Interpersonal conflict
In essence, this is the interaction of people either pursuing mutually exclusive or simultaneously unattainable goals for both conflicting parties, or striving to realize incompatible values and norms in their relationships.
In socio-psychological science, as a rule, such structural components of interpersonal conflict are considered as a conflict situation, conflict interaction, conflict resolution. The basis of any interpersonal conflict is the conflict situation that has developed even before it begins. Here we see both the participants in a possible future interpersonal clash and the subject of their disagreement.
Many studies devoted to the problems of interpersonal conflict show that a conflict situation presupposes that its participants are focused on achieving individual rather than common goals. This determines the possibility of the emergence of 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 recognize, on the one hand, the current situation as generally consistent with their individual goals, and on the other, these goals as incompatible and mutually exclusive. But until this happens, one of the potential opponents may change his position, and the object itself, about which differences of opinion have arisen, may lose significance for one, or even both, parties. If the severity of the situation disappears in this way, the interpersonal conflict, which, it would seem, was inevitably bound to unfold, having lost its objective foundations, simply will not arise.
Conflict interaction in social psychology is traditionally understood as the implementation by participants in a conflict situation of their opposing positions, their actions aimed at achieving their goals and inhibiting the solution of the enemy’s problems.
The most constructive is a differentiated approach to interpersonal conflicts, assessing them from the point of view of the causes that led to them, the nature of the consequences, the functions they perform, the forms of their occurrence, and the possibilities of their resolution. Traditionally, conflicts are distinguished by their content, significance, form of expression, type of relationship structure, and social formalization.
Unlike a conflict of a personal nature, 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 activity. After a constructive solution to the issue that gave rise to the conflict is found, most often the relationship is normalized.
Only when a leader is fluent in various tactics for resolving interpersonal conflict, taking into account numerous aspects of this socio-psychological phenomenon, and skillfully applies them in each specific case, can one count on the desired result. In addition to interpersonal conflict, there are also dissonance (intrapersonal conflict caused by an individual’s attempt to realize two or more opposing, 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 methodologically developed area is the study of the prevailing strategy of behavior in conflict interpersonal interaction (R. Blake, J. Mouton, K. Thomas, etc.).
The majority of both interpersonal and other social conflicts are based on a widespread stereotype, according to which any situation of conflict of interests represents a so-called zero-sum game in which the size of the gain is equal to the size of the loss. That is, one’s own interests can be satisfied only to the extent that the interests of the opposite party are infringed. The most obvious example of this kind is sports games where the winners win 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 does not necessarily equal 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 one by one by a prosecutor. Moreover, “both of them are guilty, however, the prosecutor only has evidence of their guilt in lesser crimes. Therefore, he invites each of the criminals to confess separately: if one confesses and the other does not, the prosecutor guarantees immunity to the confessor (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 insignificant” (1).
Thus, when using an optimal strategy that takes into account the interests of the other, both prisoners benefit - they receive symbolic punishment. Meanwhile, in practice, as D. Myers notes, “in order to minimize their own sentence, many confess, despite the fact that joint confession leads to more severe sentences than mutual non-recognition, since they are guided by the logic that “. no matter what the other prisoner decides, it will be better for each of them to confess. If the other one confesses, the first prisoner, having also confessed, will receive a moderate sentence, not a maximum. If the other does not confess, the first one can go free. Of course, each of the two reasons the same way. And both fall into a social trap” (2).
K. Thomas, based on a detailed analysis of the “prisoner’s dilemma,” identified five behavioral strategies based on the relationship between taking into account one’s own interests and the interests of the opponent, potentially possible in a conflict situation:
- Win - Lose. Within the framework of this strategy, one’s own interests are absolutized, and the interests of the opposite side are completely ignored. When applied 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 by confessing to the crime, but deliberately “pawns” his “accomplice” while simultaneously trying to minimize his own guilt.
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 the other are valued 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 an 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 of 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 unconditionally recognizing its right to exist (which in no way means automatic agreement with it);
- refusal of any compromises for the sake of maintaining relationships;
- readiness 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 essential aspect of the work of a practical social psychologist in the context of the problem of interpersonal conflicts.
