Interpersonal conflict as an object of socio-psychological analysis. Interpersonal conflicts

Interpersonal conflict is a clash of individuals in the process of their interaction. Such clashes can occur in a variety of spheres and areas of life (economic, political, industrial, socio-cultural, domestic, etc.).

D.) and have different scales of mutual claims: from a convenient place in public transport to the presidential chair in government structures; from a piece of bread to a multi-million dollar fortune.

The subjects of interpersonal conflict are individual individuals (personalities) pursuing (protecting) their personal or group interests. The object of the conflict is incompatible needs, interests, values, positions, goals, etc. of interacting individuals. The exception is non-realistic (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, as a rule, is 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 an interpersonal conflict, it is not interests and desires that collide, but real individuals about incompatible interests and desires. The clash of desires, aspirations, etc. is characteristic only of an intrapersonal conflict. Interpersonal conflict also implies a real confrontation between the parties, and not just “mutual negative perception of people.” People can perceive each other very negatively, but 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 to achieve them.

As in other social conflicts, in interpersonal conflicts one can also single out objectively and subjectively determined causes.

Objective factors create a potential opportunity for conflict. 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 apply for this position. The public (impersonal) relations between potential participants in the conflict, for example, their status-role positions, that have developed at the time of the beginning of the conflict, can also be considered conditionally objective. Reasons are considered to be objectively determined, the occurrence of which does not directly depend on the will and desire of the potential subject of interpersonal conflict.

Subjective factors in interpersonal conflict are formed on the basis of individual (social-psychological, physiological, worldview and others) characteristics of conflicting personalities. These factors largely determine the dynamics of development and resolution of interpersonal conflict and its consequences.

Interpersonal conflicts arise both between people who first met and constantly communicating. 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, comparison of a person and identification of oneself with him; 2)

socio-psychological reflection - understanding the other by thinking for him; 3)

empathy - understanding another person through empathy; 4)

stereotyping - the perception and evaluation 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 itself, as it really is; 2)

the subject as he sees himself; 3)

the subject as it is seen by another.

In the relationship of subjects, we have the same three positions on the part of another subject of reflection. The result is a process of doubled, mirror mutual reflection by the subjects of each other (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Interpersonal reflection

Similar in structure to the reflexive, but somewhat different in content, scheme for the interaction of subjects was proposed by the American psychotherapist E. Berne (Fig. 3)36.

In this scheme, the basis of the conflict is the various states of the subjects of interaction, and its “provocation” is the intersecting

Rice. 3. Transaction options and interpersonal perception

all transactions. Combinations "a" and "b" are conflicting. In the combination “c”, one of the subjects of interaction clearly dominates the other or takes the position of a patron, the other subject is content with the role of a “child”. In this combination, conflicts do not arise because both subjects take their positions for granted. The most productive in the communication of people is the position "g" (B-B). This is a communication of equal people, which does not infringe on the dignity of any of the parties. But other equal positions (“parent” - “parent”, “child” - “child”) are also objectively non-conflict.

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 notion of an official as a soulless bureaucrat, red tape, etc. In turn, an official may also form a negative image of a petitioner who undeservedly seeks special benefits for himself. In the communication of these two personalities, not real people will interact, but stereotypes - simplified images of certain social types.

Stereotypes are formed both in the process of an individual's socialization as a way of perceiving (assimilating) complex social concepts and phenomena, and in conditions of information deficiency as a generalization of an individual's personal experience and often preconceived notions accepted in society or in a certain social environment. Examples of stereotypes can be statements like: “all salesmen...”, “all men...”, “all women...”, etc.

The formed, possibly false, image of the other 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 that has been formed by one opponent in relation to another. Set is the willingness, predisposition of the subject to act accordingly. This is a certain orientation of the psyche and behavior of the subject, 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 firm 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 prospective partner. Based on these reviews, a negative attitude is formed in the entrepreneur, and the meeting may either not take place or will not give the expected results.

