Conflicts in interpersonal relationships, their causes and features. Interpersonal conflicts: how they arise and proceed, examples

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. The concept of interpersonal conflict

Interpersonal conflicts, along with group conflicts, 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 start 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 of two or more individuals caused by a mismatch of goals and interests, value orientations, the struggle for scarce resources, awareness of a security threat, psychological and behavioral characteristics. An interpersonal conflict is also understood as an open clash of interacting subjects based on the contradictions that have arisen, acting as opposite goals that are incompatible in a particular situation. Interpersonal conflict is manifested in the interaction between two or more persons. In interpersonal conflicts, subjects confront each other and sort out their relationship directly, face to face.

In an interpersonal conflict, each side seeks to defend its opinion, to prove the other one wrong, people resort to various types of aggression, from verbal to physical. Such behavior causes sharp 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, after resolving an interpersonal conflict, experience negative emotions for a long time.

Interpersonal conflict reveals the 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. The full resolution of the conflict will be carried out when the opposing sides 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 such a state will be temporary and the conflict will necessarily declare itself in some form under favorable circumstances.

Interpersonal conflict involves direct contact between opponents, direct interaction. Such a kind of "immersion" in the conflict weakens the action of the mechanisms of reflection, leads to a distortion of the perception of the situation. The psychological features of the conflict include the following points.

1. Insufficient awareness of the motives of behavior, one's own and the opponent's. Probably, it would 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);

- hypertrophy of other people's shortcomings (the principle of a straw in another's eye);

- a double standard of evaluation (what is possible for me is absolutely unacceptable on the part of the opponent);

- simplification of the conflict situation, its translation into one dimension of confrontation and struggle;

- conscious, or, more often, unconscious substitution of the object of the conflict, which increases the motivation for conflict behavior.

2. Substitution of the motives of conflict behavior, most often associated with the action of the projection mechanism - the transfer of the internal psychological state to the assessment of other objects or people (or attributing one's own motives to others). This may be based on:

- suppressed needs

- unresolved problems of the past (for example, children's complexes);

- an inferiority complex;

- own internally unacceptable qualities or personality traits, the existence of which a person does not want to admit and transfers to the outside.

The causes of interpersonal conflicts are very diverse and are due to the action of a wide variety of variables: from the sociocultural characteristics of individuals to the mismatch of their psychological types.

identifies the following groups of main causes of conflicts:

Structural features include:

- diagnostic (the appearance of a conflict acts as an indicator of dysfunctional relations and manifestations of the contradictions that have arisen);

- development function (conflict is an important source of development of its participants and improvement of the interaction process);

- instrumental (the conflict acts as a tool for resolving contradictions);

- reconstruction (conflict removes factors that interfere with interpersonal interactions, brings 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 collapse of relations;

– poor emotional state of the participants;

– low efficiency of further interaction, etc.

It is this side of the conflict that causes people the most negative attitude towards the participants, and they try to avoid them as much as 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). The subjects of interpersonal conflict include those participants who defend their own interests, strive to achieve their goal. They always speak for themselves.

The object of interpersonal conflict is what its participants claim. This is the material, social, spiritual value, or the goal, which each of the opposing subjects strives to achieve. For example, two children in kindergarten claim the same toy. In this case, the object of disagreement is the toy itself, provided that the opposite side considers its rights infringed.

The subject of the conflict in such a situation are contradictions in which the opposite interests of children are manifested. In the above case, the subject will be the desire of children to master the right to dispose of the toy, that is, the problem of mastering the object, the claims that the subjects present 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, does not lead to the emergence and deployment of a conflict process without external behavioral expression. Therefore, the second aspect is behavioral antagonism associated with contradictions in interaction, with an emotionally intense confrontation between the parties.

In accordance with this, we can distinguish two parallel systems, two "hypostases" in the interpersonal conflict.

1. Analyzing the content characteristics of the object of the conflict, we construct some cognitive (semantic) structure based on knowledge, information, values ​​that we attach to these cognitive elements. In accordance with them, the purpose of the action is built.

