflection of ‘human nature’. that very different values and beliefs It is more that a society based on private flowed from very different socio-cultural property creates atomised and contexts. Once again, Sherif’s enduring antagonistic individuals. Hence, if we message was clear: an individualistic, want to challenge moral collapse in was notable amongst competitive and conflictual society is not society, education is insufficient, we need Muzafer’s collaborators unavoidable (Aslıtürk, in press). to change the fundamental structure of After his period at Princeton, Sherif our world. Social harmony depends upon own frames of reference (Sherif, 1938a,b). moved to Yale and soon thereafter to creating a harmonious social order. But if Sadly, however, this important work has Oklahoma where he remained until 1966. society creates the person, Sherif also never been translated from the Turkish. In the 1950s his political views became believed that people are active agents Sherif’s increasingly bold rhetoric did less popular. The Cold War, McCarthyite in creating society. More specifically, he not go unnoticed, especially when he witch hunts in the US (which touched proposed that individuals don’t just began to attack those important Turkish Sherif himself insofar as he was the operate within a pre-given frame of bureaucrats who supported the Nazis. subject of a comprehensive FBI reference but are able to develop their But Sherif was not deterred. He explicitly investigation in 1951 – see Batur, in sided with the anti-fascist camp during press) and the oppression of his friends a conflict at his university. He boldly in Turkey all took their toll on Sherif opposed a discrimination case targeting personally, politically and professionally a Jewish student (Batur, 2013). He (Aslıtürk & Cherry, 2003). He became published a book against racism Irk less explicit about his Marxism. But Psikolojisi [Race Psychology] (1943b). nonetheless one can still see a continuity All this led him to be detained in 1944 in his core ideas. as part of a process targeting members of This is apparent in the second of the Turkish Communist Party. He was Sherif’s core contributions of his exile released after four weeks and he then left years. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Turkey in early 1945 with a US State along with his collaborators (notably his Scholarship. In 1947 Sherif was dismissed wife Carolyn) he devoted his intellectual from his position at , energies to reconceptualising social ostensibly because he was married to a psychology as a discipline. He edited foreigner, but in reality because of his a series of influential texts including An politics. All the other anti-fascist Outline of Social Psychology (Sherif, 1948), professors were dismissed from the Social Psychology at the Crossroads (Rohrer university in 1948. In 1951 many of his & Sherif, 1951), Group Relations at the close friends were arrested during an anti- Crossroads (Sherif & Wilson, 1953), communist purge. Sherif’s links with his Groups in Harmony and Tension (Sherif & homeland had come to a close. Sherif, 1953) and Emerging Problems in Social Psychology (Sherif & Wilson, 1957). In these volumes, he argued for Years of exile a more ‘social’ social psychology, for Sherif produced some of his important methodological plurality, and for In the 1940s Muzafer Sherif explicitly sided with work in the early days of his return to US. interdisciplinarity. Most fundamentally, the anti-fascist camp First, working with Hadley Cantril at he sought to combat the emergence of

slogans. Journal of Abnormal and [Satisfaction of ego]. İnsan, 1 (3), thought]. Ad ımlar, 1 (9), 305–306. Sherif, M. & Cantril, H. (1947). The Social Psychology, 32 , 450 –461. 197 –203. Sherif, M. (1948). An outline of social psychology of ego-involvements: Social Sherif, M. (1937b). roosevelt Sherif, M. (1943a). Hümanizma psychology. new york: Harper. attitudes and identifications. Hoboken, amerikasında terbiyede fertçiliğin görüşümüz [Our humanism view], Sherif, M. (1970). On the relevance of nJ: John Wiley & Sons. yıkılışı [the collapse of individualism Ad ımlar, 1 (8) , 249–251. social psychology. American Sherif, M. & Sherif, C.W. (1953). Groups in in roosevelt america]. Ülkü, 10 (55) , Sherif, M. (1943b). Irk psikolojisi [race Psychologist, 25 , 144 –156. harmony and tension . new york: 43 –49. psychology]. istanbul: üniversite Sherif, M. (1977). Crisis in social Harper. Sherif, M. (1938a). ’tab-ı beşer’ hakkında kitabevi. psychology: Some remarks towards Sherif, M. & Wilson, M.O. (Eds.) (1953). [On essence of man]. İnsan, 1 (2) , Sherif, M. (1944). İleri fikir geri fikir breaking through the crisis. Group relations at the crossroads. new 109–116. münakaşası [discussion on Personality and Social Psychology york: Harper. Sherif, M. (1938b). Benliğin doyurulması progressive thought and backward Bulletin, 3 , 368 –382. Sherif, M. & Wilson, M.O. (Eds.) (1957).