In conflict situations, a negative attitude deepens the split 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 is 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, making the same conclusions, we forget that a person does not react to real facts, but to their ideas about them. People's ideas are different, sometimes diametrically opposed, and this fact should 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 to be the only true 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 concepts of “interpersonal compatibility” and “interpersonal incompatibility”. Compatibility implies mutual acceptance of partners in communication and joint activities. Incompatibility - mutual rejection (antipathy) of partners, based on the mismatch (opposition) of social attitudes, value orientations, interests, motives, characters, temperaments, psychophysical reactions, individual psychological characteristics of the subjects of interaction.

Often the basis of interpersonal contradictions and conflicts are the differences (mismatch) of individual biological rhythms (“biological clocks”). One type of people shows increased activity in the morning. They are called "larks". The peak of activity of another type of people falls on 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 an emotional conflict (psychological antagonism), which is the most complex and difficult to resolve form of interpersonal confrontation. The complexity 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, as it were, for no apparent reason. The reason for such a conflict is a negative mutual assessment and inadequate mutual perception of each other's opponents.

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 are especially cruel and uncompromising, since they (whatever the reasons for the conflicts) affect the honor and dignity of opponents.

Interacting with other people, a person primarily protects his personal interests, and this is quite normal. The resulting conflicts are a reaction to obstacles to achieving goals. And on how significant the subject of the conflict seems to be for a particular individual, his conflict attitude will largely depend on his predisposition and willingness to act in a supposed conflict in a certain way. It includes the goals, expectations and emotional orientation of the parties.

But individuals face in interpersonal conflicts, protecting not only their personal interests. They can also represent the interests of individual groups, institutions, organizations, labor collectives, 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 characteristic of interpersonal conflicts are the following types. 1.

Conflicts, the causes of which are incompatible needs, desires, interests, goals, values, etc. 2.

Conflicts of "incompatible" means to achieve common needs, interests, goals, etc. 3.

Conflict due to limited material resources (money, an apartment, a land plot, a preferential ticket to a resort, and others). 4.

The conflict of dominance (power relations) is manifested in the desire of one subject to impose his will (power) on another (others) and the unwillingness of the other (others) to obey or the desire to challenge the limits of imposed powers (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 evaluate the statuses they and opponents occupy, for example, a child disputes the authority of a parent, a citizen - the authority of an official. 6.

Role conflicts can be divided into three subspecies: 1)

two or more individuals strive to fulfill the same role in a social group or impose some role on another; 2)

inadequate assessment of the performance of the role by another individual; 3)

performance of 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 relationship with each other (friends, parents - children, spouses, lovers), when one or both subjects want to solely own and dispose of the other38. 8.

The conflict of rivalry or competition is observed when two or more individuals compete with each other in any kind of activity, as well as in strength, beauty, wealth, intelligence, courage, and more, while competition and rivalry involve conflict interactions. 9.

unrealistic conflict. As mentioned above, such a conflict arises not about some object (subject), but because of 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.

The 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 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 causes of the conflict situation, the interests and goals pursued by opponents, the balance of opposing forces, the conflict behavior of the parties, an interpersonal conflict can have the following types of outcome:

) avoiding conflict resolution, when one of the parties does not seem to notice the contradictions that have arisen. Such behavior may be due either to a clear superiority in strength of one of the parties, or to 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 presented to 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 significant for one of the parties; 3)

compromise - mutual concessions on both sides. The amount 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 adversaries into partners and allies; 5)

escalation of tension and the escalation of the conflict into a comprehensive confrontation. Such conflict behavior is due to the mutual attitude towards an uncompromising struggle; 6)

a forceful version of conflict suppression, when one or both parties are forced by force (threat of force) to accept one or another variant of the outcome of the contradiction.

