Lecture 17: Conflict Flashcards
1
Q
conflict
A
arises when one individual’s pursuit of their goals interferes with the other person’s goals
2
Q
conflict in interdependent relationships
A
- Inevitable in interdependent relationships, where our outcomes are affected by the actions of the other person
- Any two individuals will occasionally differ in their motives, beliefs, and opinions, and these incompatibilities (whether they are occasional or chronic) create conflict
- Runs the gamut from minor things (ex. which movie to watch) to major life decisions (e.g., whether to have children & how to raise them)
- Even in generally compatible couples, incompatibilities will occasionally arise
- Competing motives are constantly in flux (ex. autonomy vs. connection)
3
Q
what do couples disagree on?
A
- Basically everything
- Most common: children, chores, and communication
4
Q
instigating events for conflict
A
Sources of conflict are diverse, but instigating events can be grouped into four general categories:
1. criticism
2. illegitimate demands
3. rebuffs
4. cumulative annoyances
5
Q
criticism
A
verbal or nonverbal acts that communicate unfair dissatisfaction with a partner
6
Q
illegitimate demands
A
requests that are excessive and seem unjust
7
Q
rebuffs
A
occurs when one is denied a desired reaction
8
Q
cumulative annoyances
A
relatively trivial events that become irritating with repetition (social allergies)
9
Q
are conflicts inevitable?
A
- Conflicts are inevitable
- But, they do not have to be destructive
- How we disagree during conflict is more important than whether we disagree or what we disagree about
- We can exercise control over our actions (even if it’s hard)
10
Q
4 types of couples
A
- valdating
- volatile
- conflict avoiding
- hostile
11
Q
validating couples
A
compromise often & work out problems to mutual satisfaction
12
Q
volatile couples
A
frequent, passionate conflict, tempered by positive affect (humour, displays of fondness)
13
Q
conflict avoiding couples
A
agree to disagree, avoid conflict head-on
14
Q
hostile couples
A
least stable pairing, characterized by high levels of hostility
15
Q
2 subtypes of hostile couples
A
- engaged subtype
- detached subtype
16
Q
engaged subtype
A
- Attempt to address disagreements, but do so badly
- Argue often & intensely, often with insults, name-calling, put-downs
17
Q
detached subtype
A
let disagreements fester, are emotionally detached (although with occasional bouts of sniping)
18
Q
relationship satisfaction in 4 types of couples
A
- Couples, where at least one member is validating, tend to be happier
- Types 1-3 can be stable, but will only work to the extent that they help maintain the golden 5:1 ratio between positive and negative interactions
19
Q
the four horsemen of the apocalypse
A
- Exchanges of unhappy couples are characterized by more negative affect & less positive affect
- 10 times more likely to use a negative tone of voice
- Expressions of negative emotions are not necessarily bad for relationships: it can actually increase closeness
- But 4 hostile dynamics do not bode well for relationships: criticism, contempt, defensiveness, stonewalling
20
Q
criticism
A
- attacking personally or character
- More likely to put their partner on the defensive
21
Q
complaint
A
airing out disagreements by focusing on a specific behaviour
22
Q
shifting from complaining to criticism
A
- A shift from complaining to criticism commonly arises if complaints are not addressed (due to poor communication and/or unwillingness to address the complaint)
- Unlike complaints, criticisms tend to be generalizations
- You always, you never
23
Q
kitchen-sinking
A
- ”Bundling” complaints
- Similar effect to criticism of a partner’s personality because it seems so overwhelming & pervasive
- Results in conversation drifting off-beam
24
Q
off-beam
A
wandering from topic to topic without resolving anything
25
contempt
- Most destructive of all the horsemen
- Criticism coupled with scorn & disgust, a sense of superiority
- Intention to insult and psychologically abuse partner
- Includes insults & name-calling, hostile humour, mocking, nonverbal cues of disgust
- Underlying feelings of disgust and negatively toward the partner
- See them as stupid, disgusting, incompetent, and foolish
- Loss of admiration for the partner
26
defensivenessness involves protecting against the attack by:
- Denying responsibility
- Making excuses
- Cross-complaining
- Yes-butting
- Repeating yourself without paying attention to what the other is saying
- Playing the victim
27
cross-complaining
responding to a complaint with another complaint
28
yes-butting
start off by agreeing with your partner, but end up disagreeing by finding something unworkable with what they’re saying or justifying your actions
29
defensiveness
- An understandable reaction when feeling beleaguered
- But it obstructs communication and tends to escalate rather than de-escalate conflict
- Engenders feelings of tension and prevents partners from hearing & understanding each other
30
stonewalling
- Withdrawing from and disengaging from meaningful conversation with the partner
- Removing oneself from the conversation, not responding, offering monosyllabic responses, ignoring the partner
- Provocative & destructive: conveys disapproval, creates distance, and precludes resolution
31
flooding
- A sense of being overwhelmed by negative emotion and strong physiological arousal
- Impedes constructive discussion; leads to hostility, defensiveness, and withdrawal
- With chronic flooding: hypervigilance for signs of attack, immersion in distress-maintaining thoughts
- Statements like “We need to talk” can immediately put the partner on the defensive
32
Demand/withdraw patterns
destructive pattern of conflict where one person presses the issue, while the other withdraws & avoids discussing the issue
33
cyclical pattern of the demand/withdraw patterns
- The more the demander pushes, the more the withdrawer retreats
- Because arguments are left unsettled, leads to serial arguing
- Linked to personal and relationship distress
34
gender differences in the demand/withdraw pattern
- Men are more likely to be withdrawers/stonewallers, and women are more likely to be demanders
- This pattern is seen cross-culturally
35
3 possible explanations for the demand/withdraw pattern
1. biological perspective
2. differences in socialization
3. differences in power
36
biological perspective
- Men experience stronger & longer-lasting physiological stress responses during conflict and are more prone to flooding
