Interpersonal conflict as an object of socio-psychological analysis. Interpersonal conflicts
Interpersonal conflict is a clash between individuals in the process of their interaction. Such collisions can occur in a variety of spheres and areas of life (economic, political, industrial, sociocultural, everyday life, etc.).
D.) and have different scales of mutual claims: from a convenient place in public transport to the presidential chair in government agencies; from a piece of bread to a multi-million dollar fortune.
The subjects of interpersonal conflict are individuals (personalities) pursuing (protecting) their personal or group interests. The object of the conflict is the incompatible needs, interests, values, positions, goals, etc. of interacting individuals. The exception is unrealistic (objectless) interpersonal conflicts, in which the cause of the confrontation is the mental state of one, two or more subjects. In such a conflict, the incident is usually presented as the cause (object) of the conflict.
Some researchers interpret interpersonal conflict as “a clash of incompatible desires, aspirations and attitudes of communication partners...”35. In this definition, in our opinion, the subjects of the conflict are replaced by the object.
In interpersonal conflict, it is not interests and desires that clash, but real individuals over incompatible interests and desires. The clash of desires, aspirations, etc. is characteristic only of intrapersonal conflict. Interpersonal conflict also presupposes a real confrontation between the parties, and not just “mutual negative perceptions of people.” People can perceive each other very negatively, but do not conflict. Only as a result of actions directed against each other, interpersonal conflict arises.
So, interpersonal conflict is a clash (confrontation) of two or more individuals, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests, values, positions, roles, goals and/or means of achieving them.
As in other social conflicts, in interpersonal conflicts it is also possible to distinguish objectively and subjectively determined causes.
Objective factors create the potential for conflict to arise. For example, a vacant position for the head of a department may become a cause of conflict between two employees of this department if both of them are applying for this position. The social (impersonal) relations between potential participants in the conflict, for example their status and role positions, can also be considered conditionally objective. Reasons whose occurrence does not directly depend on the will and desire of the potential subject of interpersonal conflict are considered objectively determined.
Subjective factors in interpersonal conflict are formed on the basis of individual (socio-psychological, physiological, ideological and other) characteristics of the conflicting individuals. These factors largely determine the dynamics of the development and resolution of interpersonal conflict and its consequences.
Interpersonal conflicts arise both between people who meet for the first time and those who constantly communicate. In both cases, an important role in relationships is played by interpersonal perception (interpersonal perception), which involves the assessment and understanding (misunderstanding) of a person by a person. The process of interpersonal perception has a complex structure, its components are as follows: 1)
identification - comparison, juxtaposition of a person and identification of oneself with him; 2)
socio-psychological reflection - understanding another by thinking for him; 3)
empathy - understanding another person through empathy; 4)
stereotyping - the perception and assessment of another by extending to him the qualitative characteristics of a social group.
In social psychology, the process of reflection involves at least six positions that characterize the mutual reflection of subjects: 1)
the subject himself, as he really is; 2)
the subject as he sees himself; 3)
the subject as he appears to another.
In the relationship between subjects, we have the same three positions on the part of the other subject of reflection. The result is a process of double, mirror mutual reflection of each other by the subjects (Fig. 2).
Rice. 2. Interpersonal reflection
A scheme of interaction between subjects, similar in structure to the reflexive one, but slightly different in content, was proposed by the American psychotherapist E. Berne (Figure 3)36.
In this scheme, the basis of the conflict is the various states of the subjects of interaction, and its “provocation” is intersecting
Rice. 3. Options for transactions and interpersonal perceptions
xia transactions. Combinations “a” and “b” are conflicting. In combination “c”, one of the subjects of interaction clearly dominates the other or occupies the position of a patron, the other subject is content with the role of a “child”. In this combination, conflicts do not arise due to the fact that both subjects take their positions for granted. The most productive position in human communication is the position “g” (V-V). This is communication between equal people, without infringing on the dignity of either party. But other equal positions (“parent” - “parent”, “child” - “child”) are also objectively non-conflicting.
Adequate perception of a person by others is often hampered by already established stereotypes regarding this category of people. For example, a person has a preconceived idea of an official as a soulless bureaucrat, a red tape worker, etc. In turn, the official may also form a negative image of a petitioner who is undeservedly seeking special benefits for himself. In the communication between these two personalities, it is not real people who will interact, but stereotypes - simplified images of certain social types.
Stereotypes develop both in the process of socialization of an individual as a way of perceiving (assimiling) complex social concepts and phenomena, and in conditions of a lack of information as a generalization of the individual’s personal experience and often preconceived ideas accepted in society or in a certain social environment. Examples of stereotypes can be statements like: “all salesmen...”, “all men...”, “all women...”, etc.
A formed, possibly false, image of another can seriously deform the process of interpersonal interaction and contribute to the emergence of conflict.
An obstacle to finding agreement between individuals can be a negative attitude formed by one opponent towards another. Attitude represents the readiness, predisposition of the subject to act accordingly. This is a certain orientation of the subject’s psyche and behavior, readiness to perceive future events. It is formed under the influence of rumors, opinions, judgments about a given individual (group, phenomenon and others). For example, an entrepreneur has previously arranged a meeting with his colleague from another company to conclude an important business agreement. In preparation for the meeting, he heard negative comments from third parties about the business and ethical qualities of the proposed partner. Based on these reviews, the entrepreneur develops a negative attitude, and the meeting may either not take place or will not produce the expected results.
In conflict situations, a negative attitude deepens the rift between opponents and makes it difficult to resolve and resolve interpersonal conflicts.
Often the causes of interpersonal conflicts are misunderstandings (“misunderstanding” of one person by another). This happens due to different ideas about the subject, fact, phenomenon, etc.
D. “We often expect,” writes M. Moltz, that others will react to the same facts or circumstances in the same way as we do; by making the same conclusions, we forget that a person reacts not to real facts, but to their ideas about them”37. People have different ideas, sometimes diametrically opposed, and this fact must be accepted as a completely natural phenomenon, not to be dismissive of the ideas of others, but to try to understand them or at least take them into account, not to consider your ideas the only correct ones and not to impose them on others.
In interpersonal interaction, an important role is played by the individual qualities of opponents, their personal self-esteem, self-reflection, individual threshold of tolerance, aggressiveness (passivity), type of behavior, sociocultural differences, etc. There are the concepts of “interpersonal compatibility” and “interpersonal incompatibility”. Compatibility presupposes mutual acceptance of partners in communication and joint activities. Incompatibility is mutual rejection (antipathy) of partners, based on the discrepancy (confrontation) of social attitudes, value orientations, interests, motives, characters, temperaments, psychophysical reactions, individual psychological characteristics of the subjects of interaction.
Often, interpersonal contradictions and conflicts are based on differences (mismatches) of individual biological rhythms (“biological clocks”). One type of people is more active in the first half of the day. They are usually called “larks”. The peak activity of another type of people occurs in the second half of the day. If each of these types does not take into account the characteristics of the other, then their interaction will be fraught with various kinds of conflicts. Especially often such conflicts occur between close people: spouses, relatives, friends, etc.
Interpersonal incompatibility can cause emotional conflict (psychological antagonism), which is the most complex and difficult to resolve form of interpersonal confrontation. The difficulty of resolving such a conflict lies in the fact that there seems to be no real reason for the emergence of contradictions and the conflict appears to arise without any apparent reason. The reason for such a conflict is the negative mutual assessment and inadequate mutual perception of opponents of each other.
In the development of interpersonal conflict, it is also necessary to take into account the influence of the surrounding social, socio-psychological environment. For example, conflicts between gentlemen in the presence of ladies can be especially cruel and uncompromising, since in them (whatever the reasons for the conflicts) the honor and dignity of opponents are affected.