2. But at the same time, conflict actions are associated with the motives of behavior, with the personal meaning that sets the relationship to 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, so 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 the dynamics of the conflict. Depending on the degree of tension in relations, 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, full normalization of relations).

Daniel Dana, PhD, 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:

1st level: skirmishes (minor troubles that do not pose a threat to the relationship);

2nd level: clashes (development of clashes into clashes - expansion of the circle of causes that cause quarrels, a decrease in the desire to interact with another and a decrease in faith in his good intentions for us);

3rd level: crisis (the escalation of clashes into a crisis is the final decision to break off relations that are unhealthy, here the emotional instability of the participants reaches such an extent that there are fears of physical violence).

Each of these authors independently determines the tactics and strategy for resolving conflicts and preventing them. In any case, for the emergence of an interpersonal conflict, the presence of contradictions (objective or imaginary) is necessary. The contradictions that have arisen due to a discrepancy in the views and assessments of people 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.

The conflict situation is characterized by the presence of opposite 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 needed, that is, 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 may be a negative opinion about one of the contenders for the leadership of any student.

3. Basic styles of behavior

in interpersonal conflict

Any conflict always has its resolution, someday ends. Interpersonal conflict is no exception, after all, it also has its resolution. Forms of resolving interpersonal conflicts depend on the behavior of 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: rivalry, evasion, adaptation, compromise, suppression, assertive behavior. Let's take a closer look at these styles.

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 their 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 is manifested 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 becomes 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 get away from the conflict, not attaching great value to it, perhaps due to the lack of conditions for its resolution. A group of opponents or one of them refuse to participate in the further development of events, evade solving the problem. The forms of manifestation of such behavior can be silence, defiant removal, ignoring the offender, breaking off relations. In some cases, this behavior can be productive (if the problem is not important to you, if you realize that you are being deliberately drawn into the conflict, if you do not currently have sufficient information about the situation). But this style also has negative aspects: dodging provokes excessive demands from the opponent, turning off the situation can lead to a loss.

3. fixture implies the willingness of the subject to give up their interests in order to maintain relationships that are placed above the subject and object of disagreement. The conflict is not released outside for the sake of solidarity (sometimes false), the preservation of unity even at the cost of significant sacrifices and concessions. So, the leader can adhere to this tactic in relation to subordinates (or one of them) in order to save the "face" of the organization, "not to wash dirty linen in public." Such behavior may be justified if you need to get a reprieve, analyze the situation. But if this style is used constantly, one of the parties inevitably becomes the object of manipulation and is forced to constantly make concessions, submit to the pressure of the opponent. This leads to the accumulation of negative emotions, the constant growth of a negative emotional background.

4. Compromise requires concessions from both sides to the extent that an acceptable solution is found through mutual concessions for the opposing sides. This style of conflict behavior is perhaps the most constructive (although it is not applicable in every situation). The bottom line is that the point of view of the opponent 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 achieve 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 quarrel over a chocolate bar, then a compromise is possible (half), but if the object of the conflict is a toy, then a compromise is impossible for objective reasons (an indivisible object). The fact is that a compromise presupposes, albeit partial, but simultaneous satisfaction of the needs of the subjects of conflict confrontation.

5. suppression- the essence of this style lies in the fact 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 higher ranked positions and seeks to realize his 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 English assert - to assert, to defend). Such behavior implies the ability of a person to defend his interests and achieve his goals without prejudice to 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 both to oneself and to a 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 efficiency is achieved when one assertive person interacts with another such person.

It should be noted that there is no ideal style of behavior in interpersonal conflict. All of these styles of behavior can be both spontaneous and consciously used to achieve the desired results in resolving such conflicts.

Conflictology. Ed. . SPb. Publishing house "Lan", 1999. S. 132.

Shipilov. M. UNITI, 1999. S. 264.

Dana D. Overcoming disagreements. SPb. LENATO, 1994, pp. 30–35.

Andrienko psychology. M. ACADEMIA, 2000. S. 223–224.

