The psychology of conflict is its structure, in other words, it is the way in which it occurs. Conflict psychology examines the relationship between various elements of personality. And she defines conflict itself as the lack of unanimity between two individuals (parties) or groups of subjects. Confrontation is one of the variations in the relationships between subjects. If it is constructive, it acts as a development of the relationship between the participants.
In psychology, the term conflict contains contradictions associated with incredibly strong emotions. Any conflict is a social phenomenon and is characterized by the presence of specific functions that act as unique indicators showing how conflict situations affect society or the individual.
Definition of “conflict”
If you set yourself a goal, then from modern psychological literature you can glean more than a hundred definitions of this term with noticeable differences in formulation.
The most common ones worth mentioning are:
- A conflict is an expression of subjective or objective disagreements that find expression in a duel between the parties.
- Conflict is one of the most acute ways to resolve significant differences that arose during the interaction of its subjects and is associated with negative emotions.
A number of questions arise. What can be considered a significant contradiction, what is disagreement in general and how to distinguish it from a conflict?
Resolution methods
Psychological conflict has several ways of resolution.
- Avoiding or moving away from a collision. In this situation, one side does not react or pretends that it is indifferent to the discord that has arisen.
- Mitigating disagreements. One of the conflicting parties agrees with the claims or is looking for an excuse.
- Agreement. Both sides find a compromise in order to resolve the current situation.
- Use of force. In such a situation, one side of the conflict is forced to accept conditions that facilitate the resolution of disagreements.
- The best way to resolve conflict in psychology is to prevent it. To do this, you need to learn to build a dialogue, listen to your opponent, learn to articulate your desires, without counting on your partner to guess what you want.
- Don't get into an argument when you're excited. In a state of passion, you can cause irreparable psychological trauma to your opponent, and sometimes physical trauma, which you will regret in the future.
- Analyze the situation, find the cause of the collision, tell your interlocutor about your discovery. Do this while remaining calm.
- Discuss together a way out of the current confrontation.
Most often, excess emotionality prevents you from avoiding confrontation. If the goal is to prevent a conflict of interests, you will have to learn to control your inner impulses. Thanks to these qualities, a person is able to adequately assess the situation in which he finds himself. And the ability to keep your emotions under control helps you convey your arguments to your opponent with maximum effectiveness. Another good quality is the awareness of the right of each individual to independently resolve certain situations.
The situation is more complicated when it comes to intrapersonal discord. A person faces his problems alone, sometimes without understanding their essence. To successfully resolve the situation, you need to find the root cause of the internal confrontation. Only then can you look for ways to solve it. Often a person has to take his condition for granted and then the discord will be reduced to a minimum. It is not always possible to solve this issue on your own, since getting to the bottom of the truth is quite difficult.
Whatever the background of the confrontation in which you find yourself involved, try to behave with dignity. Carry on a conversation without raising your voice. Don't let your emotions ruin your relationship. As they say, a bad peace is better than a good quarrel. If a collision cannot be avoided, make every effort to ensure that the situation does not affect your deepest feelings. When it comes to family discord, do not try to hush up disagreements, say out loud what exactly bothers you, learn to find a compromise, and any conflict will help your relationship reach a new creative level.
Difference between contradiction and conflict
Apart from Yuri Rozhdestvensky, none of the experts consider disagreement to be a speech act. The famous linguist defines three stages of development of the clash of interests that became the cause of the problematic situation. He believes that they are:
- difference of opinion;
- disagreements in discussions;
- open struggle in actions, expressed by conflict.
It follows that a contradiction is a dialogue, in other words, a speech act in which the parties express disagreements. Conflict should be considered speech acts of subjects that are aimed at causing harm to the enemy.
Composition, structure of the conflict
In order for the concept and functions of conflict to become clear, it is necessary to become familiar with its four main components: dynamics, structure and management.
The structure of this concept consists of:
- subject of dispute or object;
- subject(s), that is, specific individuals, organizations, groups participating in it;
- scale (it can be global, regional, local or interpersonal);
- the conditions in which the conflict occurs;
- tactics and strategies of the parties;
- possible outcomes of the conflict, results, consequences, as well as awareness of this.