When interacting with other people, a person primarily protects his personal interests, and this is quite normal. The conflicts that arise are a reaction to obstacles to achieving goals. And how significant the subject of the conflict seems to be for a particular individual will largely depend on his conflict attitude - his predisposition and readiness to act in a certain way in the expected conflict. It includes the goals, expectations and emotional orientation of the parties.
But individuals encounter interpersonal conflicts, defending not only their personal interests. They can also represent the interests of individual groups, institutions, organizations, labor collectives, and society as a whole. In such interpersonal conflicts, the intensity of the struggle and the possibility of finding compromises are largely determined by the conflict attitudes of those social groups whose representatives are the subjects of the conflict.
The most typical types of interpersonal conflicts are the following: 1.
Conflicts, the causes of which are incompatible needs, desires, interests, goals, values, etc. 2.
Conflicts of “incompatible” means of achieving common needs, interests, goals, etc. 3.
Conflict over limited material resources (money, apartment, land, discounted trip to a resort, etc.). 4.
A conflict of dominance (power relations) is manifested in the desire of one subject to impose its will (power) on another (others) and the reluctance of the other (others) to obey or the desire to challenge the limits of imposed authority (family conflicts, hazing in the army). 5.
A conflict of status positions arises either when individuals claim the same social status, or when they inadequately assess the statuses occupied by them and their opponents, for example, a child challenges the authority of a parent, a citizen challenges the authority of an official. 6.
Role conflicts can be divided into three subtypes: 1)
two or more individuals strive to fulfill the same role in a social group or impose a role on another; 2)
inadequate assessment of the role performance of another individual; 3)
performing two or more incompatible roles and/or an inadequate social role. 7.
The conflict of possession is most typical for individuals who are in close relationships with each other (friends, parents - children, spouses, lovers), when one or both subjects want to solely own and dispose of the other38. 8.
A conflict of rivalry or competition is observed when two or more individuals compete with each other in some type of activity, as well as in strength, beauty, wealth, intelligence, courage and others, while competition and rivalry involve conflictual interactions. 9.
Unrealistic conflict. As mentioned above, such a conflict arises not over some object (subject), but due to the inadequate mental state of one or both subjects of the conflict. Here conflict is not a means to an end, but an end. 10.
A conflict of psychological incompatibility is a negative mutual assessment and perception of each other by opponents. The danger of such a conflict lies in the fact that incompatibility may not manifest itself in any way in the relationships of individuals for a certain period of time - exist at the subconscious level, but in a certain, difficult situation become the cause of a fierce interpersonal conflict.
Depending on the reasons for the conflict situation, the interests and goals pursued by opponents, the relationship of opposing forces, and the conflicting behavior of the parties, an interpersonal conflict can have the following types of outcome: 1
) avoidance of conflict resolution, when one of the parties does not seem to notice the contradictions that have arisen. Such behavior may be associated either with a clear superiority in power of one of the parties, or with the fact that at the moment there are not sufficient opportunities to resolve the contradictions that have arisen; 2)
smoothing out contradictions when one of the parties either agrees with the claims made against it (but only at the moment) or seeks to justify itself. Such behavior may be due either to the desire to maintain normal relationships, or to the fact that the subject of the dispute is not of significant importance for one of the parties; 3)
compromise - mutual concessions by both parties. The size of concessions, as a rule, depends on the balance of opposing forces; 4)
consensus - finding a mutually acceptable solution to a problem. With this option, the parties can turn from opponents into partners and allies; 5)
escalation of tension and escalation of the conflict into a comprehensive confrontation. Such conflict behavior is due to a mutual attitude toward an uncompromising struggle; 6)
a forceful option for suppressing a conflict, when one or both parties are forced by force (threat of force) to accept one or another outcome of the conflict.
there are two forms of it - constructive (-> productive conflict) and non-constructive. An unconstructive interpersonal conflict arises when one of the opponents resorts to morally condemnable methods of struggle, seeks to psychologically suppress the partner, discrediting and humiliating him in the eyes of others. Usually this causes fierce resistance from the other side, the dialogue is accompanied by mutual insults, solving the problem becomes impossible, and interpersonal relationships are destroyed. Interpersonal conflict is constructive only when opponents do not go beyond business arguments and relationships. In this case, various behavioral strategies can be observed. So, the following stand out:
1) rivalry (confrontation), accompanied by an open struggle for one’s interests;
2) cooperation aimed at finding a solution that satisfies the interests of all parties;
3) compromise - settlement of disagreements through mutual concessions;
4) avoidance, which consists in the desire to get out of a conflict situation without resolving it, without conceding one’s own, but also without insisting on one’s own;
5) adaptation - the tendency to smooth out contradictions by sacrificing one’s interests. The general expression of these behavioral strategies is characterized as corporatism and assertiveness.
Interpersonal conflict
a contradiction that arises in the sphere of interpersonal relationships, caused by the incompatibility of views, interests, goals and needs of people. In interpersonal conflicts (as opposed to intrapersonal or intergroup conflicts), people pursue incompatible goals, or adhere to incompatible values and norms, trying to realize them in their relationships with each other. They can also simultaneously, in intense competition, strive to achieve the same goal, which can only be achieved by one of the conflicting parties.
Interpersonal conflict
a situation of interaction between people in which they pursue incompatible goals, or adhere to incompatible values and norms, trying to realize them in their relationships with each other, or at the same time, in an acute specific struggle, strive to achieve the same goal that can be achieved only one of the conflicting parties.
INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT
the most destructive way of developing and completing significant contradictions that arise in the process of interpersonal interaction. For the emergence of cognitive behavior, the simultaneous presence of three conditions is necessary: contradictions in interpersonal interaction, opposition from opponents, and their experience of expressed negative emotions towards each other. The central object of conflictology is social conflicts, and their core is social conflict. Conflicts between social groups have a more noticeable impact on society compared to social conflict. The logic of knowledge requires conflictologists to understand, first of all, a relatively simple social conflict, which is K. m. Such conflicts m. b. constructive and destructive, short and long, low, medium and high intensity, etc. Depending on the sphere of its occurrence, control mechanisms are divided into business and emotional-personal.