The article provides an analysis of such a phenomenon as interpersonal conflict. The most typical causes, main signs and features of interpersonal conflict, its varieties, the possibilities of prevention and overcoming are considered.

In psychological science, a conflict that arises during the interaction (communication, communication) of one individual (or several) with another (others) is commonly called interpersonal.

Interpersonal conflict is a kind of confrontation between participants in a particular situation, when they perceive events as a psychological problem that requires mandatory resolution in favor of either all or individual participants in such an interaction.

A mandatory phenomenon in interpersonal conflict in society is contradictions between people - obstacles in communication, communication, finding a common language or achieving individual goals, motives and interests.

Causes and signs of occurrence

The concept of interpersonal conflict has a number of features and characteristics:

• the presence of objective contradictions- they must be significant for each conflicting person;
• the need to overcome contradictions as a means of establishing relationships between the participants in a conflict situation;
• participants activity- actions (or lack of them) aimed at achieving their interests, or reducing contradictions.

The causes of interpersonal conflicts are very diverse and depend on the socio-psychological context of a particular situation, the characteristics of an individual, the nature of relationships between people, etc.

The classification of causes can be represented as follows:

1. Resource- reasons associated with limitations or insufficiency of material, human resources, their quantitative and qualitative indicators.
2. Interdependencies- act as the causes of conflicts in the course of the implementation of relations related to power, authority, the fulfillment of common tasks, emotional attachment, including kinship, sexual.
3. Target differences as the causes of conflicts are manifested in real or imaginary differences in the goals of the participants in the conflict, which are seen as a threat to the realization of their own results and expectations in a given situation.
4. Value-motivational differences as the cause of the conflict take place with incompatibility of approaches to assessing the situation, the actions of other people and their own, as well as motives for actions.
5. Behavioral- the essence of these reasons is manifested in the differences in the life experience of the participants in the conflict, as well as in the manner of behaving in a certain situation.
6. Communication- Causes that arise in the course of improper communication.
7. Personal- these causes appear in the process of conflict participants in the conflict, when they show their individual and personal (personal) characteristics.

The causes of the conflict may vary depending on the specifics of its participants. So, in adolescence, the following become characteristic of a person:

• increased self-esteem (if it is hurt, the teenager tends to defend it through conflict interaction);
• unambiguity and ultimatum of moral assessments and criteria (everything and everything that does not correspond to the values ​​of a teenager is criticized);
• biased level of claims - overestimated or underestimated (the desire to prove something to the whole world or unreasonable pessimism and disbelief in one's own capabilities);
• maximalism in everything (there is no “golden mean”, which often leads to tension in relations with others).

In a family, the causes of interpersonal conflicts are also specific: from the banal incompatibility of characters or gender differences, to a mismatch in the understanding of family traditions and values ​​(raising children, sharing responsibilities, duties, etc.).

Types and structure

The structure of interpersonal conflict is quite simple and understandable. Conflictologists distinguish the following elements:

1. Members- all those who, one way or another, are involved in the conflict process. Types of participants: those who entered into the conflict directly, "support groups" of opposing individuals, neutral people (they are trying to win them over to their side), influential individuals (group leaders, bosses, moral authorities).
2. Item- an imaginary or objectively existing problem, due to which there is a quarrel (discord) between the parties to the conflict.
3. An object- a value of a certain kind (spiritual, material, social), which is in the sphere of interests of the conflicting participants and which they seek to possess or use.
4. Micro and macro environment, in which the conflict proceeds at various stages and spheres: at the intrapersonal, personal, social, spatio-temporal level.

Typology and types of interpersonal conflicts have many varieties. Depending on the nature of the problems that are affected, conflicts are:

• valuable(conflicts over meaningful ideas and basic values ​​of the individual);
• interests(conflicts affect incompatible and conflicting interests, aspirations and goals of participants in a particular situation);
• normative(conflicts arise when rules and norms of behavior are violated in the course of interaction between individuals).