- More reactive to conflict
37
differences in socialization
- Boys are socialized to hide & suppress emotions, focus on pursuing autonomous goals
- Girls are socialized to express feelings, focus on relationships, foster intimacy/closeness, and receive more support when expressing emotions
38
differences in power
- The person who wants change is in a lower-power position and must rely on the other person to create change
- The person who benefits from the status quo will be resistant to change because they hold the power in the situation
- Women tend to desire more change in the relationship than men, which puts them in a lower-power role in heterosexual relationships
39
Comparison of heterosexual, gay, and lesbian couples for the demand/withdraw pattern
- If there is something essential about men vs. women, we would not expect to see the demand-withdraw asymmetry in gay & lesbian couples
- Some have found no difference in overall levels of demand/withdraw behaviour or asymmetry between couple types
- Others have found that women demand more and men withdraw more regardless of couple time
- Regardless of gender, the person who wants change (low power) demands, and the more powerful person (the one invested in the status quo) withdraws
40
cycle of negativity in close relationships
- The first three minutes of a conversation set the tone
- Can be used to predict subsequent divorce with 96% accuracy
- Unhappy, risky couples are more likely to reciprocate negativity
- Meet negative behaviours with defensiveness, stonewalling
41
harsh startup
leading discussion with contempt or criticism
42
negative affect reciprocity
negative emotions are met with negative emotions
43
accomodation
- Even happy couples sometimes engage in negative behaviour, but we are better able to keep negativity from spiralling out of control
- Willingness to respond to destructive acts with constructive responses
- Characteristic of committed couples
- Breaks the cycle of negativity
- Often begins with the way we think about our partner’s behaviour
44
the role of cognition in conflict
- The way we behave during a disagreement is important
- But so are our perceptions of partners’ behaviours
45
attributional conflict
- We agree on what happened but not why it happened
- Fuelled by actor-observed differences and self-serving biases
46
mindreading
- One’s tendency to assume that they understand their partner’s thoughts, feelings, and opinions without asking
- Unhappy partners tend to read unpleasant or hostile motives into neutral or positive ones
- Attributions of harmful intent are particularly detrimental
47
cognitive editing
- Responding only to constructive portions of the partner’s comment and ignoring the negative
- Prevents escalation & helps re-focus on the issue at hand
48
breaking the cycle of negativity
- There are several broad patterns of behaviour that can disrupt the cycle of negativity and facilitate more constructive discussion:
1. Calm down
2. Listen and speak constructively and nondefensively
3. Validate your partner
4. Challenge your mindset
49
taking a break
- Calming down is essential (helps prevent flooding, defensiveness, stonewalling, and belligerence)
- Learn to recognize when you’re feeling overwhelmed & take a time out
- Let your partner know that you are not shutting them out
- DON’T spend time out rehearsing vengeful or distress-maintaining thoughts
- DO try to reframe thoughts more positively
- Ex. “they’re super upset right now, but this isn’t a personal attack”, “I’m upset now but we have a good relationship and I love them”
50
speaking more constructively
- Criticisms (personal attacks on a partner’s character) & contempt trigger defensiveness
- Behaviour descriptions
- Avoid words like “always” and “never”
- I-statements: description of your feelings
- XYZ statements: combine behaviour descriptions and I-statements
“When you do X in situation Y, I feel Z”
- Avoid domineering (e.g., “When I want your opinion, I will let you know) and belligerent speech (e.g., “What do you want now?”)
51
behaviour descriptions
voice complaints by focusing on discrete, manageable behaviours
52
active listening
- Listen in order to understand what your partner is saying (not in order to criticize your partner)
- Don’t mindread—instead:
paraphrase their message to make sure you understood them correctly and practice perception checking to make sure you are inferring your partner’s feelings correctly
- Even simple backchannel communications like nodding, “yeah”, ”uh-huh”, and “I see” can communicate that you are trying to understand your partner
- Avoid displaying negative nonverbal behaviour while you’re listening
53
validation
- Try to understand & empathize with the feelings behind your partner’s communications
- Understanding the other’s point of view & taking it seriously does not mean you must agree
- But such validation communicates respect & care for your partner, which de-escalates the situation & promotes an open, constructive dialogue
54
techniques for validation
- Put yourself in your partner’s shoes or try taking a third-party perspective
- Take responsibility for your actions
- Avoid yes-butting when acknowledging your partner’s point of view
55
challenge your mindset
- Instead of rehearsing thoughts related to victimhood & righteous indignation, examine how you contribute to the negative dynamics in your relationship
- Ex. in the demand-withdraw pattern: as the demander, your criticisms and attempts to control your partner are threatening them & pushing them away. As the withdrawer, your stonewalling & turning away from the partner thwarts their needs & leads them to escalate their demands
- Remember what you like about your partner
- Push back against the tendency to rewrite history (memory bias)
- Communicate positive regard & admiration for your partner
- Instead of seeing argument as a way to retaliate or exert control over your partner, think of a way you can improve both your outcomes
- Try to foster a sense of optimism about the problem
56
importance of self-control
- Successful conflict management requires self-control
- Factors that weaken our inhibitions or strain our cognitive resources (ex. alcohol, stress, lack of sleep) increase irritability, decrease perspective-taking, and make a destructive response more likely
- John Gottman recommends scheduling a time to politely air out grievances
- Addressing issues pre-emptively when we are feeling calm may help avoid the disastrous combo of provocation + low self-control