3 Ibid. pp. 633-634.
4 Myers D. Social psychology. St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 645.
The main essence of interpersonal conflicts
The development of each person’s personality largely depends on upbringing, the surrounding social environment, and the psychology of relationships within the family. Thus, an individual formed personality differs significantly from other individuals in its psychological qualities, mental abilities, manner of speech, style of clothing, state of health, etc. It is these differences that are the main causes of interpersonal conflicts.
Interpersonal Conflict: An Example
Interpersonal conflict: an example. Types of conflicts. Ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts
Unfortunately, people are not always able to resolve all disputes and misunderstandings peacefully. Very often, interpersonal conflict arises completely out of nowhere. What is the reason and why does this happen? What are the ways to resolve interpersonal conflicts? Is it possible to avoid them and live your whole life without conflict with anyone?
Conflict is one of the ways to resolve problems and contradictions that arise as a result of interactions between individuals or groups of people. Moreover, it is accompanied by negative emotions and behavior that goes beyond the norms accepted in society.
During a conflict, each side takes and defends an opposing position towards each other. None of the opponents wants to understand and accept the opponent’s opinion. The conflicting parties can be not only individuals, but also public groups and states.
If the interests and goals of two or more people in a particular case diverge, and each side tries to resolve the dispute in its own favor, interpersonal conflict arises. An example of such a situation is a quarrel between husband and wife, child and parent, subordinate and boss. This type of conflict is the most common and most frequently occurring.
Interpersonal conflict can occur both between people who know each other well and constantly communicate, and between those who see each other for the first time. In this case, the relationship is clarified by the opponents face to face, through a personal dispute or discussion.
A conflict is not just a dispute between two participants that arises spontaneously and unexpectedly. This is a process consisting of several stages, gradually developing and gaining strength. The causes of interpersonal conflicts can sometimes accumulate for quite a long time before they result in open confrontation.
At the first stage, the conflict is hidden. At this time, conflicting interests and views are just maturing and forming. At the same time, both parties to the conflict believe that their problem can be solved through negotiations and discussions.
At the second stage of the conflict, the parties realize that it will not be possible to overcome their differences peacefully. So-called tension arises, which increases and gains power.
The third stage is characterized by the beginning of active actions: disputes, threats, insults, dissemination of negative information about the enemy, search for allies and like-minded people. At the same time, mutual hostility, hatred, and bitterness accumulate between the participants.
The fourth stage is the process of resolving interpersonal conflicts. It may end in reconciliation between the parties or a break in relations.
There are many classifications of interpersonal conflicts. They are divided according to severity, duration, scale, form of manifestation, and expected consequences. Most often, types of interpersonal conflicts differ according to the reasons for their occurrence.
The most common is a conflict of interest. It occurs when people have opposing plans, goals, and intentions. An example is the following situation: two friends cannot agree on how to spend their time. The first one wants to go to the cinema, the second one just wants to take a walk. If neither of them wants to make concessions to the other, and an agreement cannot be reached, a conflict of interest may arise.
The second type is value conflicts. They can arise in cases where participants have different moral, ideological, and religious ideas. A striking example of this type of confrontation is the conflict of generations.
Role conflicts are the third type of interpersonal confrontation. In this case, the cause is violations of habitual norms of behavior and rules. Such conflicts can occur, for example, in an organization when a new employee refuses to accept the rules established by the team.
Among the reasons that provoke conflicts, the first place is limited resources. This could be, for example, one TV or computer for the whole family, a certain amount of money for bonuses that needs to be divided among all employees of the department. In this case, one person can achieve his goal only by infringing on another.
The second reason for the development of conflicts is interdependence. This may be a connection of tasks, authorities, responsibilities and other resources. Thus, in an organization, project participants may begin to blame each other if for some reason it was not possible to implement it.
Conflicts can be provoked by differences between people in goals, views, ideas about certain things, and manners of behavior and communication. In addition, the cause of confrontation can be a person’s personal characteristics.
Almost all people spend most of their time at work. During the performance of duties, disputes and contradictions often arise between employees. Conflicts in interpersonal relationships that occur in organizations very often slow down the company’s activities and worsen the overall result.
