Friday, May 6, 2011
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Conflict and Interpersonal Problem Solving in Close Relationships
In this study Londahl, E., Tverskoy, A., & D'Zurilla, T. (2005) discuss conflict between romantic partner relations. They discuss how avoidance, interpersonal, and interpersonal conflict styles can bring about resolution to communication situations. Conflict
As discussed in class interpersonal conflict is when an individual has conflict with others; either a group or individual. When this occurs, the group needs to decide upon a way to solve the issue with all parties being somewhat (competition), partially (zero sum), or completely satisfied (non-zero sum) with the outcome of the situation.
With competition in a conflict one party basically refuses to see anyone else's point of view other than their own, the person wants what they are want and do not care if the other party are satisfied or not.
In zero sum one party wins and one party looses; which can leave ill feelings and the potential for future conflict eruption simply because the initial conflict was not solved in an amicable/agreeable manner.
Non-zero sum creates the ideal outcome for all involved, as most likely all parties of interest have given voice to their concerns, have made clear their requirements/expectations and have come to an acceptable term(s) of agreement to the conflict.
If solutions to a problem are not easily found or agreed upon a mediator can also be of use to assist the deescalation of the situation and resolution of the problem. A mediator can help assist both parties with ways to release internalized issues so that both parties can 'air' their concerns and have the matter sufficiently dealt with.
In conflicting situations, it is best to choose Constructive problem solving because it initiates a challenge or opportunity to benefit the issue with a solvable solution by allowing persons to effectively with time and effort,to persistently come up with a solution; instead of choosing Destructive problem solving which only leads to festering and harboring hurt or bitter feelings and larger problems to solve or not, which only causes further disagreements or disputes between people in relationships.
As discussed in class interpersonal conflict is when an individual has conflict with others; either a group or individual. When this occurs, the group needs to decide upon a way to solve the issue with all parties being somewhat (competition), partially (zero sum), or completely satisfied (non-zero sum) with the outcome of the situation.
With competition in a conflict one party basically refuses to see anyone else's point of view other than their own, the person wants what they are want and do not care if the other party are satisfied or not.
In zero sum one party wins and one party looses; which can leave ill feelings and the potential for future conflict eruption simply because the initial conflict was not solved in an amicable/agreeable manner.
Non-zero sum creates the ideal outcome for all involved, as most likely all parties of interest have given voice to their concerns, have made clear their requirements/expectations and have come to an acceptable term(s) of agreement to the conflict.
If solutions to a problem are not easily found or agreed upon a mediator can also be of use to assist the deescalation of the situation and resolution of the problem. A mediator can help assist both parties with ways to release internalized issues so that both parties can 'air' their concerns and have the matter sufficiently dealt with.
In conflicting situations, it is best to choose Constructive problem solving because it initiates a challenge or opportunity to benefit the issue with a solvable solution by allowing persons to effectively with time and effort,to persistently come up with a solution; instead of choosing Destructive problem solving which only leads to festering and harboring hurt or bitter feelings and larger problems to solve or not, which only causes further disagreements or disputes between people in relationships.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
"Men's and Women's reactions to fair and unfair treatment in relationship conflict"
"Men's and Women's reactions to fair and unfair treatment in relationship conflict"
Article summary:
Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009) conducted a study on men and women and the level of 'fair and unfair' treatment during relationship conflict, discussing the level of affective feelings and relationship satisfaction.
It was discovered that people need and desire 'fairness' when dealing with situations that are highly important to them. As 'fair' treatment gives the individual a sense of security.
People are more likely to remain involved in a relationship when their partner is actively involved and interested in a fair conflict resolution.
The study confirmed that men are less likely to be affected by fairness of treatment as compared to women; unless they are fully committed to the woman and the relationship.
Women however, are affected both positively as well as negatively whether the conflict is resolved fairly or unfairly, and weather in a committed or non-committed relationship; as the identity of women are tied into who they view themselves to be. Strongly because for women only their relationships foster an attached sense of self.
In the end giving a person the ability to express their positions and opinions gives the individual a sense of having a voice and a sense that their ideals are respected and accepted as valid.
Integration:
The theory of gender differences in relationships and the level of fair or unfair treatment being evidenced as discussed by Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009) is related to distributive justice as they theorize that people will react more positively to fairness than unfair treatment.
However I think that several conflict theories apply as equity and equality do not always apply or work in relational situations and people will often react more to unjust experiences rather than just situations.
Some theories such as the classic 'Tit for Tat' , in cases where the men are not fully committed to the resolution of conflict; their input is based only on moves and counter moves and considered a 'game' of who can win the battle of the wills, more than a resolution to bond further relational connectedness.
I believe the GRIT strategy can also be applied to such issues of this kind. As it is important to relay / voice full intentions, offer solution, make actions match words, establish needed trust, and take every measure for de-escalation possible for positive outcomes.