A real conflict is a complex developing process that follows the following stages:
- Subject situation. At this stage, objective reasons for starting it are born.
- Conflict interaction. This stage represents an incident, or a temporary development of a difficult situation.
- Full or partial resolution of a problem situation.
Conflict functions
You should also consider what functions the conflict performs, depending on the consequences for its participants:
- constructive (the tension that arose during a difficult situation can be used to solve certain problems or goals);
- dialectical (finding the causes of the conflict);
- destructive (elimination of problems inhibits the emotional color of interaction).
These are the main functions of conflict, expressed in its consequences, but many authors identify several more, depending on their views.
Chapter 1. The formation of conflictology
Conflictology is a relatively young science. It appeared in its completed form only by the middle of the 20th century. But conflicts have always existed, and the first attempts to understand them date back to ancient times.
The problem of the relationship between contradiction, struggle and conflict in the works of ancient thinkers
Ancient philosophers believed that conflict in itself is neither good nor bad; it exists everywhere, regardless of people's opinions about it. The whole world is full of contradictions; the life of nature, people and even Gods is inevitably connected with them. True, they had not yet used the term “conflict” itself, but they had already seen that conflict does not exhaust the whole of life, but represents only a part of it.
Interpretation of the conflict function
Scientific literature demonstrates different attitudes to the issue described. As a negative phenomenon, a problematic situation needs to be resolved, and if possible, it is better to avoid it altogether. This opinion is contained in the works of the authors of the administrative school. And a group of specialists belonging to the school of “human relations” adhere to a similar idea. After all, the presence of problematic interactions in an organization meant mismanagement and ineffective work.
Today there is a belief that disagreement is common, and in some cases desirable, even in well-managed organizations. The positive functions of conflict are to discover different points of view, multiple sources of information, and reveal problem areas. But its negative manifestations include the possible occurrence of violence, disorganization, a slowdown in the pace of development, etc.
It should be concluded that the functions of conflicts are in the development of a group or individual, but can also lead to a negative sense of self and deterioration of work in a group or organization. Correct or illiterate management of a problem situation decides its role for the subjects; the destructive functions of the conflict can take over.
Conclusion
Conflict is a relationship between subjects of social interaction that is characterized by confrontation in the presence of opposing motives (needs, interests, goals, ideals, beliefs) or judgments (opinions, views, assessments).
The function of conflict is understood as the influence of conflicts on individual elements of the system (individuals, groups, communities) and on the system as a whole, as well as the possible consequences of such influence.
In the modern theory of personnel management, and the theory of organization management in general, the idea of the functions of conflict is very ambiguous. Some scientists count about 30 functions of conflict, some are limited to five, but there is a certain set of functions that are unconditionally recognized by all modern researchers of the issue under consideration.
In accordance with this, in the course of the work, 3 main approaches to the definition and gradation of conflict functions were considered, namely, the functional classification of L. Coser, the functions of conflicts defined by M.A. Yulyum and N.V. Molotkov based on the works of classics, as well as a functional classification according to the positive and negative impact of the corresponding functions on the team and the activities of the organization as a whole.
In the process of this study, it was found that the most effective and optimal approach to determining the functions of conflicts, in relation to personnel management, is the approach of constructive-destructive definition of functions, in which both positive and negative functions of conflict are objectively presented.
Conflict classifications
Modern authors offer a large selection of classifications according to different principles. Thus, sociologist Andrei Zdravomyslov presents a classification according to the levels of the parties to the conflict:
- between cultures (types of cultures);
- between government forms;
- between and within institutions;
- between associations.
Groups involved in a conflict may be divided into:
- groups based on common position;
- ethnic;
- interest groups;
- between individuals.
American philosopher Ralph Dahrendorf defined one of his most extensive classifications:
- by scale;
- on social consequences;
- by sources of occurrence;
- by forms of struggle;
- in relation to the subjects’ attitude to the conflict;
- according to the characteristics of the conditions of origin;
- according to the tactics used by the parties.
A. Dmitrov classifies social conflicts by area: political, economic, labor, education, social security, etc.
Functions of social conflict:
- integrative;
- innovative;
- activation of social connections;
- transformation of relationships;
- signaling about hotbeds of social tension;
- preventive;
- informational;
- adaptive;
- social changes.