Interpersonal conflict
from lat. conflictus - collision] - a collision of opposing goals, motives, points of view of interests of participants in the interaction. In essence, this is the interaction of people either pursuing mutually exclusive or simultaneously unattainable goals for both conflicting parties, or striving to realize incompatible values and norms in their relationships. In socio-psychological science, as a rule, such structural components of interpersonal conflict as a conflict situation, conflict interaction, and conflict resolution are considered. The basis of any interpersonal conflict is the conflict situation that has developed even before it begins. Here we see both the participants in a possible future interpersonal clash and the subject of their disagreement. Many studies devoted to the problems of interpersonal conflict show that a conflict situation presupposes that its participants are focused on achieving individual rather than common goals. This determines the possibility of the emergence of interpersonal conflict, but does not yet predetermine its obligatory nature. In order for an interpersonal conflict to become a reality, it is necessary for its future participants to recognize, on the one hand, the current situation as generally meeting their individual goals, and on the other, these goals as incompatible and mutually exclusive. But until this happens, one of the potential opponents may change his position, and the object itself, about which differences of opinion have arisen, may lose significance for one, or even both, parties. If the severity of the situation disappears in this way, the interpersonal conflict, which, it would seem, was inevitably bound to unfold, having lost its objective foundations, simply will not arise. For example, the basis of most conflict situations in which a teacher and a student are participants most often lies in the discrepancy, and sometimes the direct opposite, of their positions and views on learning and the rules of behavior at school. Lack of discipline, laxity, a careless, frivolous attitude towards the study of one or another student and excessive authoritarianism and intolerance of the teacher are frequent causes of acute interpersonal clashes. But a timely, targeted educational intervention carried out by a teacher to reorient the student, and in some cases, a revision of his own wrong position, can eliminate a conflict situation and prevent it from developing into an open interpersonal conflict, and sometimes a protracted confrontation. Conflict interaction in social psychology is traditionally understood as the implementation by participants in a conflict situation of their opposing positions, their actions aimed at achieving their goals and inhibiting the solution of the enemy’s problems. As observation and special studies show, the attitudes towards interpersonal conflicts, for example, of teachers and their behavior in situations of conflict interaction are ambiguous. As a rule, teachers who implement an authoritarian leadership style and adhere to dictatorship and guardianship tactics in relationships with students are intolerant of any conflict situation, and even more so of interpersonal clashes, regarding it as a direct threat to their authority and prestige. In this case, any conflict situation in which such a teacher is a participant moves to the stage of an open conflict, during which he tries to “solve” educational problems. The most constructive is a differentiated approach to interpersonal conflicts, assessing them from the point of view of the causes that led to them, the nature of the consequences, the functions they perform, the forms of their occurrence, and the possibilities of their resolution. Traditionally, conflicts are distinguished by their content, significance, form of expression, type of relationship structure, and social formalization. Interpersonal conflict in its content can be both business and personal. Experimental studies show that the frequency and nature of conflicts depend on the level of socio-psychological development of the community: the higher it is, the less often conflict situations arise in the group, which are based on the individualistic tendencies of its members. The business conflicts that arise here are predominantly generated, as a rule, by objective business-related contradictions in joint activities and have a constructive orientation, performing the positive function of determining the optimal ways to achieve a group goal. The business nature of such an interpersonal conflict in no way excludes the emotional intensity, clearly expressed and clearly demonstrated by each of its participants in their personal attitude towards the object of disagreement. Moreover, it is personal interest in the success of the case that does not allow the conflicting parties to descend to settling scores, to attempts to assert themselves by humiliating the other. Unlike a personal conflict, which often does not lose its intensity even when its initial grounds have already been exhausted, the degree of emotional intensity of a business conflict is determined by the attitude of both parties to the content and goals of the joint activity. After a constructive solution to the issue that gave rise to the conflict is found, most often the relationship is normalized. Continuing with the example from the field of educational practice, it should be said that almost any conflict between a teacher and a student is significant not only for its two direct participants, but also for the entire teaching staff as a whole. Despite the fact that quite often an interpersonal conflict is perceived as a “combat”, the social community to which the parties belong and are oriented is always, albeit sometimes invisibly, present during their collision, largely determining the course of its development. The nature and characteristics of the course of conflict interaction between a teacher and a student are largely determined by the specifics of the intra-group structure of the teaching and educational team, and the presence of power that the teacher has. From the point of view of social formalization, such conflicts, the so-called “vertical” conflicts, in their overwhelming majority should be classified as “official”, especially if in the form of expression they represent an open, demonstrative clash. But even in the case of a hidden, “masked” conflict, one can only conditionally speak about its unofficial nature. A necessary condition for a teacher to effectively influence a conflict that has arisen between him and a student for one reason or another is his thorough analysis of the causes, motives that led to the situation, goals, and probable outcomes of the conflict in which he found himself a participant. The ability of a teacher (like any other leader) to take a fairly objective position is a serious indicator of his high professional qualifications and skill. As research has shown, it is impossible to formulate any universal principle for resolving interpersonal conflicts that are diverse in their focus and nature, or to indicate the only correct tactics of behavior in all cases. Only when a leader is fluent in various tactics for resolving interpersonal conflict, taking into account numerous aspects of this socio-psychological phenomenon, and skillfully applies them in each specific case, can one count on the desired result. In addition to interpersonal conflict, there are also dissonance (intrapersonal conflict caused by an individual’s attempt to realize two or more opposing, mutually exclusive motives), intergroup conflict and conflict between an individual and a group. And yet, in terms of research within the framework of socio-psychological science, the study of issues related to interpersonal conflicts is a priority. The most detailed methodologically developed area is the study of the prevailing strategy of behavior in conflict interpersonal interaction (R. Blake, J. Mouton, K. Thomas, etc.).
The majority of both interpersonal and other social conflicts are based on a widespread stereotype, according to which any situation of conflict of interests represents a so-called zero-sum game in which the size of the gain is equal to the size of the loss. That is, one’s own interests can be satisfied only to the extent that the interests of the opposite party are infringed. The most obvious example of this kind is sports games where the winners win exactly the same score as the losers.
However, in real life there are often situations that are non-zero-sum games, in which the total gain does not necessarily equal the total loss. A classic illustration of this paradox is the “prisoner’s dilemma”, widely known in social psychology. In the original version, this is a story about two suspects of a serious crime, who are interrogated one by one by a prosecutor. Moreover, “both of them are guilty, however, the prosecutor only has evidence of their guilt in lesser crimes. Therefore, he invites each of the criminals to confess separately: if one confesses and the other does not, the prosecutor guarantees immunity to the confessor (and uses his confession to accuse the other of a more serious crime). If both confess, each will receive a moderate sentence.
If neither confesses, the punishment for both will be insignificant.”1 Thus, when using an optimal strategy that takes into account the interests of the other, both prisoners win - they receive symbolic punishment. Meanwhile, in practice, as D. Myers notes, “in order to minimize their own sentence, many confess, despite the fact that joint confession leads to more severe sentences than mutual non-recognition, since they are guided by the logic according to which “... regardless depending on what the other prisoner decides, it will be better for each of them to confess. If the other one confesses, the first prisoner, having also confessed, will receive a moderate sentence, not a maximum. If the other does not confess, the first one can go free. Of course, each of the two reasons the same way. And both fall into a social trap.”2
It can be noted that in this particular situation, such a line of behavior is justified and is conditioned, firstly, by the extremely high personal significance of the outcome for each of the participants and, secondly, by the physical impossibility of agreeing and concluding an agreement on joint actions. However, even in much less responsible and emotionally charged situations, people fall victim to the “zero-sum” stereotype. According to D. Myers, “in approximately 2000 studies, university students were faced with various versions of the “prisoner’s dilemma,” where the price of the game was not prison time, but chips, money, chips. Moreover, for each pre-selected strategy of the second player, it is more profitable for the first player to isolate himself (since in doing so he exploits the willingness to cooperate of the second player or protects himself from exploitation on his part). However, that’s the rub: without cooperating, both parties receive much less than if they trusted each other and benefited each other. This dilemma forces the participants into a psychological trap when both realize that they could mutually benefit; but, not trusting each other, they become fixated on refusing to cooperate.”3
Confirmation of the last thesis was obtained in a number of experiments conducted by domestic social psychologists. A group of students, divided into two teams of equal size, were asked to play a very simple game. The teams placed on opposite sides of the dividing line drawn on the floor were given the following instructions: “Your team receives one winning point for each player of the opposing team who crossed the dividing line and ended up on the side of the hall where you are now. You can use any means to encourage them to do this, except physical force." It is not too difficult to guess that the optimal winning strategy in this situation for both teams is to simply exchange sides, as a result of which both teams receive the maximum possible win. Note that, according to the conditions of the game, the participants had almost unlimited opportunities to agree on interaction both with the opposing team and within their own team. Despite this, in numerous trials, participants, as a rule, began with attempts to persuade, bribe, and blackmail members of the opposing team, i.e., they played a zero-sum game. When the idea of possible cooperation with rivals arose, it invariably ran into fierce resistance from individual participants and in many cases remained unrealized. If the parties did come to an agreement, they implemented it through a scrupulously synchronized one-on-one “exchange” of players, thereby demonstrating a clear distrust of each other.