The four properties of interaction could also be applicable, as intimate relationships imitate the stages of 'moves and countermoves', patterns of behavior that create avoidance or escalation, prior history of relationships will also factor into how communication exists or not, and the context or environment of the situation will have an impact on perceptions of a situation.
Another good theory would be one of Reciprocity and Compensation as sometimes in relationships it can be more beneficial to give more than you take or expect in order to actually 'Win' the battle so to speak and just obtain peace.
Rummel's five stage model would be of good use to situations that have the potential for cyclic eruption; by attending to positions or attitudes held determines the initiation for or against ongoing conflict , by utilizing open conflict everyone can openly discuss their concerns and come to a understandable balance of power if nothing else, even if not 100% solvable at the time hopefully enough can be done to avoid the disruption stage for a reasonable period of time.
And finally some use Promises, which say I'll act beneficially toward you as long as you fulfill predetermined requests and expectations. On the other hand Threats can also be a part of conflict within relationships; by making known, one party to the other that one would behave detrimentally if needs/requests are not met.
Application:
The principle of distributive justice as discussed by Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009), could be applied to the relationship of fairness during times of relational conflict when the variables of positive or negative outcomes are detrimental to the couple's committed determination to the progression of the relationship for a beneficial resolution.
Although women perceive fair treatment by their partners as the partner giving her a voice and an ear as well as actions to solidify the interaction, if the tables turned and the woman would not commit to the man in times that he wanted a voice in a matter of discussion he would then be rendered to feel similar repercussions that a female is made to feel when she is being invalidated.
I estimate that a lot of the reason some people find themselves in 'unfair' situations could be due to the lack of value that they have ascribed to themselves. Giving self a lower value than what you want or expect from will create maltreatment and devaluing from others.
The saying that "All's Fair in Love and War" can be justly applicable when stated in this context of people desiring fair treatment whether male or female.
All are sensitive to having their needs met, and knowing that women are more sensitive than men would do many women in relationships a justice to apply the same 'distributive' tactics dealt; as in war as well as in relationships "fair play" does not always apply!
References
KLUWER, E. S., TUMEWU, M., , & VAN DEN BOS, K. (2009). Men's and women's reactions to fair and unfair treatment in relationship conflict. Personal Relationships, 16(4), 455-474.
Article summary:
Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009) conducted a study on men and women and the level of 'fair and unfair' treatment during relationship conflict, discussing the level of affective feelings and relationship satisfaction.
It was discovered that people need and desire 'fairness' when dealing with situations that are highly important to them. As 'fair' treatment gives the individual a sense of security.
People are more likely to remain involved in a relationship when their partner is actively involved and interested in a fair conflict resolution.
The study confirmed that men are less likely to be affected by fairness of treatment as compared to women; unless they are fully committed to the woman and the relationship.
Women however, are affected both positively as well as negatively whether the conflict is resolved fairly or unfairly, and weather in a committed or non-committed relationship; as the identity of women are tied into who they view themselves to be. Strongly because for women only their relationships foster an attached sense of self.
In the end giving a person the ability to express their positions and opinions gives the individual a sense of having a voice and a sense that their ideals are respected and accepted as valid.
Integration:
The theory of gender differences in relationships and the level of fair or unfair treatment being evidenced as discussed by Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009) is related to distributive justice as they theorize that people will react more positively to fairness than unfair treatment.
However I think that several conflict theories apply as equity and equality do not always apply or work in relational situations and people will often react more to unjust experiences rather than just situations.
Some theories such as the classic 'Tit for Tat' , in cases where the men are not fully committed to the resolution of conflict; their input is based only on moves and counter moves and considered a 'game' of who can win the battle of the wills, more than a resolution to bond further relational connectedness.
I believe the GRIT strategy can also be applied to such issues of this kind. As it is important to relay / voice full intentions, offer solution, make actions match words, establish needed trust, and take every measure for de-escalation possible for positive outcomes.
The four properties of interaction could also be applicable, as intimate relationships imitate the stages of 'moves and countermoves', patterns of behavior that create avoidance or escalation, prior history of relationships will also factor into how communication exists or not, and the context or environment of the situation will have an impact on perceptions of a situation.
Another good theory would be one of Reciprocity and Compensation as sometimes in relationships it can be more beneficial to give more than you take or expect in order to actually 'Win' the battle so to speak and just obtain peace.
Rummel's five stage model would be of good use to situations that have the potential for cyclic eruption; by attending to positions or attitudes held determines the initiation for or against ongoing conflict , by utilizing open conflict everyone can openly discuss their concerns and come to a understandable balance of power if nothing else, even if not 100% solvable at the time hopefully enough can be done to avoid the disruption stage for a reasonable period of time.
And finally some use Promises, which say I'll act beneficially toward you as long as you fulfill predetermined requests and expectations. On the other hand Threats can also be a part of conflict within relationships; by making known, one party to the other that one would behave detrimentally if needs/requests are not met.
Application:
The principle of distributive justice as discussed by Kluwer, Tumewu, and Van Den Bos (2009), could be applied to the relationship of fairness during times of relational conflict when the variables of positive or negative outcomes are detrimental to the couple's committed determination to the progression of the relationship for a beneficial resolution.