there are two forms of it - constructive (-> productive conflict) and non-constructive. An unconstructive interpersonal conflict occurs when one of the opponents resorts to morally condemned methods of struggle, seeks to psychologically suppress the partner, discrediting and humiliating him in the eyes of others. Usually this causes violent resistance from the other side, the dialogue is accompanied by mutual insults, the solution of the problem becomes impossible, interpersonal relationships are destroyed. Constructive interpersonal conflict happens only when opponents do not go beyond business arguments and relationships. In this case, various strategies of behavior can be observed. So, 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 the conflict situation without solving it, without giving up one's own, but not insisting on one's own;

5) adaptation - the tendency to smooth out contradictions, sacrificing one's own interests. The generalized expression of these behavioral strategies is characterized as corporatism and assertiveness.

Interpersonal conflict

a contradiction that arises in the sphere of interpersonal relations, 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 relationships with each other. They can also simultaneously strive in a sharp competitive struggle 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 mutual relations with each other, or at the same time, in a sharp concrete struggle, they strive to achieve the same goal that can be achieved ¬chute only one of the conflicting parties.

INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT

the most destructive way of development and completion of significant contradictions that arise in the process of interpersonal interaction. For the emergence of K. m., the simultaneous presence of three conditions is necessary: ​​contradictions in interpersonal interaction, counteraction of opponents, their experience of expressed negative emotions in relation to each other. The central object of conflictology is social conflicts, and their core is K. m. Conflicts between social groups have a more noticeable impact on society compared to K. m. The logic of knowledge requires conflictologists to know, first of all, a relatively simple social conflict, which K. m. Such conflicts can be. constructive and destructive, short and long-term, low, medium and high intensity, etc. Depending on the scope of the flow, K. m. is divided into business and emotional-personal.

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 is 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 a “single combat”, 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 they represent an open, demonstrative clash in the form of expression. But even in the case of a hidden, "disguised" conflict, 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 methodically 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 suggests that each of the criminals confess separately: if one confesses and the other does not, the prosecutor guarantees immunity to the confessed person (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 minor. 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 “... regardless what the other prisoner decides, it will 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 fall prey to the "zero-sum" stereotype. According to D. Myers, “in about 2000 studies, university students encountered various versions 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, it is more profitable for the first to isolate itself (since in doing so, he exploits the readiness to cooperate of the second player or protects himself from exploitation by him). Nevertheless, that's the whole point, without cooperating, both parties get much less than if they trusted each other and benefited mutually. This dilemma drives the participants into a psychological trap when both realize that they could mutually benefit; but, not trusting each other, they “obsess” over non-cooperation”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 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 to induce them to do this, except for 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, that is, they 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" of players "one on one", thus 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 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, “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. 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. With regard 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 the example under consideration, 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. 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 the 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 assertive behavior of the parties, which meets four basic principles, which include:

Direct, clear and unambiguous statement of one's own position;

Acceptance of the opponent's position, in the sense of unconditional recognition of its right to exist (which in no way means automatic agreement with it);

Refusal of any compromises for the sake of maintaining relations;

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 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.

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 content of the article:

Interpersonal conflicts are a collision of 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 the 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 one's own views, then 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 sets off an analytic chain reaction in the subconscious. It turns out the degree of importance of the priority task and the strength of personal connections between these people.

If personal ambitions take second place, then the chances of reconciliation of the differences that have arisen are quite large, since everyone will appreciate the relationship. If heightened pride is stronger than the need to connect with a person, interpersonal conflict develops. It can be resolved in one of the following possible ways while maintaining the initial relationship, or it can break all ties.

In the mechanism of development of conflicts in interpersonal relationships, there are several specific features:

• An irresistible desire to prove one's case. A person tries to justify his opinion both by presenting real reasons and factors, and by devaluing the interlocutor's arguments.
• emotional attachment. The conflict is accompanied by vivid affective reactions that are difficult to control.
• Bias in the negativity of the alternative solution. The opinion that one's own judgment is the only correct one makes one doubt the correctness of the opponent's decision.