Conflicts in organizations can occur both between employees occupying the same position and between subordinates and superiors. The reasons for the emergence of contradictions may be different. This includes shifting responsibilities to each other, and a feeling of unfair treatment from management, and the dependence of employees’ results on each other.
Conflict in an organization can be provoked not only by disagreements about work issues, but also by problems in communication and personal hostility between colleagues. Most often, confrontation can be resolved by employees themselves through negotiations. Sometimes the management of interpersonal conflicts is taken over by the head of the organization, he finds out the reasons and tries to resolve the problems that have arisen. It happens that the matter may end with the dismissal of one of the conflicting parties.
Family life involves constantly solving all kinds of everyday problems. Very often, spouses cannot find agreement on certain issues, resulting in interpersonal conflict. An example of this: the husband returned from work too late, the wife did not have time to cook dinner, the husband scattered dirty socks around the apartment.
Material problems significantly aggravate conflicts. Many domestic quarrels could be avoided if every family had enough resources. The husband doesn’t want to help his wife wash the dishes - let’s buy a dishwasher, there is an argument over what channel we will watch - no problem, let’s get another TV. Unfortunately, not everyone can afford this.
Each family chooses its own strategy for resolving interpersonal conflicts. Some people quickly give in and seek reconciliation; others can live in a state of quarrel for a long time and not talk to each other. It is very important that discontent does not accumulate, that spouses find a compromise, and that all problems are resolved as quickly as possible.
The conflict between “fathers and sons” can be viewed in a broad and narrow sense. In the first case, it occurs within an individual family, while in the second it is projected onto the entire society as a whole. This problem has existed at all times; it is not new to our century.
Generational conflict occurs due to differences in views, worldviews, norms and values between young people and older people. However, this difference does not necessarily provoke conflict. The reason for the struggle between generations is the unwillingness to understand and respect each other's interests.
The main features of interpersonal conflicts between generations are that they are much longer in nature and do not develop in certain stages. They may periodically subside and flare up again with renewed vigor in the event of a sharp infringement of the interests of the parties.
To ensure that your family is not affected by generational conflict, you must constantly show respect and patience to each other. Old people should often remember that they were once young and did not want to listen to advice, and young people should not forget that after many years they will also become elderly.
Few people like constant swearing and quarrels. Many people would dream of living without ever having conflict with anyone. However, this is currently impossible in our society.
Starting from early childhood, a person conflicts with others. For example, the kids did not share the toys, the child does not obey the parents. In adolescence, generational conflict often comes first.
Throughout our lives, we have to periodically defend our interests and prove that we are right. At the same time, it is impossible to do without conflicts. All we can do is reduce the number of conflicts to a minimum, try not to succumb to provocations and avoid quarrels without good reason.
When a conflict arises, both participants want to resolve it as quickly as possible, while achieving their goals and getting what they want. How should you behave in this situation in order to come out of it with dignity?
First, you need to learn to separate your attitude towards the person with whom you have a disagreement from the problem itself that needs to be solved. Don’t start insulting your opponent or getting personal, try to behave with restraint and calm. Give reasons for all your arguments, try to put yourself in your opponent’s place and invite him to take your place.
If you notice that you are starting to lose your temper, invite your interlocutor to take a break to calm down and cool down a little, and then continue to sort things out. To solve a problem as quickly as possible, you need to see a specific goal and focus on ways to achieve it. It is important to remember that in any conflict situation it is necessary, first of all, to maintain relations with the opponent.
The most successful way out of a conflict situation is to find a compromise between the warring parties. In this case, the parties make a decision that suits all parties to the dispute. There are no remaining agreements or misunderstandings between the conflicting parties.
However, not in all cases it is possible to reach a compromise. Very often the outcome of a conflict is coercion. This option for resolving the conflict is most typical if one of the participants occupies a dominant position. For example, a leader forces a subordinate to do as he pleases, or a parent tells his child to do as he sees fit.
To prevent the conflict from gaining momentum, you can try to smooth it out. In this case, the person who is accused of something agrees with the reproaches and claims, and tries to explain the reason for his actions and actions. Using this method of getting out of a dispute does not mean that the essence of the conflict is understood and the mistakes are realized. It’s just that at the moment the accused does not want to enter into conflict.