Such rigidity in the perception of conflict situations, inherent in many people, is due to their total fixation on their own position and inability to look at the situation through the eyes of another. In this regard, the most important practical task of a social psychologist when working with both obvious and brewing interpersonal conflict is to minimize by means of socio-psychological influence the influence on the perception of the situation and the opponent of such factors as personal projections of participants, prejudice in favor of themselves, and a tendency to self-justification , fundamental attribution error, negative stereotypes. Thus, the situation is freed from the truly destructive components of the conflict, since, from the point of view of modern social psychology, “many conflicts contain only a small core of truly incompatible goals; the main problem is a distorted perception of other people’s motives and goals”1. Objective contradictions, conditioned by real circumstances, are not only not destructive in themselves, but on the contrary, they often contain development potential. In any case, a clear understanding of the essence of the contradictions, free from layers of transferences and countertransferences characteristic of the destructive development of a conflict situation, allows you to outline a plan of action and choose a behavioral strategy that is most adequate to the real circumstances.
K. Thomas, based on a detailed analysis of the “prisoner’s dilemma,” identified five behavioral strategies based on the relationship between taking into account one’s own interests and the interests of the opponent, potentially possible in a conflict situation:
1. Win - Lose. Within the framework of this strategy, one’s own interests are absolutized, and the interests of the opposite side are completely ignored. When applied to the “prisoner's dilemma,” a full-scale strategy of this kind would mean that the suspect not only agrees to cooperate with the prosecutor by confessing to the crime, but deliberately “pawns” his “accomplice” while simultaneously trying to minimize his own guilt.
2. Loss - Win. At the same time, one’s own interests are ignored and the interests of others are absolutized. In the example under consideration, guided by this strategy, the suspect takes all the blame upon himself, thereby shielding his comrade.
3. Losing - Losing. Choosing this strategy means ignoring both your own interests and the interests of the other party. In this case, the suspect tells the prosecutor about a serious crime committed by himself and another suspect, which will obviously result in severe punishment for both.
4. Compromise. Partial consideration of both one's own interests and the interests of the other - mutual recognition of a less serious crime with the prospect of a moderate sentence for both.
All four of these strategies are zero-sum games. In contrast, the fifth Win-Win strategy is a non-zero-sum game in which both one's own interests and the interests of the other are valued equally highly. When applied to the “prisoner’s dilemma,” it means that both suspects do not confess and get off with “a slight fright.” If we abstract from the “prisoner’s dilemma” and consider situations of conflict of interests in which the parties interact with each other, it is important to note that the search for an optimal solution in the “win-win” logic is most facilitated by confrontation, which at the level of ordinary consciousness is often confused with aggression and tend to avoid. In fact, confrontation is not a consequence of aggressive, but of assertive behavior of the parties, which meets four basic principles, which include:
Direct, clear and unambiguous statement of one's position;
Acceptance of the opponent’s position, in the sense of unconditionally recognizing its right to exist (which in no way means automatic agreement with it);
Refusal of any compromises for the sake of maintaining relationships;
Willingness to improve one's own position by accepting the opponent's arguments.
In this regard, the development of assertive behavior and confrontation skills is another essential aspect of the work of a practical social psychologist in the context of the problem of interpersonal conflicts.
A practical social psychologist, within the framework of his professional activities, can and should use business constructive conflict interaction as a correctional and educational resource and should, to the best of his ability, prevent the emergence of personal destructive conflict clashes among members of the group or organization that interests him.
3. Interpersonal conflict
1. The concept of interpersonal conflict
2. Functions, structure and dynamics of interpersonal conflict
3. Basic styles of behavior in interpersonal conflict
1. Concept of interpersonal conflict
Interpersonal conflicts, along with group ones, are one of the most common types of conflicts. Interpersonal conflicts are closely related to other types of conflicts: intergroup, ethnic, organizational, since any conflict is always the interaction of specific individuals, and in order to trigger the mechanism of conflict confrontation, personal motivation of the participants, a feeling of hostility or hatred towards another is necessary.
Interpersonal conflict is a clash between two or more individuals caused by a discrepancy in goals and interests, value orientations, struggle for scarce resources, awareness of a security threat, psychological and behavioral characteristics. Interpersonal conflict is also understood as an open clash between interacting subjects based on the contradictions that have arisen, acting in the form of opposing goals that are incompatible in a particular situation. Interpersonal conflict manifests itself in interactions between two or more individuals. In interpersonal conflicts, subjects confront each other and sort out their relationships directly, face to face.
In an interpersonal conflict, each side strives to defend its opinion, to prove the other wrong; people resort to a variety of types of aggression, from verbal to physical. This behavior causes acute negative emotional experiences in the subjects of the conflict, which aggravate the interaction of the participants and provoke them to extreme actions. In conditions of interpersonal conflict, rational perception of reality is often difficult, emotions begin to take precedence over reason. Many of its participants experience negative emotions for a long time after resolving an interpersonal conflict.
Interpersonal conflict reveals a lack of agreement in the existing system of interaction between people. They have opposing opinions, interests, points of view, views on the same problems, which at the appropriate stage of the relationship disrupt normal interaction, when one of the parties begins to purposefully act to the detriment of the other, and the latter, in turn, realizes that these actions infringe on its interests, and takes retaliatory actions.
This situation most often leads to conflict as a means of resolving it. A complete resolution of the conflict will be achieved when the warring parties together quite consciously eliminate the causes that gave rise to it. If the conflict is resolved by the victory of one of the parties, then this state will turn out to be temporary and the conflict will certainly manifest itself in some form under favorable circumstances.
Interpersonal conflict involves direct contact between opponents, direct interaction. This kind of “immersion” in the conflict weakens the action of reflection mechanisms and leads to a distortion of the perception of the situation. The psychological features of the conflict include the following points.
1. Lack of awareness of the motives of behavior, your own and your opponent’s. It would probably be more accurate to talk about a kind of mythologization of motives, their construction under the influence of various factors. Typical examples of mythologization are:
– the illusion of one’s own nobility (I defend a just cause, truth, goodness and justice in the struggle);
– exaggeration of other people’s shortcomings (the principle of a straw in someone else’s eye);
– double standard of assessment (what is possible for me is absolutely unacceptable from the opponent);
– simplification of the conflict situation, transferring it into one dimension of confrontation and struggle;
– a conscious, or, more often, unconscious substitution of the object of the conflict, increasing the motivation for conflict behavior.
2. Substitution of motives for conflict behavior, most often associated with the action of the projection mechanism - the transfer of an internal psychological state to the assessment of other objects or people (or attributing one’s motives to others). This may be based on:
– suppressed needs;
– unresolved problems of the past (for example, children's complexes);
– inferiority complex;
– one’s own internally unacceptable qualities or personality traits, the existence of which a person does not want to admit and transfers externally.
The causes of interpersonal conflicts are very diverse and are determined by the influence of a wide variety of variables: from the sociocultural characteristics of individuals to the discrepancy between their psychological types.
identifies the following groups of main causes of conflicts:
Design functions include:
– diagnostic (the emergence of a conflict acts as an indicator of dysfunctional relationships and the manifestation of emerging contradictions);
– development function (conflict is an important source of development of its participants and improvement of the interaction process);
– instrumental (conflict acts as a tool for resolving contradictions);
– reconstruction (the conflict removes factors that interfere with interpersonal interactions, takes interaction between participants to a new level).
The destructive functions of conflict are related to:
– with the collapse of existing joint activities;
– deterioration or complete breakdown of relationships;
– poor emotional state of the participants;
– low efficiency of further interaction, etc.
It is this side of the conflict that causes people to have the most negative attitude towards the participants, and they try to avoid them if possible.