832 vol 27 no 11 november 2014 camps, conflict and collectivism

confidence’ was itself a psychologisation of the crisis. He was critical of the ‘publish or perish’ attitude in academy. He stated that ‘mostly because of the unrelated idiosyncratic variables and scientistic technical sophistications’ research in social psychology was ‘too myopic, too ethnocentric, too fragmented and too incoherent’ (p.372). Above all, he insisted that any solution to the crisis depended upon a clear and critical perspective on the nature of the social world. Without that, social psychology will always be inadequate.

Conclusion Sherif retired from Pennsylvania State University in 1972. He died, in , in 1988. His work on social norms and on the boys’ camps is still cited in the textbooks, but in a way that divorces them from the wider intellectual project that Sherif pursued throughout his career. That project remains to be discovered in full and to be acknowledged in psychology and beyond. What is more, such a (re-)discovery is important in Carolyn and Muzafer brought an optimistic and liberatory message that people could get order to understand that the current along and work for common goals if the conditions were right problems of (social) psychology are not really new, and a solution of these individualistic and reductionist factors. Consequently, group behaviour problems requires political and ‘social’ explanations of human behaviour (see must be studied in its context, and we commitments, a clearer understanding of Granberg & Sarup, 1992) and to insist must employ rich methods that make the social nature of mind, and not simply on the social structuration of the human this possible (Valentim, 2007). Finally as greater methodological sophistication and mind. Cherry (1995, p.106) states, ‘the Sherifs technical progress. We believe that the This message is perhaps at its clearest were bringing an optimistic and liberatory roots of such understanding can be traced in the most famous of Sherif’s post-war message that people could get along and in Sherif’s own scholarship and that contributions, his boys’ camp field work for common goals if the conditions scrutiny of his personal and academic life experiments conducted with Carolyn were right’; this even in the dark days of will pave the way to scrutinise our own Sherif, which gave rise to ‘realistic conflict the Cold War. positions and responsibilities. theory’ (Sherif et al., 1961). At one level Even at the end of his career, in the message of this work is disarmingly the 1970s Sherif maintained his focus. simple: psychological relations between In critical interventions in the debate on Aysel Kayaoğlu group members reflect functional the so-called crisis in social psychology is at Anadolu University, relations between groups. But at another (On the Relevance of Social Psychology , Eskisehir, Turkey level the message could hardly be more 1970; Crisis in Social Psychology: Some [email protected] profound, both theoretically, Remarks Towards Breaking Through the methodologically and politically. Group Crisis , 1977), Sherif questioned the behaviour cannot be reduced to values guiding social scientific studies. intrapersonal tendencies or interpersonal He argued that the characterisation crisis conflicts. It depends on social structural in social psychology as the ‘crisis of Sertan Batur is at the University of Vienna, Austria

Emerging problems in social psychology . Valentim, J.P. (2007). Sherif’in teorik görüşleri norman, Ok: ve gruplar arası ilişki Çalışmaları: Olumlu Book Exchange. bir karşılıklı bağımlılık için notlar [Sherif Sherif, M., Harvey, O.J., White, B.J. et al. theoretical concepts and intergroup (1961). Intergroup conflict and cooperation: relations studies: notes for a positive Ersin Aslıtürk The Robbers Cave experiment . norman, interdependence]. in S. Batur & E. is at Ottawa University, Ok: university of Oklahoma Book aslıtürk (Eds.) Muzaffer Şeri f’e armağan: Canada Exchange. Muzaffer Şeri f’ten Muzafer Şeri f’e Trotter, R.J. (September, 1985). muzafer (pp.179 –192). istanbul: İletişim. Sherif: a life of conflict and goals. Zürcher, E.J. (1993). Turkey: A modern history. Psychology Today. 19 , p.54. london/new york: tauris.

read discuss contribute at www.thepsychologist.or g. uk 833