These standards do not allow the contradiction to be resolved in the usual way and further aggravate the situation.

The main causes of interpersonal conflicts

Confrontation between people reaches its climax due to completely different reasons. Moreover, in each individual situation, there are several significant factors that could provoke an interpersonal conflict:

1. Dissatisfaction with material and spiritual goods. If a person has a lack of necessary resources in quantitative or qualitative terms, he tries to make up for them in a different way, where there is a high risk of developing an interpersonal conflict.
2. Mutual interests. In a group where the goals of the participants converge, but the methods for achieving the set task have some differences, a number of confrontations may arise. A person is unable to fulfill some of their needs in a work or personal relationship. This should include conflict situations at work, problems with the subordination of subordinates and mentors, family disagreements, family quarrels.
3. Separate 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 needs a compromise solution.
4. Value features of the question. This type of confrontation is based on dissimilar motivational approaches to the same issue due to different psychological attitudes and priorities.
5. Course of action. It develops due to the lack of stereotypes and manners of some behavior in one of the opponents. The reason for this may be a lack of experience or an inability to perform the necessary actions. Often causes conflicts at work or school.
6. Communication. The discrepancy between the communication abilities of one person to another, non-compliance with the rules of dialogue, subordination and tact.
7. Character. The cause of the conflict is specific personality traits that the other individual dislikes.

The reasons may vary depending on the age of the person. So, in children and adolescents, controversial situations can be caused by those factors that have no place in adult life. The pubertal period is characterized by biased maximalism, a tendency to issue ultimatums and an unambiguous assessment of people.

Family conflicts in interpersonal relationships can be based both on ordinary domestic disagreements, and on the inability to realize one's own needs, a mismatch of values ​​and goals in life between spouses.

Working relationships often crack in the execution of orders and tasks. There is also a risk of developing personal hostility among employees of one link and management. Often, disputes are based on behavioral issues, for example, a discrepancy between the actions of an employee and the reputation of a company or organization.

Varieties of interpersonal conflicts

The concept of interpersonal conflict is a unique example of a combination of characterological features of each individual and the nuances of controversy. Therefore, it is difficult to single out any common points in each of the disputes. The classification allows us to break down such confrontations into three large options that differ in motivational features:

• Differences in values. 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 divisions that exist between people. Such situations do not necessarily cause conflicts, but when combined with the appropriate conditions, they can ignite real confrontation. Similarly, in family relationships: different personal meanings of the goals of each of the spouses can coexist until one of them begins to influence or undermine the spiritual values ​​of the other. This balance can be controlled by common higher ideals, which nevertheless converge. For example, one of the parents lures 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: a son or daughter should do something. Shared perspectives 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 profit and personal dislike for the opponent. For example, the 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 variant of interpersonal conflict is based on the 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 the points of these rules, tactless or unacceptable behavior may be interpreted as a reason for confrontation. Such disagreements can be observed at work as situations of excess of authority or violation of subordination. In families, such conflicts occur due to inappropriate attitudes towards each other, which is expected in given conditions.

How to deal with interpersonal conflict

To resolve an interpersonal conflict, it must be remembered that truth is not born in a dispute, but the true face of a participant in a quarrel is revealed. How your opponent and others see you during this 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 contradictions.