Admitting your mistakes and repenting for what you have done is another way to resolve interpersonal conflict. An example of such a situation: a child regrets that he did not prepare his homework and received a bad grade, and promises his parents to continue to do his homework.
Every person should always remember that it is better to prevent absolutely any dispute than to later deal with its consequences and repair damaged relationships. What is the prevention of interpersonal conflicts?
First, you need to limit your communication with potentially conflicting people as much as possible. These can be arrogant, aggressive, secretive individuals. If it is not possible to completely stop communicating with such people, try to ignore their provocations and always remain calm.
To prevent conflict situations, you need to learn to negotiate with your interlocutor, try to find an approach to any person, treat your opponent with respect and clearly formulate your positions.
Before entering into conflict, you need to think carefully about whether you really need it. Very often people start to sort things out in cases where it makes no sense at all.
If your interests are not directly affected, and during the dispute you will not achieve your goals, most likely there is no point in entering into an interpersonal conflict. An example of a similar situation: on a bus, the conductor starts arguing with a passenger. Even if you support the position of one of the disputants, you should not get involved in their conflict without a good reason.
If you see that your opponent’s level is radically different from yours, there is no point in entering into an argument or discussion with such people. You will never prove to a stupid person that you are right.
Before getting involved in a conflict, you need to evaluate the pros and cons, think about what consequences it could lead to, how your relationship with your opponent will change, and whether you want this, how likely it is that during the dispute you will be able to achieve your goals. You also need to pay great attention to your emotions at the moment of threat of a quarrel. It may be worth using tactics to avoid the conflict, cool down a little and think carefully about the current situation.
Interpersonal conflict Essentially, this is the interaction of people either pursuing mutually exclusive or simultaneously unattainable goals for both conflicting parties, or seeking to realize in their relationships https://www.hr100.ru/wmc/info/dictionary/?id=1240051793 Interpersonal conflict: example Unfortunately, people do not always manage to resolve all disputes and misunderstandings peacefully. Very often, interpersonal conflict arises completely out of nowhere. What is the reason and why does this happen? https://kakfb.ru/samosovershenstvovanie/psihologija/57198-mezhlichnostnyj-konflikt-primer-tipy-konfliktov.html
Interpersonal conflict example from literature (6th grade)
The answer was left by the Guru
"Fathers and Sons"…………. The main conflict of the work is a socio-political conflict, the conflict of fathers and children - representatives of the nobility with commoners. Such people who, according to the author, live with the thoughts of the passing time and passing ideas about life, and new ideas, directions, thoughts born of the new time. The fact that social conflict is the main one in the work is confirmed by the nature of the artistic means chosen by the author: portraits of heroes, their clothing, description of the landscape, speech - everything speaks of the difference between the representatives of these two camps, between which the main conflict occurs. It is mainly revealed in three disputes between Bazarov and Pavel Petrovich, in disputes the subject of which are issues that concern the progressive people of that time: the attitude to the role of the nobility in society, to science, to the Russian people, to art and to nature. Naturally, the characters' points of view are determined by their opposing worldviews. Pavel Petrovich believes that aristocracy is the driving force of social development; his ideal of social order is “English freedom,” that is, a constitutional monarchy. Kirsanov focuses on liberalism, that is, on (its main principle) the preservation of the system during reforms in the social way of life. Bazarov is not satisfied with this position. He needs to change the social system, he is for the revolution, and therefore he rejects liberalism and denies the leading role of the nobility (in Russian society) as incapable of decisive action. The question of social change and revolution is posed both in the debate about the people and in the debate about nihilism. Kirsanov cannot come to terms with the all-denying position of the nihilists; for him it seems wild if a person is devoid of principles in life. “There are only four and a half of you,” he declares to Bazarov. And in Evgeniy’s answer, the author again hints at a social explosion: “Moscow burned down from a penny candle,” says the main character. Bazarov denies everything: religion, art, the autocratic serfdom system - largely because he sees the inertia, the deceitfulness of the manifestation of these concepts in real life, the hypocrisy of morality, the dilapidation and decay of the entire state system in general. It is not for nothing that in 1859, when the novel takes place, the tsarist government was on the verge of social upheaval and was experiencing a crisis.