Depending on the dynamics of the conflict, they are divided into:

• sharp(occur here and now, affect significant events and values), as an example: deception in a married couple;
• protracted(last for a long period of time with medium, but constant, tension, affect problems that are significant for the individual) - conflict of generations, fathers and children;
• sluggish(not intense, flare up from time to time) - a conflict of people working together who are not suitable for each other in character.

Stages and consequences

Each conflict necessarily goes through certain stages and stages, which are characterized by the degree of intensity, duration and consequences:

1. Hidden, implicit stage interpersonal conflict. It is the foundation for the emergence of conflict and is found in the dissatisfaction of the individual with something - status in the team, unfair wages, the inability to possess something, inadequate assessment of others, etc. If the overcoming of internal displeasure is not carried out, the next stage develops.
2. Stage of tension. The conflict breaks out. This is where the positions of the participants in the conflict are formed and the opportunities to reduce the confrontation or increase it.
3. Confrontation stage. Antagonism intensifies in positions in conflicting relationships. There are active conflicts.
4. Completion stage. There is either a complete resolution of the conflict, when the parties were able to agree. Or partial completion - the conflict is preserved at a certain stage and tension is reduced. Or there is a complete break in the relations of the conflicting parties and the emergence of prerequisites for conflict at a deeper level.

Resolution methods

Ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts show the intentions of the participants in the conflict, strategies for building relationships in a tense situation:

1. offensive strategy manifests itself in the forceful scenario of conflict resolution. Only those who act in their own interests and impose them on the other conflicting side will win here. The means to achieve the result are dominance over others, emotional pressure, cunning and manipulation.
2. Avoidance and withdrawal strategy. In fact, the conflict is not resolved, but its tension is reduced by ignoring or changing the attitude towards the subject of the conflict. Or, here there are concessions by one of the parties to the conflict, a departure from their interests in order to maintain relationships.
3. Contract strategy. There is a choice of the optimal solution to the conflict through the procedure of negotiations and the achievement of a mutually beneficial result.

Prevention and principles of behavior in conflict

Conflict prevention and prevention is facilitated by a preliminary assessment of any tense situation in the relationship and response to it:

1. Conflict management should include mandatory meetings of the parties to the conflict, where the causes of the conflict and ways to overcome it are identified.
2. A necessary principle of behavior in a conflict is the setting of common goals for the conflicting parties, which are understood and accepted by everyone. This is how collaboration is formed.
3. An important principle of behavior is consent to the invitation of a mediator to resolve the conflict. It can be one person or a group of people who are equally trusted by both one and the other side of the confrontation. The decision of the mediator is unconditional and binding on all parties to the conflict.

Video: How Interpersonal Conflict Occurs

Introduction

The conflict that occurs in life or at work is not a myth, not an illusion. Nevertheless, the conflict is not a tragedy, it has the right to exist, to exist.

Conflict - contradictions that arise between people and groups due to incompatibility of views and various disagreements.

“Conflict” is translated from Latin as “collision”, this is a collision of people with opposite views, interests and aspirations.

Conflicts occur in all social spheres. Conflict is a type of social interaction, the participants of which are individuals, various organizations and groups of people.

The whole process of functioning of society consists of conflicts. The more complex the social structure, the more differentiated the society, the more different and mutually exclusive interests, goals and more sources for possible conflicts.

Most often, conflicts have a devastating effect on people and make their life difficult and the consequences of certain behavior in a conflict situation are fear, hostility and threats. If these experiences are too intense and prolonged, then people may develop a defensive reaction, that is, behavior appears that penetrates the personality structure and distorts the nature of behavior, thinking and feelings. The negative consequences of this process may extend to other situations in which this person will be involved. Thus, there is a kind of chain reaction that covers ever wider areas of interpersonal relationships.

There are many classifications of conflicts according to different criteria.

In this term paper, we will consider interpersonal conflicts and ways to resolve them, since this type of conflict is the most common and requires more effort to resolve. This topic is relevant in the modern world, since every person at least once participated in an interpersonal conflict.

Course work consists of the following parts: introduction, 3 chapters, conclusion, glossary, list of references and applications.