The structure of interpersonal conflict is not something particularly specific. As in any other conflict, the main structural elements in an interpersonal conflict are: the subjects of the conflict, their personal characteristics, goals and motives, supporters, the cause of the conflict (the object of the conflict). Subjects of interpersonal conflict include those participants who defend their own interests and strive to achieve their goals. They always speak on their own behalf.
The object of an interpersonal conflict is considered to be what its participants claim. This is the material, social, spiritual value, or the goal that each of the warring subjects strives to achieve. For example, two children in kindergarten are competing for the same toy. In this case, the object of disagreement is the toy itself, provided that the opposite party considers its rights to be infringed.
The subject of conflict in such a situation is the contradictions in which the opposing interests of children are manifested. In this case, the subject will be the desire of children to master the right to dispose of a toy, i.e. the problem of mastering an object, the claims that subjects make to each other. In this regard, two aspects can be distinguished in the structure of interpersonal conflict: the first is the objectively established antagonism of interests, goals, values, and opinions. But in itself, the confrontation of interests and goals is static and does not lead to the emergence and development of a conflict process without external behavioral expression. Therefore, the second aspect is behavioral antagonism associated with contradictions in interaction, with an emotionally charged confrontation between the parties.
In accordance with this, we can distinguish two parallel systems, two “hypostases” in interpersonal conflict.
1. Analyzing the meaningful characteristics of the conflict object, we construct a certain cognitive (semantic) structure based on knowledge, information, and the meanings that we attach to these cognitive elements. In accordance with them, the goal of the action is built.
2. But at the same time, conflicting actions are connected with the motives of behavior, with the personal meaning that sets the relationship with opponents.
But any conflict should always be considered not only in statics, but also in dynamics. Conflict is a process that is always in development, therefore its elements and structure are constantly changing. There is a wide range of views on this issue in the literature. for example, in the textbook “Conflictology” they give a detailed table of the main periods and stages of conflict dynamics. Depending on the degree of tension in the relationship, they distinguish differentiating and integrating parts of the conflict.
The conflict itself, they believe, consists of three periods:
1) pre-conflict (the emergence of an objective problem situation, awareness of an objective problem situation, attempts to solve the problem in non-conflict ways, pre-conflict situation);
2) conflict (incident, escalation, balanced counteraction, end of the conflict);
3) post-conflict situation (partial normalization of relations, complete normalization of relations).
Doctor of Psychology Daniel Dana, one of the pioneers in the field of conflict resolution, in his four-step method for improving relationships, identifies only three levels of conflict development:
Level 1: hassles (minor troubles that do not pose a threat to relationships);
Level 2: clashes (the escalation of skirmishes into clashes - an expansion of the range of reasons that cause quarrels, a decrease in the desire to interact with another and a decrease in faith in his good intentions towards us);
Level 3: crisis (the escalation of clashes into a crisis is the final decision to break off a relationship that is unhealthy; here the emotional instability of the participants reaches such an extent that fears of physical violence arise).
Each of these authors independently determines the tactics and strategy for resolving conflicts and preventing them. In any case, for an interpersonal conflict to arise, there must be contradictions (objective or imaginary). Contradictions that arise due to discrepancies in people’s views and assessments on a variety of phenomena lead to a situation of dispute. If it poses a threat to one of the participants, then a conflict situation arises.
A conflict situation is characterized by the presence of opposing goals and aspirations of the parties to master one object. For example, the issue of leadership in a student group between students. For a conflict to arise, a kind of trigger is required, i.e. a reason that activates the action of one of the parties. Any circumstances can act as a trigger, even the actions of a third party. In the above example, the reason could be a negative opinion about one of the candidates for leadership of any student.
3. Basic styles of behavior
in interpersonal conflict
Any conflict always has its resolution and ends someday. Interpersonal conflict is no exception; in the end, it also has its resolution. Forms of resolving interpersonal conflicts depend on the style of behavior of the subjects in the process of conflict development. This part of the conflict is called the emotional side, and many researchers consider it the most important.
Researchers identify the following styles of behavior in interpersonal conflict: competition, avoidance, adaptation, compromise, suppression, assertive behavior. Let's look at these styles in more detail.
1. Rivalry– this style of behavior is characterized by persistent, uncompromising, non-cooperative defense of one’s interests, for which all available means are used. This style is most often used by opponents of equal rank. Characteristic features of this style: the desire to satisfy one’s interests at the expense of the interests of others; the desire to avoid the pain caused by defeat; The main thing is not to win, the main thing is not to lose. This behavior manifests itself in people who always strive to “save face”, to be a winner in any situation and at any cost. If this style is used by both opponents, the conflict turns into an end in itself, the original cause fades into the background, and rational control over the situation is lost.
2. Evasion associated with an attempt to avoid the conflict, not to attach great value to it, perhaps due to the lack of conditions for its resolution. A group of opponents or one of them refuses to participate in the further development of events and avoids solving the problem. Forms of manifestation of such behavior can be silence, demonstrative removal, ignoring the offender, breaking off relationships. In some cases, such behavior can be productive (if the problem is not important to you, if you realize that you are being deliberately drawn into a conflict, if you do not have sufficient information about the situation at the moment). But this style also has negative aspects: avoidance provokes inflated demands from the opponent, and withdrawal from the situation can lead to loss.
3. Device presupposes the subject’s willingness to sacrifice his interests in order to preserve relationships that are placed above the subject and object of disagreement. The conflict is not released for the sake of solidarity (sometimes false), preserving unity even at the cost of significant sacrifices and concessions. Thus, a manager can adhere to this tactic in relation to subordinates (or one of them) in order to preserve the “face” of the organization, “not to wash dirty linen in public.” Such behavior may be justified if you need to get a reprieve and analyze the situation. But if this style is used constantly, one of the parties inevitably becomes an object of manipulation and is forced to constantly make concessions and submit to pressure from the opponent. This leads to the accumulation of negative emotions, a constant increase in the negative emotional background.
4. Compromise requires concessions from both sides to the extent that through mutual concessions an acceptable solution is found for the opposing parties. This style of conflict behavior is perhaps the most constructive (although it is not applicable in every situation). The point is that the opponent's point of view is accepted, but only if he makes reciprocal concessions. With this style, a rational strategy dominates: it is better to gain something than to lose everything. It is important that each participant in the conflict achieves something. But often the problem is that some finite value is being divided, and the needs of all participants cannot be fully satisfied, which can become the basis for a new conflict. For example, if two children are quarreling over a chocolate bar, then a compromise is possible (divide in half), but if the object of the conflict is a toy, then a compromise is impossible on objective grounds (indivisible object). The fact is that compromise presupposes, although partial, simultaneous satisfaction of the needs of the subjects of conflict confrontation.
5. Suppression– the essence of this style is that one of the opponents forces the other to accept his point of view or position at any cost, using aggression, power and coercion. This happens very often when one of the opponents has a higher ranking position and seeks to realize its advantage using any available resources. Such behavior, for example, is often characteristic of authoritarian parents when resolving conflict situations with a child. Of course, this leads to the fact that the “weaker” opponent is forced to submit, but the conflict is driven inside and inevitably periodically resumes.
6. Assertive behavior(from the English assert - to assert, to defend). This behavior presupposes a person’s ability to defend his interests and achieve his goals without infringing on the interests of other people. It is aimed at ensuring that the realization of one’s own interests is a condition for the realization of the interests of interacting subjects. Assertiveness is an attentive attitude towards both yourself and your partner. Assertive behavior prevents the emergence of conflicts, and in a conflict situation helps to find the right way out of it. At the same time, the greatest effectiveness is achieved when one assertive person interacts with another similar person.
It should be noted that there is no ideal style of behavior in interpersonal conflict. All of these styles of behavior can be either spontaneous or consciously used to achieve the desired results when resolving such conflicts.