Behavior in interpersonal conflict should not sink to the level that will not correspond to self-image. It is necessary to act in such a way 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 follow the basic rules of such behavior, the conflict gets every chance for a quick and effective resolution:

1. Respect for the opponent. Be that as it may, in most cases, a person confronts with someone he knows well or often interacts with. Interpersonal conflicts with strangers also happen, but not as often as with relatives, friends, colleagues. The probability of further connections or contacts with the opponent is huge. Therefore, in order to avoid further embarrassment, apologies and discomfort in dealing with this person, one should not be insulting or humiliating in relation to him.
2. Emotional restraint. There is a tendency that conflict situations without an affective load are resolved faster and do not leave an unpleasant aftertaste. Moreover, it is likely to maintain minimally positive relations with the other side of the confrontation. In important disputes, the transition to the emotional side with the identification of personal hostility to a person is considered a sign of tactlessness, bad manners and bad taste. In addition, such an attitude will by no means raise the reputation of a person among friends and relatives.
3. Direction towards problem solving. Often in conflict situations, people forget why they started an argument. Having switched to personal insults and humiliation, the essence of the feud remains unresolved or untouched. All attention, rage or enthusiasm should be used in the development of optimal schemes for resolving this disagreement, methods of establishing a mutually satisfactory compromise.

In any conflict, you should behave the way you would like your opponent to behave. Thus, it is possible to achieve culture and mutual understanding with relatives, friends and acquaintances.

Ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts

Subconsciously, a person himself tries to resolve any disagreements by the methods that he considers the most convenient and simple. Sometimes, even without active intervention in the confrontation, it can resolve itself. This is not always the case, but 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 eliminate the cause of the conflict, but only erases its main manifestations. In fact, dissatisfaction with these circumstances is transformed into internal anger, resentment, and external active manifestations subside for a while. There is still a huge possibility that a dispute that has died down after a while can be resumed with much greater force. Smoothing is achieved through the usual reconciliation due to various factors or temporary benefits.
• compromise solution. Partial acceptance of the conditions of the opponent by all parties to the conflict is capable of weakening its strength for some time. Although small disagreements will still remain, but at an insufficient level to resume confrontation. There is a great possibility of its development after a certain period of time.
• Adoption. 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. It is extremely rare for people to 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 recognizes its wrongness and the superiority of the point of view, idea or proposal of the opponent. Often this happens in working conditions, when the subordination forces the staff to fully agree with what management puts forward. A peculiar scheme of submission does not always work for choleric or hysterical personalities. Such people will never allow their opinion and results to be ignored.

In addition to these methods, there are many special recommendations that will help achieve resolution of interpersonal conflict in the shortest possible time. If you follow these rules, after a disagreement, they usually do not experience unpleasant feelings or discomfort from communicating with a former opponent:

1. The presence of a conflict situation must always be recognized. This is an integral part of the process itself, which must be resolved. If you resist and do not accept the dissonance in the relationship for what it is, hidden negative feelings can persist for a very long time and gradually poison life.
2. Creating an opportunity to clarify the current situation. Discussion and discussion are simply necessary for the correct 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.
3. Identifying Specific Reasons for Disagreements. To avoid the transition to an emotional level and personal claims, you need to clearly identify the circle of interest in this conflict. Often you can understand that the problem is not so big.
4. Options for the outcome of the situation. There must be several of them to make it possible to choose the best one. They need to be developed taking into account the interests of each party.
5. Choosing an agreed solution and making it a reality. The joint practical application of those measures that have been agreed leads to reconciliation and attempts to establish personal contact.

Any of the proposed methods for resolving interpersonal conflict may turn out to be ineffective if, on an emotional upsurge, a person does not understand the importance of reconciliation. Usually this passes with time, and people themselves are looking for ways to return the old relationship.

Prevention of interpersonal conflicts

The best medicine is prevention. It is much easier to prevent the development of unwanted contention than to look for ways to resolve it later. So you can maintain trusting relationships with friends, relatives, acquaintances and even at work. The reputation will remain impeccable if you know how to use the prevention of interpersonal conflicts.

The main points of 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:

• Attention should be paid to the opponent, it is necessary to behave with him politely and tactfully.
• Tolerance will help to avoid short-tempered reactions from the other person.
• Trust and openness should be shown by maintaining eye contact, avoiding the look is not necessary in any case.
• Provide an opportunity for the interlocutor to explain their point of view and justify the opinion.
• Try to understand the opponent or mentally put yourself in his place.
• Tactfully admit your mistake, if any.
• Express vague feelings that indicate your doubts about your rightness regarding the present conversation.
• Carefully explain those points where the opponent's opinion lends itself to criticism.
• A positive attitude to resolve the situation, and not to argue that you are right.