The theoretical material was analyzed on the basis of the works of the following authors: A. Antsupov, A. Shipilov, G. Kozyrev, K. Levin, R. Petrukhin and others, which reveal the general patterns and psychological foundations of interpersonal conflicts.

The concept of interpersonal conflict

Interpersonal conflict is a conflict that occurs between subjects, arising as a result of socio-psychological interaction. This can happen in various fields and fields of activity (economic, political, industrial, socio-cultural, home, etc.). The reasons for these conflicts can be varied. As in other conflicts, here we can talk about objectively and subjectively incompatible or conflicting interests, needs, goals, values, views, ideas, opinions, assessments, ways of behavior, etc.

These conflicts can arise both between people who meet for the first time, and constantly communicating with people. The most important role in relationships in both cases is played by the personal perception of a person.

Often the cause of interpersonal conflicts is a misunderstanding (misunderstanding of one person by another). This is due to different ideas about the subject, phenomenon, fact, etc.

In interpersonal interaction, the individual qualities of opponents, their self-esteem, individual tolerance threshold, aggressiveness (passivity), type of behavior, social and cultural differences, etc. are important. There are concepts of interpersonal incompatibility and interpersonal compatibility. Interpersonal compatibility includes the mutual acceptance of partners in the field of communication and joint activities. Incompatibility - mutual rejection (dislike) of partners, based on a discrepancy between views, interests, motives, value orientations, character, temperament, mental and physical reactions. Interpersonal incompatibility can cause emotional conflict, which manifests itself in a very complex and difficult form of interpersonal confrontation.

There are objective and subjective factors of interpersonal conflict.

Objective factors create the potential for conflict. For example, the appearance of a vacant position can cause conflict between two people if both apply for it.

Subjective factors are created on the basis of individual (social-psychological, physiological, philosophical, etc.) personality characteristics. These factors determine the most dynamic development and resolution of the conflict and its consequences.

All interpersonal conflicts arising from a clash of interests and goals can be divided into three types.

The first one implies a fundamental conflict, in which the realization of the goals and interests of one person can be achieved only at the expense of the interests of another.

The second - concerns only the form of relations between people, but this does not violate their moral, spiritual and material needs and interests.

The third is a seeming contradiction, which can be caused either by false information or a misinterpretation of events and facts.

Conflicts can be divided into the following types:

a) competition - the desire for dominance;

b) disputes - differences of opinion on the search for optimal ways to solve common problems;

c) discussion - discussion of a controversial issue.

Interpersonal conflicts can have open and hidden forms of expression. Open conflict has a direct action of people against each other. In the latent form of conflict, through indirect confrontation and confrontation, using veiled methods, obstacles are created for the actions of the enemy.

The structure of the conflict means the totality of its individual parts, connections and everything that makes up the integrity of the conflict.

Key elements of conflict interaction:

1) the subject of the conflict is not always on the surface, most often, it is hidden from the participants, but is one of the main components of interaction in the conflict. The conflict can be resolved when the object has been clearly defined.

Misunderstanding of the object of the conflict or its replacement can aggravate the conflict situation. The conflict has its cause and arises from the dissatisfaction of the need, sometimes it is considered the subject of the conflict.

A person will seek to satisfy the need through their values. Therefore, it is an object of conflict. There are social, spiritual, physical values ​​that conflicting people strive to possess.

2) the subject of the conflict, the contradiction that persists throughout the conflict. This contradiction pushes opponents to fight.

3) the parties to the conflict are the people who participate in the conflict situation. Types of participants by form:

Individual;

Social group;

Organization;

State.

There are major and minor participants in the conflict. Among the main opposing sides, one can single out the initiator. Among the minor - instigators and organizers. These people do not take a direct part in the conflict, but contribute to the development of the conflict, attract new actors. The degree of influence and power in a conflict situation depends on how strong support the participant has, what connections, opportunities and resources he has. People who support one or another of the conflicting parties form a support group. At the stage of conflict resolution, a third party may appear - independent mediators who help resolve the conflict. The involvement of a judge, professional mediators contributes to the natural resolution of the conflict.