Although women perceive fair treatment by their partners as the partner giving her a voice and an ear as well as actions to solidify the interaction, if the tables turned and the woman would not commit to the man in times that he wanted a voice in a matter of discussion he would then be rendered to feel similar repercussions that a female is made to feel when she is being invalidated.
I estimate that a lot of the reason some people find themselves in 'unfair' situations could be due to the lack of value that they have ascribed to themselves. Giving self a lower value than what you want or expect from will create maltreatment and devaluing from others.
The saying that "All's Fair in Love and War" can be justly applicable when stated in this context of people desiring fair treatment whether male or female.
All are sensitive to having their needs met, and knowing that women are more sensitive than men would do many women in relationships a justice to apply the same 'distributive' tactics dealt; as in war as well as in relationships "fair play" does not always apply!
References
KLUWER, E. S., TUMEWU, M., , & VAN DEN BOS, K. (2009). Men's and women's reactions to fair and unfair treatment in relationship conflict. Personal Relationships, 16(4), 455-474.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
The History and Current Conflict of Lybia
The current uprising in Libya is not the first large-scale rise of rebel movements in this country. There is a history in Libya of armed protest movements against governmental and societal discrepancies. Libya
Since the 19th century up to and during the colonial period, Libya has had a very strong societal influence on the central and state levels.
The traditions of contesting the state have always been strong. When the Italians invaded Libya in 1911 they could not conquer the country, due to a very well organized volunteer army that resisted the central invasion in the north until 1931.
This is to say that Libya has had strong societal forces that are very concerned about keeping their communities and autonomy and not allowing the central government determine every aspect of their affairs.
The protesters moved more quickly to armed resistance. The civilian casualties seem to have strengthened the opposition’s resolve; and Libyans who are generally opposed to foreign intervention, are seeking help to fight against the Libyan government in order to apply pressure on the government and bankrupt the regime of its power. Libya
All in all this appears to be a conflict that has a zero sum propensity; where one side wins at the loss/cost of the opposite party. The conflict has already become tragically destructive due to the senseless loss of lives; and the more one party tries to compete in order to defeat the other the more loss occurs.
This is an intergoup/international conflict to where both sides need to come to an amicable resolution or call in third party aid as a measure to end the downward spiral effects of the war.
Libya at this point it at a very destructive conflict stage with dangerous moves and counter moves, that have brought about such negative patterns of behavior.
The relationship has always been strained between the government and its people and most likely will always be; as the government desires a "central" headship and the people desire a democracy. The fact being that with intergroup/international differences being more competitive and less cooperative, a controlling style used by the government will never work to reach agreements needed to end the war. Collaboration needs to occur, by negotiating and working out the differences, bringing about a compromise which allows both sides to 'split the difference'. and end the violence in order to live peaceably.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Tit for Tat
I chose this topic as I find this strategy very interesting seeing as how everyone on the planet at one time or another has engaged in the act(s) during inter/intra-personal, inter/intra-group/social, or global/international confrontation(s).
Tit for tat is all about equivalence in retaliation. This method is used in Game Theory as well as Prisoner’s dilemma strategies. When we are using this strategy we initially cooperate, then respond to an opponent's prior action. If our opponent was previously cooperative, the partner is cooperative. If not, the partner is not.
This operation is contingent on four strategies:
- Unless provoked by the opponent, the partner will cooperate
- If provoked by the opponent, the partner will then retaliate
- The partner is quick to forgive
- The partner has to have a good chance of continued competition against the opponent.
Friday, January 14, 2011
~16 Weeks In The Ring With LOVE~
Hello my name is Tricia. I am in my senior year at KSU majoring in psychology. My plan is to continue on for my masters in family counseling and eventually obtain my Clinical PhD.
I decided upon this course of study as a benefactor for my future endevors as a clinician, as well as my current engagements within the many social circles in which I serve; such as BBBS of Stark County, Youth minister for COL ministeries, and mentoring female youth within the community and urban settings. I also believe the information studied and learned will be well applied to my current field of work, school and home life.
Aaaahhh...the Irony of it all...a photo that I have selected; I felt it only Fitting seeing as how my last name is 'LOVE' and I am a 'BOXER'..."all's fair in Love & War" soooooo Glove-up... 'Ding-Ding'... and lets talk Conflict Resolution!
I decided upon this course of study as a benefactor for my future endevors as a clinician, as well as my current engagements within the many social circles in which I serve; such as BBBS of Stark County, Youth minister for COL ministeries, and mentoring female youth within the community and urban settings. I also believe the information studied and learned will be well applied to my current field of work, school and home life.
Aaaahhh...the Irony of it all...a photo that I have selected; I felt it only Fitting seeing as how my last name is 'LOVE' and I am a 'BOXER'..."all's fair in Love & War" soooooo Glove-up... 'Ding-Ding'... and lets talk Conflict Resolution!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)