If the parties to a social conflict are able to resolve it, then this serves as an incentive for progressive changes in society.
The functions of social conflict serve to determine the importance of a given predicament. Regarding a specific subject, conflicts are divided into:
- External (intergroup, between subject and group, interpersonal);
- Internal (personal conflicts).
Psychologists also divide interactions of this kind into motivational, role, cognitive and others.
Kurt Lewin believed that motivational conflicts should be classified as intrapersonal. Examples of these include job dissatisfaction, lack of self-confidence, stress and overload at work. Berkowitz, Myers and Deutsch classified this same category as group.
Cognitive conflicts among different authors also refer to both intergroup and intrapersonal conflicts.
Role conflicts, the essence of which is the problem of choosing a suitable option among several, are considered at the intergroup, interpersonal and intrapersonal levels. According to the works of Fred Lutens, intrapersonal conflicts should be divided into: goal, role and frustration.
Causes of conflict situations
The most common prerequisites for the development of conflict:
- The root cause of discord may be banal dissatisfaction with something or someone. The situation worsens when hostility is cumulative. A person rams displeasure into himself, then breaks down and splashes out all the negativity. Usually in such a situation, emotions take precedence over reason.
- Self-doubt is another reason for the psychology of conflict. This is the seed of internal disagreement that does not allow a person to prove himself as a self-sufficient person. Sometimes this condition leads to depression.
- Another reason for the emergence of irreconcilable differences is the infringement of other people’s interests, which aggravate the situation by public clashes. Such disputes are common in society, especially in small groups.
Intergroup and interpersonal conflicts
Intergroup conflicts arise when the interests of certain groups clash. The impetus for the emergence of such a situation may be a struggle for resources or influence in an organization consisting of a number of groups with differing interests.
The most common are interpersonal conflicts. Most of them arise from the struggle for material values, although outwardly this looks like an imbalance in views or worldview. In other words, these are communication conflicts.
By nature, such situations are divided into:
- Objective - real problems.
- Subjective - evaluation of actions or phenomena.
And according to the consequences they are classified as:
- Constructive - rational changes.
- Destructive - destruction.
Algorithm of actions for conflict management
To achieve results through proper conflict management, the manager must determine its type, as well as the causes and functions of conflicts.
He then applies the best possible solution.
To manage intrapersonal goal conflict, a manager must balance personal and organizational goals. For role conflict, you first need to understand the type of situation. There are a number of ways to resolve intrapersonal conflicts:
- compromise;
- sublimation;
- care;
- crowding out;
- reorientation;
- correction, etc.
Interpersonal conflicts can arise in any area of relationships. Their management should be analyzed in internal and external aspects.
At all stages of managing this situation, likes and dislikes, causes and factors should be considered. There are two known ways to resolve this type of conflict: pedagogical and administrative. In most cases, conflicts, for example, between a subordinate and a boss, result in withdrawal or fighting. Both options are not suitable for solving them effectively.
Experts are considering a number of other possible options for how an individual can behave. One of the most popular is the two-dimensional model of Thomas and Killman. It is based on the appeal of the subjects of the conflict to their interests and the interests of the opposition. When analyzing interests, participants adhere to one of five types of behavior: leaving, fighting, concessions, cooperation, compromise.
Types of obedience
(
In business communication, in principle, there is no concept of “types of obedience,” so I wrote about “types of listening.” Like this. Further, under the asterisk, there is only one mention of the concept “types of obedience” in d.o)
American communication researcher Kelly identifies four types of listening
.
Directed, critical listening.
The participant in communication first carries out a critical analysis of the message (often doing this preventively, that is, coming with an attitude towards critical perception of information), and then makes an attempt to understand it. Such listening is appropriate where decisions, projects, ideas, points of view, etc. are discussed. Where new information is discussed and new knowledge is communicated, critical listening has little prospect. The attitude of rejecting information does not allow one to listen to it; it requires focusing attention only on what confirms the undesirability of listening. As a result, everything valuable seems to pass by, there is no interest in information, a person simply wastes time and remains dissatisfied.
Empathic listening.