4) socio-psychological conditions and the social environment in which the conflict occurs. The environment helps or hinders opponents and mediators, as it contributes to the awareness of the motives, goals and dependencies that guide the participants.

There are five strategies for dealing with conflict:

Persistence (coercion), when one of the parties to the conflict tries to impose its opinion, not taking into account the interests and opinions of others. As a rule, such behavior leads to a deterioration in the relationship between the two parties. This strategy is effective if it is used in a situation that endangers the existence of the organization or hinders the achievement of its goals.

Departure (avoidance), when one of the conflicting parties tries to get away from the conflict. This tactic is appropriate if the subject matter of the dispute is not of great importance, or if there are currently no conditions for a positive resolution of the conflict, and when the conflict is not realistic.

Adaptation (flexibility), when a person gives up his interests, is ready to meet his opponent. Such a strategy may be appropriate if the subject of the dispute for a person is of less importance than the relationship with the other party. But, if this strategy is dominant, then he will not be able to effectively control his subordinates.

Compromise. When one side adheres to the point of view of the opponent, but only to a certain extent. In this behavior of the parties, the search for the most suitable solution is carried out through mutual concessions. The ability to do this is highly appreciated, as it reduces hostility and allows you to quickly resolve the conflict situation. But a compromise solution can also lead to dissatisfaction due to its incompleteness and lead to new conflicts.

Cooperation is when the parties to the conflict recognize each other's right to their point of view and are ready to accept it, and this makes it possible to analyze the reasons for disagreements and find the most acceptable way out. This strategy is based on the belief of the participants that differences of opinion are an inevitable consequence of the fact that smart people have their own ideas about what is right and what is not. Participants in interpersonal conflicts are individuals.

In conflict situations, people can play different roles and assume a variety of positions and statuses. The set of possible roles that people play in society is very large, as well as the various options for role positions in the conflict of relations. For example, the president can play a direct role in national or interstate conflicts, and in other disputes he can act as an ordinary citizen, neighbor, husband, father, etc. In other words, each person does not have a certain value, it changes every day and depends on the conditions under which he is. In addition, in the conflict, the role may change or become new. Their positions in a conflict situation may be different.

Types of positions involved in the conflict:

1) main participants (initiator / instigator and opponent);

2) mediators (mediators, judges, experts);

3) organizers;

4) instigators;

5) people supporting the main participants.

The status of the main participants can be determined not only by their role in the conflict or social position in society or in interpersonal relationships. They are also characterized by the position that arises in the course of the conflict, which is called rank. Its level depends on the capabilities owned by the participant (material, physical, intellectual, social, personal). The influence is exerted by the skills and experience of the subject, and the state of his social ties.

The level of social, intellectual and physical strength is not only the strength of the main participant, but also the capabilities of his supporters. This support is of great importance in quantitative and qualitative terms, it affects the entire course of the conflict and ways to resolve it. Support can be expressed as the presence of real participants in the conflict, as well as public recognition of the opinion of one or another side of the conflict (for example, the use of the media).

The conflicts we have considered can perform various functions (positive or negative).

Interpersonal conflict[from lat. conflictus - clash] - clash of opposing goals, motives, points of view of the interests of the participants in the interaction. In essence, this is the interaction of people either pursuing goals that are mutually exclusive or unattainable at the same time by both conflicting parties, or seeking 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, conflict resolution are considered. At the heart of any interpersonal conflict lies the conflict situation that has developed even before it began. Here we have the participants of a possible future interpersonal clash, and the subject of their disagreement. In many studies devoted to the problems of interpersonal conflict, it is shown that the conflict situation implies the orientation of its participants to achieve not common, but individual goals. This determines the possibility of an 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 realize, on the one hand, the current situation as generally meeting their individual goals, and on the other hand, these goals as incompatible and mutually exclusive. But until this happens, one of the potential opponents may change its position, and the object itself, about which differences of opinion have arisen, may lose its significance for one or even for both sides. If the acuteness of the situation disappears in this way, the interpersonal conflict, which, it would seem, inevitably had to unfold, having lost its objective foundations, simply will not arise. So, for example, at the heart of most conflict situations, the participants of which are a teacher and a student, most often there is a discrepancy, and sometimes even a direct opposite, of their positions and views on learning and the rules of behavior at school.