Conflictology. Ed. . St. Petersburg Publishing house "Lan", 1999. P. 132.
Shipilov. M. UNITY, 1999. P. 264.
Dana D. Overcoming disagreements. St. Petersburg LENATO, 1994, pp. 30–35.
Andrienko psychology. M. ACADEMIA, 2000. pp. 223–224.
Contents of the article:
Interpersonal conflicts are a clash between two or more individuals in the course of productive interaction, which is manifested by inconsistency or divergence of goals in a particular situation. In other words, interpersonal should be called an existing contradiction between people, which excludes the interests and goals of all parties and occurs taking into account the individual characteristics of each person.
The mechanism of development of interpersonal conflict
Each person in society defends his point of view and his interests, defending the rights to his own desires and positions. In addition, there are also goals that a given person strives to achieve. In the course of this, people need to contact each other, develop patterns of interaction and connections at different levels (professional, friendly, close). If an obstacle in the form of another person stands in the way of your own views, a conflict will arise.
The discrepancy between the established pattern of relationship with the individual and the fact that he becomes an obstacle to personal goals causes an analytical chain reaction in the subconscious. The degree of importance of the primary task and the strength of personal connections between these people are determined.
If personal ambitions take second place, it means that the chances of reconciling the differences that have arisen are quite high, since everyone will value the relationship. If heightened pride turns out to be stronger than the need for connection with a person, interpersonal conflict develops. It can be resolved in one of the possible ways listed below while preserving the initial relationship, or it can break all ties.
There are several specific features in the mechanism of development of conflicts in interpersonal relationships:
- An irresistible desire to prove oneself right. A person tries to justify his opinion both by presenting real reasons and factors, and by devaluing the arguments of his interlocutor.
- Emotional attachment. Conflict is accompanied by strong affective reactions that are difficult to control.
- Bias in the negativity of an alternative solution. The opinion that one’s own judgment is the only correct one makes one doubt the correctness of the opponent’s decision.
The main causes of interpersonal conflicts
Confrontation between people reaches its climax due to completely different reasons. Moreover, in each individual situation we can name several significant factors that could provoke an interpersonal conflict:
- Dissatisfaction with material and spiritual benefits. If a person lacks the necessary resources in quantitative or qualitative terms, he tries to make up for them in another way, where there is a high risk of developing interpersonal conflict.
- Mutual interests. In a group where the goals of the participants converge, but the methods of achieving the task have some differences, a number of confrontations may arise. The person is unable to fulfill some of his needs in work or personal relationships. This should include conflict situations at work, problems with subordination of subordinates and mentors, family disagreements, and family quarrels.
- Individual interests. Opponents have personal goals, the fulfillment of one of them excludes the other. The developing conflict raises the question of the differences that exist at the moment and requires a compromise solution.
- Value features of the issue. This type of confrontation is based on dissimilar motivational approaches to the same issue due to different psychological attitudes and priorities.
- Course of action. Develops due to the absence of stereotypes and manners of certain behavior in one of the opponents. This may be due to lack of experience or inability to perform the necessary actions. Often causes conflicts at work or school.
- Communication. Inconsistency between the communication abilities of one person and another, non-compliance with the rules of dialogue, subordination and tact.
- Character. The cause of the conflict is specific personal characteristics that the other individual dislikes.
Family conflicts in interpersonal relationships can be based both on ordinary everyday disagreements and on the inability to realize one’s own needs, inconsistency of values and goals in life between spouses.
Working relationships often crack when carrying out orders and assigned tasks. There is also a risk of developing personal hostility among employees of the same level and management. Often disputes are based on behavioral issues, for example, a discrepancy between an employee’s actions and the reputation of a company or organization.
Types of interpersonal conflicts
The concept of interpersonal conflict represents a unique example of a combination of the characterological characteristics of each individual and the nuances of controversy. Therefore, it is difficult to identify any common points in each of the disputes. The classification allows us to divide such confrontations into three large options, which differ in motivational features:
- Values disagreement. What is important for one person turns out to be completely unimportant for another and causes a wave of indignation and discontent. This group contains all the religious, political and philosophical differences that exist between people. Such situations do not necessarily cause conflict, but when combined with the right conditions, they can spark real confrontation. It is similar in family relationships: different personal meanings of the goals of each spouse can coexist until one of them begins to influence or undermine the spiritual values of the other. This balance can be controlled by common highest ideals, which nevertheless converge. For example, one of the parents attracts the child to a certain type of activity, and the second - to a completely different one. But each of them is sure of one thing: their son or daughter should do something. Common views on the problem determine priority solutions that suit both.
- Conflict of interest. Completely different goals and ideas about achieving them can coexist as long as they do not intersect. If the desire of one person excludes the intention of another, a conflict situation develops on this basis. This scenario often occurs in life when some resources are distributed that both parties want to receive.
This group of conflicts includes any kind of emotional competition, including both benefit and personal hostility towards the opponent. For example, a struggle in the office for a promotion, a tender for a large project in a company, a competition for an increased scholarship in an educational institution. - Violation of the rules of interaction. This type of interpersonal conflict is based on an unwillingness to adhere to the general rules and norms that have been established to regulate communications between the two parties. If one of them violates some of these rules, insensitive or unacceptable behavior may be interpreted as a reason for confrontation. Such disagreements can be observed at work as situations of abuse of authority or insubordination. In families, such conflicts occur due to inappropriate attitudes towards each other, which is expected in these conditions.
How to behave during interpersonal conflict
To resolve an interpersonal conflict, it is necessary to remember that in a dispute the truth is not born, but the true face of the participant in the disagreement is revealed. How your opponent and others see you during a given disagreement can have significant consequences in the future. A distinctive feature of a well-mannered and intelligent person is the ability to keep himself and his emotions in check while clarifying discrepancies.
Behavior during interpersonal conflict should not descend to such a level that it does not correspond to self-image. It is necessary to act so that the spoken words and promises do not cause further shame, regret or any other unpleasant sensations. Every word in a dispute should be thought through to the smallest detail.
If you adhere to the basic rules of such behavior, the conflict has every chance of a quick and effective resolution:
- Respect for your opponent. Be that as it may, in most cases a person leads a confrontation with someone whom he knows well or often interacts with. Interpersonal conflicts with strangers also happen, but not as often as with loved ones, acquaintances, and colleagues. The likelihood of further connections or contacts with your opponent is enormous. Therefore, in order to avoid further awkwardness, apologies and discomfort in communicating with this person, you should not treat him in an insulting or humiliating manner.
- Emotional restraint. There is a tendency that conflict situations without affective load are resolved faster and do not leave an unpleasant aftertaste. Moreover, there is a possibility of maintaining a minimally positive relationship with the other side of the confrontation. In important disputes, switching to the emotional side with the identification of personal hostility towards a person is considered a sign of tactlessness, bad manners and bad taste. Moreover, such an attitude will not at all raise a person’s reputation among friends and relatives.
- Direction to solve the problem. Often in conflict situations, people forget why they started an argument. By turning to personal insults and humiliations, the essence of the feud remains unresolved or untouched. All attention, rage or enthusiasm should be used in developing optimal schemes for resolving this disagreement, methods for establishing a mutually satisfactory compromise.
In any conflict, you should behave the way you would like your opponent to behave. In this way, you can achieve culture and mutual understanding with loved ones, friends and acquaintances.
Ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts
Subconsciously, a person himself tries to resolve any disagreements using methods that he considers the most convenient and simple. Sometimes, even without active intervention in the confrontation, it can resolve on its own. This does not always happen, but it is usually resolved in one of 4 ways:
- Smoothing sharp corners. This is a kind of imaginary way out of the current situation, which in fact does not get rid of the cause of the conflict, but only erases its main manifestations. In fact, dissatisfaction with these circumstances transforms into internal anger and resentment, and external active manifestations subside for a while. There remains a huge possibility that the subsided dispute may resume with much greater force after a while. Smoothing is achieved through ordinary reconciliation due to various factors or temporary benefits.
- Compromise solution. Partial acceptance of the opponent’s terms by all parties to the conflict can weaken his strength for some time. Although minor differences will still remain, they will not be at a sufficient level to resume confrontation. There is a great possibility of its development over a certain period of time.
- Acceptance. Attention is focused on both points of view, and all comments, additions and claims to each other are accepted. This type of interaction after an interpersonal conflict is observed infrequently, but still has the right to exist as the most optimal scenario for the development of events. It is extremely rare that people can fully accept each other’s point of view, integrate it with their own and come to a mutually beneficial solution.
- Domination. One side fully and completely admits that it is wrong and that the opponent’s point of view, idea or proposal is superior. This often happens in work environments where subordination forces staff to fully agree with what management puts forward. A peculiar scheme of subordination does not always work for choleric or hysterical individuals. Such people will never allow their opinions and results to be ignored.
- The presence of a conflict situation must always be recognized. This is an integral part of the process itself that must be resolved. If you resist and do not accept dissonance in a relationship for what it is, hidden negative feelings can persist for a very long time and gradually poison your life.
- Creating an opportunity to clarify the current situation. Discussion and debate are essential for proper resolution of interpersonal conflict. It is necessary on both sides to provide conditions under which it will be possible to understand the causes and essence of the problem.
- Determining specific reasons for disagreement. To avoid moving to the emotional level and personal claims, you need to clearly define the range of interests in this conflict. Often this way you can understand that the problem is not that big.
- Options for the outcome of the situation. There must be several of these to give you the opportunity to choose the optimal one. They need to be developed taking into account the interests of each party.
- Selecting an agreed solution and turning it into reality. The joint practical application of the measures that have been agreed upon leads to reconciliation and attempts to establish personal contact.
Prevention of interpersonal conflicts
The best medicine is prevention. It is much easier to prevent the development of unwanted discord than to search for ways to resolve it later. This way you can maintain trusting relationships with friends, relatives, acquaintances and even at work. Your reputation will remain impeccable if you know how to prevent interpersonal conflicts.
The main points in preventing the formation of disagreements lie in the behavior, gestures and tact of both parties. If you follow a few rules, you can significantly reduce the risk of violent conflicts with other people:
- You should pay attention to your opponent, you must behave politely and tactfully with him.
- Tolerance will help you avoid violent reactions from the other person.
- Trust and openness should be shown by maintaining eye contact; there is no need to avoid looking in any case.
- Provide an opportunity for the interlocutor to explain his point of view and justify his opinion.
- Try to understand your opponent or mentally put yourself in his place.
- Tactfully admit your mistake, if any.
- Express vague feelings that indicate your doubts about your correctness regarding the present conversation.
- Carefully explain those points where your opponent’s opinion can be criticized.
- A positive attitude towards resolving the situation, rather than arguing that you are right.
Important! Any conflict should be resolved without a raised voice, and personal insults should not be allowed.
How to resolve interpersonal conflict - watch the video:
For mutually beneficial and productive relationships with colleagues at work, at home with family or loved ones, you should know how to resolve the interpersonal conflict that will inevitably arise in everyone’s life. To do this, you need to be able to behave correctly in order to avoid unwanted actions and extremely unpleasant consequences.
LECTURE “INTERPERSONAL CONFLICTS” (Topic 7).
Conflicts arise in almost all spheres of human life. They manifest themselves in interpersonal communication, in joint activities, in the management process, in all relationships between people. The most common form of conflict is interpersonal. Therefore, knowledge of the characteristics of interpersonal conflicts, the ability to identify the causes of their occurrence and apply ways to manage them is so professionally important for a psychologist.
1. The concept of interpersonal conflict and its features
· Interpersonal conflict is an intractable contradiction that arises between people and is caused by the incompatibility of their views, interests, goals and needs. (Morozov A.V., 2000)
There are other approaches to determining the essence of interpersonal conflict:
1. Interpersonal conflict represents a situation of confrontation between the participants, perceived and experienced by them (or at least one of them) as a significant psychological problem that requires its resolution and causes activity of the parties aimed at overcoming the contradiction that has arisen and resolving the situation in the interests of both or one of the parties (Grishina N.V., 2000)
2. Interpersonal conflict - this is an intractable situation that can arise due to the existing disharmony of interpersonal relations of people in a society or group, as well as as a result of an imbalance between the structures existing in them (Krysko V.G., 2003)
3. Interpersonal conflict – this is a temporary emotional change in a person’s mood in connection with the receipt of new data that significantly changes the old idea of an object or process of interest (Zhuravlev P.V., 2000)
4. Interpersonal conflict is a struggle for values and claims to a certain status, power, resources, in which the goals are to neutralize, cause damage or destroy a rival (Kibanov A.Ya., 1998).
5. Interpersonal conflict represents a clash of two or more strong motives that cannot be satisfied simultaneously. The weakening of one motivating stimulus leads to the strengthening of another and a new assessment of the situation is required (Gubsky E.F., 2002).
6. Interpersonal conflict – this is a collision of oppositely directed, mutually incompatible tendencies in the consciousness of an individual, in interpersonal interactions or interpersonal relationships, associated with negative emotional experiences (Petrovsky A.V., 1985).
Let us generalize all the variety of formulations of interpersonal conflict by highlighting it features:
1. Conflicts between people arise not due to the manifestation of objective circumstances, but as a result of their incorrect subjective perception and assessment by individuals;
2. In interpersonal conflicts, there is a direct confrontation between people, i.e. rivals usually face each other;
3. In interpersonal reasons, the whole variety of known psychological reasons (general, particular, objective, subjective, etc.) is manifested;
4. During interpersonal conflicts, there is a quick test of characters, temperaments, manifestations of abilities, will, intelligence, emotional sphere and other individual psychological characteristics;
5. Interpersonal conflicts are characterized by high emotional intensity and coverage of all aspects of interpersonal relationships between conflicting subjects;
6. Interpersonal conflicts affect the interests of not only the conflicting parties, but also those who are directly connected with them through professional or personal relationships.
The conducted studies gave grounds for the assertion that in 85% of conflicts the mood of the right-wing opponent noticeably worsens. In 70% of conflict cases, a deterioration in the mood of the wrong opponent was recorded. The conflict continues to have a negative impact on the mood of the participants even after it is resolved in 50% of cases.
Classification of interpersonal conflicts does not differ significantly from the classification of intrapersonal conflicts. The following forms of interpersonal conflicts are distinguished:
– motivational (conflict of interest);
– moral;
– cognitive (value);
– unfulfilled desire;
– role-playing (secretive and open);
– adaptive;
– inadequate self-esteem.
This classification scheme for interpersonal conflicts can be supplemented with two classification groups, namely:
1. According to the nature of the causes
1.1. Summoned labor professional relations;
1.2. Summoned psychological characteristics human relationships (likes, dislikes, etc.);
1.3. Summoned individual psychological characteristics participants (emotionality, aggressiveness, communication skills, etc.).
2. By significance for participants interpersonal conflicts can be:
2.1. Constructive , i.e. bringing relationships (after resolving the conflict) to a higher level of development, leading to mutual understanding;
2.2. Destructive, or leading to negative, destructive consequences.
It is of some interest to study the causes and areas of manifestation of conflicts.