With empathic listening, the participant in a business interaction pays more attention to “reading” feelings rather than words. Such listening can be effective if the speaker evokes positive emotions in the listener, and ineffective if the speaker evokes negative emotions with his words.
Non-reflective listening.
This type of listening involves minimal interference in the interlocutor’s speech with maximum concentration on it. Such a hearing is appropriate in the following situations:
· the partner is eager to express his point of view, his attitude towards something;
· the partner wants to discuss pressing issues, he experiences negative emotions;
· it is difficult for a partner to express in words what worries him;
· partner is shy, unsure of himself.
Active reflective listening.
In this type of listening, feedback is established with the speaker. Feedback from the listening process can be provided in various ways:
· questioning (direct appeal to the speaker, which is carried out using a variety of questions);
· paraphrasing, or verbalization (to paraphrase means to express the same thought, but in different words. The listener paraphrases the speaker’s thought, that is, returns to him the essence of the message so that he can assess whether it was understood correctly);
· reflection of feelings (when reflecting feelings, the main attention is paid not to the content of the message, but to the feelings that the speaker expresses, the emotional component of his statements);
· summarizing (thereby the partner makes it clear to the speaker that his main thoughts are understood and perceived).
(This is all I found where the word “obedience” is mentioned in business communication)
In domestic social psychology, says R.M. Bityanov, it is customary to distinguish three different types of interpersonal communication in their orientation: imperative, manipulation, dialogue.
Imperative communication is an authoritarian, directive form of influencing a communication partner in order to achieve control over his behavior, forcing him to take certain actions. The peculiarity of the imperative is that the ultimate goal of communication - coercion of a partner - is not veiled. Orders, instructions, instructions and demands are used as means of exerting influence.
We can name a group of social activities in which the use of an imperative type of communication is completely justified from both the target and ethical points of view. These include military statutory relations, “superior-subordinate” relations, in difficult and extreme conditions.
At the same time, it is possible to identify those areas of interpersonal relationships where the use of the imperative is inappropriate and even unethical. First of all, we are talking about intimate-personal relationships, marital and child-parent relationships. It is known that with the help of commands, orders and unconditional prohibitions one can achieve external obedience
and fulfillment of any requirements. However, they do not become part of a person’s internal personal beliefs, his introverted motivation.
Manipulation is a common form of interpersonal communication that involves influencing a partner in order to achieve one’s hidden intentions. Like the imperative, manipulative communication involves influencing a partner in order to achieve one’s goals. The fundamental difference is that the partner is not informed about the true goals of communication. They either hide from him or are replaced by others.
With regard to manipulation, we can also say that there are areas of human interaction where it is quite appropriate and where it is practically unacceptable. The area of “permitted manipulation” is undoubtedly business and business relationships in general. The concept of communication between D. Carnegie and his many followers has long been a symbol of this type of relationship. At the same time, there is a danger of transferring such skills of mastering the means of manipulative influence to other people in the business sphere and to other areas of human relationships, control over oneself and one’s life.
Examples of similar educational works
Communication as communication Relationship system
... subject-subject (person - subject of activity), but also subject-subject relationships (person - person). The essence of communication lies in the interaction of subjects of activity. Communication can be considered as a party, a condition of activity, or as...
Specifics of family communication and the development of emotional relationships in marriage
... include interaction, including communication, of a person ... relationships in a married couple 0.5-1.5 years. Then the tension of emotional upsurge, negative characteristics of the partner... deeper recognition, conflicts regarding distribution...
Remote interactions in the system of human-human relations
... is a complex mechanism of interpersonal communication, as we have already found out, the functions of the unconscious are actively involved in its structure. The main types of energy interactions in the person-person relationship include two types...
Features of family conflict
...group communication. Based on this, the first group of conflicts will be determined mainly by the personal qualities of the spouses and the characteristics of intra-family relationships. The second is the influence of external subjective-objective conditions on marital relationships. IN …
Marital conflicts and mechanisms for their resolution
...relationships. — Identifying the reasons that provoke marital conflicts. — Recommendations for preventing marital conflicts... take into account the behavioral characteristics of your partner. A man's behavior and... pattern of behavior. The manner of communication, the special nuances of the mother...
