Psychological Theories of Conflict

Psychological Theories of Conflict
Drawing on the material related to the three perspectives mentioned in the lesson commentary and what Folger, Poole, and Stutman discuss in considerably more detail in the assigned reading, prepare an essay of approximately 1,000 words in which you (a) generate three pieces of advice (each one stemming from the perspectives (psychodynamic, emotion-based, and social cognition) that you would be willing to offer to another person concerning how to minimize nonconstructive forms of interaction in conflict situations and (b) explain what leads you to believe that following the advice would have the desired effect.

Joseph P. Folger, Marshall Scott Poole, and Randall K. Stutman, Working Through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships, Groups, and Organizations (Chapter 2, “The Inner Experience of Conflict,” pp. 40-73).

The psychodynamic perspective (pp. 41-46) suggests that overt communicative behavior is a response to internal psychological experiences one is having as a result of anxieties and related aggressive impulses that may be activated by perceived incompatibilities, both of which can lead to counterproductive or even destructive responses to conflict.
Theories
Verbal aggressiveness theory, which reflects the emotion-based perspective, focuses on two frequently confused but conceptually distinct personality traits (verbal aggressiveness vs. argumentativeness) that influence how the parties to a conflict are apt to interact. Verbally aggressive individuals are likely to escalate conflicts, whereas those who are argumentative are more likely to move successfully from differentiation to integration and to maintain harmonious relationships. (See pp. 46-53.)

Attribution theory, an example of the social cognition perspective, advances the view that how one is likely to interact with others in situations involving conflicts is a function of what the person perceives to be the cause of others’ behavior (pp. 61-65). Attribution tendencies, much like verbal aggressiveness noted above, reflect underlying personality traits—and more specifically, how typically one sees events as being a result of personal factors as opposed to situational factors. Those who usually see others’ behavior as intentional (the “fundamental attribution error”) as opposed to circumstantial, for instance, will communicate in a manner consistent with that perception. Attributions also tend to be self-serving, which in turn affects the ways that conflicting parties often manage their differences.

Trained incapacities theory (pp. 68-69), which combines elements of all three perspectives, focuses on how habitual patterns of communicative behavior affect prospects for the successful management of conflicts. When the patterns are inappropriate, they intensify perceptions of threat, feelings of anxiety, and one’s level of stress, all of which adversely affect the outcome.

ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.