Indiscipline, laxity, careless, frivolous attitude to the study of a student and excessive authoritarianism, intolerance of the teacher are often the causes of acute interpersonal clashes. But the purposeful educational impact on the reorientation of the student, and in some cases the revision of his own incorrect position, carried out in time by the teacher, is able to eliminate the conflict situation, prevent it from developing into an open interpersonal conflict, and sometimes a protracted confrontation. Conflict interaction in social psychology is traditionally understood as the realization by the participants in a conflict situation of their opposing positions, their actions aimed at achieving their goals and hindering the solution of the opponent's tasks. As observation and special studies show, 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 style of leadership and adhere to tactics of diktat and guardianship in relations 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 becomes a participant, passes 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, their assessment in terms of the causes that led to them, the nature of the consequences, the functions they perform, the forms of their course, and the possibilities for their resolution. Traditionally, conflicts are distinguished by their content, by significance, by the form of expression, by the type of relationship structure, by 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 subject-business contradictions of joint activities and have a constructive orientation, performing the positive functions of determining the best ways to achieve a common group goal. The business nature of such an interpersonal conflict in no way excludes emotional richness, clearly expressed and clearly manifested by each of its participants in their personal relationship to the object of disagreement. Moreover, it is precisely the personal interest in the success of the case that does not allow the conflicting parties to stoop to settling scores, to attempts to assert themselves by humiliating the other. Unlike a personal collision, 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 joint activities. After a constructive solution is found to the issue that gave rise to the conflict, most often the relationship is normalized. Continuing 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 and educational team as a whole. Despite the fact that quite often an interpersonal conflict is perceived as "martial arts" - the social community of which the parties belong and which the parties are guided by is always, although 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 due to the specifics of the intra-group structure of the teaching and educational team, 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 terms of the form of expression, they represent an open, demonstrative clash.

But even in the case of a hidden, "masked" conflict, here one can only conditionally speak of its unofficial character. A necessary condition for the effective impact of the teacher on the conflict that has arisen for one reason or another between him and the student is the implementation of a thorough analysis of the reasons, motives that led to the situation, goals, probable outcomes of the conflict clash in which he was a participant. The ability of a teacher (as well as any other leader) to take a fairly objective position is a serious indicator of his high professional qualifications and skills. As studies have shown, it is impossible to formulate any universal principle for resolving interpersonal conflicts that are diverse in their direction and nature, to indicate the only correct tactics of behavior in all cases. Only when the leader is fluent in various tactics for resolving interpersonal conflicts, taking into account the numerous aspects of this socio-psychological phenomenon, and skillfully applies them in each specific case, one can count on the desired result. In addition to interpersonal conflict, there is also dissonance (an intrapersonal conflict caused by an attempt by a person to realize two or more opposite, 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 is such a direction as the study of the prevailing strategy of behavior in conflict interpersonal interaction (R. -Blake, J. -Mouton, K. -Thomas, etc.).

At the heart of the majority of both interpersonal and other social conflicts, there is a widespread stereotype according to which any situation of conflict of interests is a so-called zero-sum game in which the amount of gain is equal to the amount of loss. That is, one's own interests can be satisfied only to the extent that the interests of the opposite side are infringed. The most obvious example of this kind is sports games where the winners win by 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 is not necessarily equal to 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 by the prosecutor one by one. At the same time, "-both of them are guilty, however, the prosecutor has only 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 confessed (and uses his confession to accuse the other in a more serious crime). If both confess, each will receive a moderate sentence. If neither confesses, the punishment for both will be insignificant "-. Thus, when using the optimal strategy that takes into account the interests of the other, both prisoners win - they receive a symbolic punishment. Meanwhile, in practice, as D. -Myers notes, "-in order to minimize their own term, many confess, despite the fact that joint confession leads to more severe sentences than mutual non-recognition, as they are guided by the logic according to which "-.. .no matter what the other prisoner decides, it would be better for each of them to confess. If the other confesses, the first prisoner who confesses too will receive a moderate sentence, not the maximum. If the other does not confess, the first one can go free. Of course, each of the two argues the same way. And both fall into a social trap.