2. Reasons and areas manifestations of interpersonal conflicts
In the study of the causes of interpersonal conflicts, three main positions have emerged. Let's look at them in more detail:
1. Psychoanalytic position (K. Horney) assumes that the key to understanding human behavior is the problems he once experienced in childhood;
2. Need-personal position (K. Levin) is based on an understanding of the causes of interpersonal conflicts as contradictions between a person’s own needs and an external objective compelling force;
3. Contextual position (M. Deutsch) suggests that the causes of interpersonal conflicts should be examined in the context of the overall system of interaction. In accordance with this position, competitive and cooperative relationships between people are distinguished, each of which can be equal and unequal, formal and informal, task-oriented or power-oriented.
Let's consider main causes of interpersonal conflicts:
1) Availability contradictions between the interests, values, goals, motives, roles of individuals;
2) Presence confrontation between different individuals caused by differences in social status, level of aspirations, etc.;
3) Appearance and the stable dominance of negative emotions and feelings as background characteristics of interaction and communication between people;
4) Mismatch reasoning, i.e. disagreement with the order (sequence) of the opponent’s conclusions, which in certain situations leads to a feeling of one’s own psychological loss;
5) Features perception, during which a significant part of information is lost. According to research, it has been established that if we take what is planned as 100%, then what is expressed contains 70% of the primary information. What is heard is 80% of what is said, and in total it is 56% of the initial information. 70% of what is heard is understood (39% of the primary information). 60% of what is understood is remembered (24% of the initial level). When retelling what is memorized, about 30% of the information is lost. As a result, only 16% of the primary information is perceived, which explains the large number of errors and the possibility of conflicts;
6) Subjective predisposition to conflicts, which manifests itself in a combination of the following psychological qualities: inadequate self-esteem, desire for dominance, conservatism of thinking, excessive straightforwardness, criticism, anxiety, aggressiveness, stubbornness, irritability, touchiness.
Main areas of manifestation interpersonal conflicts are the team (organization), society and family, i.e. social communities in which most of human life takes place.
Let us make an attempt to correlate the main causes of interpersonal conflicts with the areas of their manifestation.
1. Conflicts in a team (organization) develop according to the following schemes: “ manager-subordinate», « equal to equal», « official», « unofficial" The causes of these conflicts can be divided into two groups:
1.1. Organizational and technical (allocation of resources, differences in goals, poor communication, interdependence of tasks, differences in methods);
1.2. Psychological (individual, status, role characteristics, differences in positions, attitudes, views, judgments).
2. Conflicts in society develop according to the schemes " citizen-society" And " citizen-citizen" Their main reason is the low psychological and pedagogical culture of their participants.
3. Conflicts in the family represented by diagrams " husband-husband», « parents-children" And " spouses-relatives" Among their reasons are the following:
3.1. Deviant behavior one of the participants;
3.2. Material problems ;
3.3. Activity Limit (freedom, action);
3.4. Individual psychological characteristics ;
3.5. Sexual disharmony .
Let's move on to studying the technology of managing interpersonal conflicts
3.
In the process of managing interpersonal conflicts, it is important to take into account the factors of their development.
· Factors of conflict – these are the driving forces or instigators of conflict interaction, determining its nature and individual features.
According to the American conflictologist W. Lincoln, five factors of interpersonal conflicts can be identified:
1. Information factors boiling down to the unacceptability of information for one of the parties to the conflict. They usually manifest themselves in the forms of incomplete and inaccurate information, rumors, misinformation, unreliable sources, extraneous factors;
2. Behavioral factors representing negative manifestations in the behavior of one or both parties to the conflict (rudeness, tactlessness, aggressiveness). They manifest themselves in the form of striving for superiority, selfishness, breaking promises;
3. Relationship Factors are expressed in dissatisfaction with the interaction between the parties to the conflict. They manifest themselves in the form of incompatibility of values, differences in educational level, mistrust, lack of authority, imbalance of relationships;
4. Value factors manifest themselves in the opposite principles of behavior of the conflicting parties. They appear in the form of prejudices, adherence to traditions, ideas about ethical standards (about good and evil, justice and injustice);
5. Structural factors represent relatively stable objective circumstances that are difficult to change. This is the attitude to power, legal norms, property rights, management system, and norms of behavior.
Managing Interpersonal Conflicts can be considered in external And internal aspect. The external aspect represents the impact within a specific conflict. The internal aspect represents the main strategies of behavior in conflict. Let's look at them in more detail.
1. Managing Interpersonal Conflicts represents an impact on the sphere of conflict relationships, leading to its constructive resolution. It includes four stages:
1.1. Forecasting conflict consists in studying the individual psychological characteristics of partners, analyzing early symptoms of conflict at the stage of a conflict situation (limitation of relationships, critical statements, etc.);
1.2. Warningconflict is carried out on the basis of an in-depth analysis of the causes and factors of the brewing conflict, after which measures are taken to neutralize them. There are pedagogical measures (conversations, explanations, persuasion, suggestion) and organizational measures (temporary isolation of participants, changing the conditions of communication);
1.3. Regulationconflict is carried out on the basis of recognition by the conflicting parties of the reality of the conflict, after which conflict management technologies are applied simultaneously with limiting the number of participants;
1.4. Permissionconflict is carried out based on the choice of one of the known methods.
2. Internal aspect involves the use of technologies of rational behavior in conflict. It is based on the choice of strategy and tactics of behavior developed by American psychologists K. Thomas and R. Kilman. There are two main strategies for dealing with conflict:
2.1. Partnership strategy focuses on taking into account the interests and needs of the partner, for which points of contact of views and opinions are used;
2.2. Pressure strategy characterized by the realization of one’s own interests and goals, for which the imposition of one’s opinion and selfishness are used.
Interpersonal methods of conflict resolution are associated with the common source of any conflict - the divergence of interests of two or more parties. These include the following:
1) Method of competition consists in resolving the conflict actively, by making one’s own volitional decisions. This method consists in the fact that one party seeks to satisfy its own interests to the detriment of the interests of others, forcing them to make their own decision. This method is justified if the competing party has a certain power and authority, if the conflict must be quickly resolved. However, the method is not applicable in the event of complex conflicts;
2) Evasion method is realized when one of the parties withdraws from cooperation or even from defending its interests. This method is effective if the conflict is shallow, if it is known in advance that one of the parties is wrong, if a delay in solving the problem is necessary;
3) Method of adaptation means that the parties to the conflict interact without trying to defend their own interests. It is advisable to choose this method if the significance of the conflict is not the same for its parties;
4) Way of cooperation manifests itself in the fact that the parties actively interact and at the same time defend their interests. This method takes the longest time; it is effective if the parties have different hidden needs, and solving the problem is equally important for both.
5) Way to compromise consists in the fact that one of the parties gives a little to the other and is determined to resolve disagreements through mutual concessions. This method is effective if the situation is important for both, and the parties to the conflict have equal power.
A graphical model for choosing a conflict resolution method is shown in Fig. 1.
Rice. 1Interpersonal methods of conflict resolution.
As a result of studying this topic, the following can be formulated: conclusions:
· There are different approaches to describing interpersonal conflicts, but most researchers agree that they have objective causes, subjective manifestations, diverse manifestations, specific factors, high emotional intensity;
· Interpersonal conflicts manifest themselves in all spheres of life (team, society, family) and can be managed, which comes down to studying the causes and factors, influencing the sphere of conflict relationships, choosing a strategy and method of behavior.
Task 7
Analyze your attitude towards the main ways of resolving interpersonal conflicts. The results of the analysis are reflected in the table. Use your own rating system.
| Conflict resolution method | Relation to method |
|||
| I use it often | I prefer | I use it less often | I feel the least comfortable |
|
| COMPETITION | ||||
| EVASION | ||||
| COOPERATION | ||||
| COMPROMISE | ||||
| DEVICE | ||||