Rate the answer
Let's look at some examples of interpersonal conflicts:
Very often, conflict arises in the workplace between a manager and a subordinate or between two employees. Most often this happens when there are disagreements in the organization of the work process. For example, one employee did not complete part of the work that affects the success of the entire common business. In this case, the conflict situation will most likely affect not only the manager, but also the colleagues of the negligent employee. Sometimes a new employee does not accept the norms and principles of the existing team. In this case, there is also a high probability of conflict developing.
Interpersonal conflicts at work can also arise when there is a change in management. They often arise due to a change in the style and method of managing a team. The “old” boss was more loyal in his demands, while the “new” boss was an adherent of a more authoritarian style. This disrupts the established relationship between employees and the manager. If you do not accept the new conditions dictated by your superiors, a conflict situation will certainly arise.
An example of interpersonal conflict is all kinds of marital contradictions. They can arise for any reason: how to spend a vacation, what TV to buy, what to cook for dinner, etc.
In everyday life, conflicts between representatives of different age generations are not uncommon. Each opponent staunchly defends his position (what music to listen to, how to dress, who to be friends with, etc.). These interpersonal conflicts are widely covered in world literature and are known as “father-son conflicts.”
An example of interpersonal conflict can always be found, for example, in public transport. Someone stepped on his foot with a heel, someone leaned a bag on his head. Often in this case people become irritated and conflict. Interpersonal conflicts arise constantly, but we should not forget that they also have positive functions.
Interpersonal conflicts in society
Society as a complex social organism lives and develops according to its own laws.
In it, as in any other social system, conflicts arise.
The objective basis for the emergence of conflicts in society is the presence in it of a set of social relations between subjects of social interaction of a special kind - nations, states, classes (social groups), parties, unions, etc.
By conflicts in society we will understand conflicts in various spheres of public life (economic, political, social and spiritual), in which there is a clash of interests, values, views and goals of special subjects of social interaction - nations, states, classes, parties, unions, etc. d.
Thus, conflicts in society are divided into four main groups: economic, political, social and spiritual. In each of these groups, depending on certain factors and conditions, specific types of conflicts are identified. For example, in the group of economic conflicts, internal (covering a specific state) and external (international) conflicts can be distinguished; large-scale and local, etc.
Types of conflicting personalities
Conflicts in interpersonal relationships are an integral part of social life. Many people are not inclined to create conflict situations and try to avoid them. However, there are certain types of personalities whose psychological characteristics can cause constant strife. Categories of people with different levels of conflict are conventionally divided into 5 types:
Demonstrative
Such people always want to be the center of attention and look better in other people's eyes. A person of this type has strongly expressed emotions, which often forces him to unfold a real drama around himself. Typically, a demonstrative type personality is not adapted to independent life. Such a person cannot carry out his plans on his own, and avoids performing responsible work. Typically, such persons are the main initiators of conflicts.
Rigid
As a rule, a rigid type personality has great difficulty accepting the point of view of others. A person with such a character takes any criticism too close to his heart and often gets offended; he is vulnerable, suspicious and has inflated self-esteem.
Ungovernable
Such a person is aggressive and intolerant of generally accepted norms. His behavior is unpredictable; he has poor self-control. In addition, an uncontrollable person always blames other people for his own troubles and does not learn lessons from life experiences.
Ultra-precise
These people have high demands on themselves and others. They are extremely picky about their work, pay great attention to nuances and are often in an anxious state. People with this type of personality are prone to excessive worries about their own failures, as a result of which they often develop insomnia, headaches, and nervous and mental disorders.
Conflict-free
At first glance, such a person is not capable of provoking a conflict situation. However, he is completely dependent on the opinions of others and has increased suggestibility. A conflict-free person always strives for compromise and suffers from a lack of willpower. Such people have a lot of internal contradictions. The desire to please everyone can lead them to constantly lie and systematically get into ridiculous situations, which ultimately leads to conflicts.
Conflicts in interpersonal relationships often arise due to age, labor or social inequality. For example, the psychology of relations between a parent and a child is based on the use of special tactics that help eliminate conflicts and establish contact between an adult and a child. Ignorance of these principles can cause many conflict situations.