It can be noted that in this particular situation, such a line of behavior is justified and due, firstly, to the extremely high personal significance of the outcome for each of the participants and, secondly, to the physical impossibility of agreeing and concluding an agreement on joint actions. However, in much less responsible and emotionally "charged" situations, people become victims of the "zero sum" stereotype. According to D. -Myers, "- in about 2000 studies, university students were faced with various variants of the" prisoner's dilemma ", where the price of the game was not the term of imprisonment, but chips, money, chips. At the same time, for each pre-selected strategy of the second player, the first it is more profitable to stand apart (because in doing so he exploits the readiness to cooperate of the second player or protects himself from exploitation by him.) However, this is the whole catch, not cooperating, both parties get much less than if they trusted each other and mutually benefited.This dilemma sets the participants in a psychological trap when both realize that they we could mutually benefit - but, not trusting each other, they "-go in cycles" - on refusal to cooperate "-.

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. Teams placed on opposite sides of the dividing line drawn on the floor were given the following instruction: "-Your team receives one winning point for each player of the opposing team who crosses the dividing line and ends up on the side of the hall where you are now. You can use any means in order to induce them to do so, apart from physical pressure." It is not too difficult to guess that the optimal winning strategy in this situation for both teams is a simple exchange of sides, as a result of which both teams get the maximum possible gain. It should be noted that, according to the terms of the game, the participants had practically 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, blackmail members of the opposing team, i.e. played a zero-sum game. When the idea of ​​possible cooperation with rivals arose, it invariably encountered fierce resistance from individual participants and in many cases remained unrealized. If the parties nevertheless came to an agreement, then they implemented it through a scrupulously synchronized "-exchange" - players "-one on one"-, demonstrating, thereby, 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 an obvious and a brewing interpersonal conflict is to minimize, by means of socio-psychological impact, the influence on the perception of the situation and the opponent of such factors as the personal projections of the participants, prejudice in favor of themselves, the 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, "-in many conflicts there is only a small core of truly incompatible goals - the main problem is a distorted perception of other people's motives and goals" -. Objective contradictions, caused by real circumstances, are not only not destructive in themselves, but on the contrary, they often contain the potential for development. In any case, a clear understanding of the essence of contradictions, free from layers of transfers 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 real circumstances.

K.-Thomas, based on a detailed analysis of the "prisoner's dilemma", identified five behavioral strategies based on the ratio of 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. In relation 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, confessing to the crime, but purposefully "-pawns" - his "accomplice" -, at the same time trying to minimize his own guilt.

2. Loss - Win. At the same time, one's own interests are ignored and the interests of another are absolutized. In this example, guided by this strategy, the suspect takes all the blame on himself, thus shielding his comrade.

3. Loss - Loss. The choice of this strategy means ignoring both one's own interests and the interests of the other side. 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 another - 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 another are quoted equally highly. In relation 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 the optimal solution in the "win-win" logic is most facilitated by confrontation, which at the level of ordinary consciousness often confused with aggression and tend to avoid. In fact, confrontation is not a consequence of aggressive, but assertive behavior of the parties, which meets four basic principles, which include:

&bull - - direct, clear and unambiguous statement of own position -

&bull- - acceptance of the opponent's position, in the sense of unconditional recognition of her right to exist (which in no way means automatic agreement with her) -

&bull - - refusal from any compromises for the sake of preservation of relations -

&bull - readiness to improve own position by accepting the opponent's arguments.

In this regard, the development of assertive behavior and confrontation skills is another significant 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, by virtue of his capabilities, prevent the emergence of personal destructive conflict clashes among members of the group or organization of interest to him.