Important! The solution to any conflict should not take place in a raised voice, personal insults should not be allowed.

How to resolve interpersonal conflict - look at 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 are manifested 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 methods of managing 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 is 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 ​​\u200b\u200bthe object or process of interest (Zhuravlev P.V., 2000)

4. interpersonal conflict - this is a struggle for values ​​and claims for a certain status, power, resources, in which the goals are neutralization, damage or destruction of an opponent (Kibanov A.Ya., 1998).

5. interpersonal conflict is a clash of two or more strong motives that cannot be satisfied at the same time. 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, incompatible tendencies in the mind of a single 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 its features:

1. Conflicts between people do not arise 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 causes, the whole variety of known psychological causes (general, particular, objective, subjective, etc.) is manifested;

4. In the course of interpersonal conflicts, there is a quick test of characters, temperaments, manifestations of abilities, will, intellect, emotional sphere and other individual psychological characteristics;

5. Interpersonal conflicts are characterized by high emotional intensity and coverage of all aspects of interpersonal relations between conflicting subjects;

6. Interpersonal conflicts affect the interests of not only the conflicting parties, but also those who are directly connected with them by official or personal relations.

The conducted studies gave grounds for the assertion that in 85% of conflicts the mood of the right opponent noticeably worsens. The wrong opponent's mood deteriorated in 70% of conflicts. The conflict continues to have a negative impact on the mood of the participants even after its resolution in 50% of cases.

Classification of interpersonal conflicts does not differ significantly from the classification of intrapersonal conflicts. There are the following forms of interpersonal conflicts:

– motivational (conflict of interest);

- moral;

– cognitive (value);

– unfulfilled desire;

– role-playing (hidden and open);

- adaptive;

– inadequate self-esteem.

This classification scheme for interpersonal conflicts can be supplemented by two classification groups, namely:

1. According to the nature of the causes

1.1. caused by labor professional relations;

1.2. caused by psychological features human relationships (likes, dislikes, etc.);

1.3. caused by individual psychological characteristics participants (emotionality, aggressiveness, sociability, etc.).

2. By value for participants interpersonal conflicts can be:

2.1. Constructive , i.e. bringing relations (after conflict resolution) to a higher level of development, leading to mutual understanding;

2.2. destructive, or leading to negative, destructive consequences.

It is of particular interest to study the causes and spheres of manifestation of conflicts.

2. Causes and spheres manifestations of interpersonal conflicts

There are three main positions in studying the causes of interpersonal conflicts. Let's consider them in more detail:

1. Psychoanalytic position (C. Horney) proceeds from the fact that the key to understanding human behavior is the problems once experienced by him in childhood;

2. Need-personal position (K. Levin) is based on understanding the causes of interpersonal conflicts, as contradictions between a person's own needs and an external objective coercive force;

3. Contextual position (M. Deutsch) suggests that the causes of interpersonal conflicts should be investigated in the context of the overall system of interaction. In accordance with this position, competitive and cooperative relations between people are distinguished, each of which can be equal and unequal, formal and informal, task-oriented or distribution of power.

Consider the main causes of interpersonal conflicts:

1) Availability contradictions between interests, values, goals, motives, roles of individual individuals;

2) Presence confrontation between different personalities, caused by the difference in social status, the level of claims, etc.;

3) Appearance and 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 the information is lost. According to research, it has been established that if we take what is conceived as 100%, then what is expressed contains 70% of the primary information. What is heard is 80% of what was said, and in total it is 56% of the original information. 70% of what is heard is understood (39% of primary information). 60% of what is understood is remembered (24% of the initial level). When retelling the memorized, about 30% of the information is lost. As a result of perception, only 16% of the primary information remains, 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, resentment.

The main areas of manifestation interpersonal conflicts are the collective (organization), society and family, i.e. social communities in which most of the human activity takes place.

Let's make an attempt to correlate the main causes of interpersonal conflicts with the areas of their manifestation.

1. Conflicts in the team (organization) develop in the following way: supervisor-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 features, differences in positions, attitudes, views, judgments).

2. Conflicts in society develop according to the citizen-society" And " citizen-citizen". Their main reason is the low psychological and pedagogical culture of their participants.

3. Family conflicts 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 restriction (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.

· Conflict factors - these are the driving forces or stimuli of conflict interaction, determining its nature and individual features.

According to the American conflictologist W. Lincoln, five factors of interpersonal conflicts can be distinguished:

1. Information factors reduced to the unacceptability of information for one of the parties to the conflict. They usually manifest themselves in the form of incomplete and inaccurate information, rumors, disinformation, unreliable sources, extraneous factors;

2. Behavioral factors which are negative manifestations in the behavior of one or both participants in the conflict (rudeness, tactlessness, aggressiveness). They manifest themselves in the form of striving for superiority, selfishness, breaking promises;

3. Relationship Factors 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, distrust, lack of authority, unbalanced relations;

4. Value Factors manifest themselves in opposition to the principles of behavior of the conflicting parties. They act in the form of prejudices, adherence to traditions, ideas about ethical standards (about good and evil, justice and injustice);

5. Structural factors are relatively stable objective circumstances that are difficult to change. This is the attitude to power, legal norms, property rights, management system, norms of behavior.

Managing interpersonal conflicts can be considered in external And internal aspect. The external aspect represents the impact within a particular conflict. The internal aspect represents the main strategies of behavior in conflict. Let's consider them in more detail.

1. Managing interpersonal conflicts represents an impact on the sphere of conflict relations, leading to its constructive resolution. It includes four stages:

1.1. Forecasting conflict consists in studying the individual psychological characteristics of partners, analyzing the early symptoms of a conflict at the stage of a conflict situation (restriction of relationships, critical statements, etc.);

1.2. Warningconflict is based on an in-depth analysis of the causes and factors of the brewing conflict, after which measures are taken to neutralize them. Distinguish between pedagogical measures (conversations, clarifications, persuasion, suggestion) and organizational measures (temporary isolation of participants, changing the conditions of communication);

1.3. Regulationconflict is based on the 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 made on the basis of choosing 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 their own interests and goals, for which they use the imposition of one's opinion, selfishness.

Interpersonal Ways of Conflict Resolution associated with a common source of any conflict - a mismatch of interests of two or more parties. These include the following:

1) Way of competition is to resolve the conflict actively, by making their own volitional decisions. This method consists in the fact that one side 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 case 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 not deep, if it is known in advance that one of the parties is wrong, if a delay in solving the problem is necessary;

3) Adaptation method 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 is the longest in time, it is effective if the parties have different hidden needs, and the solution of the problem is equally important for both.

5) way to compromise lies in the fact that one of the parties gives in a little to the other and is set to resolve differences through mutual concessions. This method is effective if the situation is important for both, and the parties to the conflict have the same power.

A graphical model for choosing a conflict resolution method is shown in Figure 1.

Rice. 1Interpersonal ways of conflict resolution.

As a result of studying this topic, we can formulate the following conclusions:

· There are various 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 are manageable, which comes down to studying the causes and factors, influencing the sphere of conflict relationships, choosing a strategy and way of behavior.

Task 7

Analyze your attitude to the main ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts. Reflect the results of the analysis in the table. Use your own rating system.

Conflict resolution method	Relation to the method
	I use often	I prefer	I use less often	I feel the least comfortable
COMPETITION
EVASION
COOPERATION
COMPROMISE
DEVICE