systematic explanation for set of observation. Theories operate within a perspective, or a lens through which we view phenomena

Cognitive: stimulus --> response; asks WHY; predicts outcomes; e.g. attribution & reciprocity. 

Interactional: What & How. Describes processes (step by step); CMM & confrontational

Attribution Theory:

Fundamental attribution error 

• we correlate others negative behaviors to dispostional factos. 
• OTHERS= Internal
• Our own negative behavior to situational factors
• OWN= external 

Attribution theory:

Self Serving Bias

- In regards to ourselves

-SUCCESS= Dispositional/Internal

-FAILURE= situational / external 

Attribution Theory:

Conflict Management Implications

• Attributions influence choice of strategy. 
• patterns of attribtutions. your questions guide your beliefs/assumptions. 
• Must correct your biases
• own your own attitudes, beliefs, behaviors
• consider context of other's behaviors
• try to be accurate without making people wrong or angry

Reciprocity theory:

Interactions = ?

Characteristics of moves

-Interaction= series of moves

- Each move characterized by:

1. direction : escalation / de-escalation 

2. intensity: volume, word choices, rate, emotino 

3. fucntion: what is the main function (post/negt.)

Reciprocity Theory:

reciprocity

• responds in a similiar directino to another partys behavior of a comparable functional value. 

Reciprocity= matching others

direction

intensity

function 

Reciprocity Theory:

Compensation 

aka accomodation 

Compensation= differing from others 

direction

intensity

function 

Reciprocity Theory: norm of reciprocity

(lecture and text) 

L :kindness is treated with kindness

T: help those who have helped you and dont injure those who have helped you 

Reciprocity Theory:  

implications for conflict management 

1. compensate negative 

2. reciprocate positive 

• conflict itneraction=puposeful 
• we talk to people becuase we want to
• Issue driven
• co-created

Confrontational episodes theory :

confronatation is driven by....

• driven by violation of rule/expectaion 
• initated when one partys behavior has violated a rule or expectaion. 
• involves working through disagreement and negotiating future expectations 
• first issue must be resolved before others can be explored. 
• rule is either accepted, interpreted or rejected. 

Confrontational episodes theory 

confrontation episodes consist of...

Confrontational episodes theory 

Receiver plays key role. Why?

• Acknolwedges or denies: 
• legitmacy of rule/agreement (was there a rule?). 
• Behavior ( could deny it).  
• breaking the rule 
• responisibility for breaking rule

Confrontational episodes theory 

Implications for conflict management

• Receiver
• doesn't deny  (even when others are making judgements) 
• actively listens 
• Sender/confronter
• confronts without judgement
• listens for whether other shares your "rule"
• makes rules explicit

• people interpret intent and meaning of interaction based upon personal expereince 
• interpretations influence attitudes and future actions
• patterns of interaction become self-sustaining, self-perpetuating 
• meaning organized within a hierarchy 
• content →speech act →episode →relationship →self-concept→cultural pattern 

Coordinated Management of Meaning Theory:

rules guide understanding and responding at each level of hierarchy 

• Rules of meaning (constitutive) 
• often unconcious
• not always as intended
• what does speech act mean in this context? 
• Rules of action (regulatory) 
• based upon my interpretation from my constituive rule. 

Attribution theory: 

3 conflict management strategies (text)

• integrative
• msgs designed to manage conflict openly through discussion while refraining from negative evaluations of partners 
• collaboration and joint problem solving
• avoidance
• distrubtive
• resolve conflict in zero sum manner in which one party wins at anothers expense.  (insults/critism) 

Reciprocity Theory:

"interpersonal flex" textbook

2 criterias where conflict behavior can be assessed

effectiveness: impact/results

appropriateness : align with norms and expectations for how people should deal with conflict 

effective is always appropriate and vice versa. 

1. knowledge

2. motivation

3. skill 

Confrontational episodes theory

how is the final resolution achieved?

Confrontational episodes theory

conversations move through the following

non legitacy

justification

denies behavior

denies broken rule

denies responsbility 

Power

def and derived from?

• Def: ability to influence behavior 
• derived from: 
• access to resources that others value. 
• willingness to use resources. 

Types of Power

5

• Legitmate 
• interpersonal/referent power
• beig charismatic. virture as a person and interaction. 
• referent- who you know
• expert power: skills, expertise. no exchange requried but can be done
• punishment power: what parents have
• reward power

• interactants power & willingness determines moves and countermoves 
• moves and countermoves determine interactants types and amount of power. 
• expediates or prevents achievement of goals. 

• party with more power achieves more goals
• balanced power results in 
• stalemate 
• mutual goal achievement 

• party with less power can
• identify interactnat source of power in order to balance the power
• reduce value of the stronger partys unique resources 

Power as an out of the box conflict management tool

• power is realtional construct
• given, not owned (unless you value others resource, they can't have power, you are not giving them power 
• stronger party can refrain from using type or amount of power
• weaker party can stop granting power to other person. 

Definitions of face

• appearance, that we want to be seen. 
• who am i? how am i seen though others
• positve value that indviduals attach to their identiies. 
• self-worth, reputation, self-conception 
• relational level construct 
• postive vs. negative face
• post: public approavl
• negt:  sense of privacy/autonomy. 

Face threat

Face save

Face giving 

• jeopardizes, goes against what we seem to be
• violation of own or others self image
• jeopardizes our own self worth/value
• incompatible with relational goals
• contriutes to negative interaction (--> escalation on relational level)
• clouds content issues-makes difficult to id. 

Face Move: face save

• attempts to restore or protect own/others perceived worth/value 
• excuses of our actions 

face move: face giving

threat to flexibility in conflict interaction

• change is good in conflict
• shift in climate, requries energy, emotional charge, once face saving becomes concern, perceptions, and interaction can lead to progressive relief of conflict 
• Threatens parties ability to remain flexible and shift modes of conflict interaction 
• concern with saving face adds another issue to conflict  and takes precedence
• not wanting to realize that face has been threatened, ignore it to maintain the self image 

Resisting unjust intimidation 

Refusing to give in on a postion/Not backing down

Suppressing Conflict issue

Face-saving frame. 

-people feeling as if they are being treated unfailry. likely to attmept to resist that treatment. "I dont have to take this" 

-2 components: accusation that one is treating the other unfairly & sense of adamart resistance it conveyes. 

-can have destructive consequences. e.g. 3rd party makes it seem that prob can't be fix on own. & if not confronted,feel a need to explain the causes behind unjust/intimidating treatment

Refusing to give on a position/Not backing down

Face-saving frame

-fear to compromise a positon/stance on an issue 

-not looking like you are moving away from orginal position 

-dont want to look indecision,erratic, unstable, weakminded. 

-personal identity too closely linked to professional idenity. 

-credibility will suffer

Face sving frame 

-party attempts to acknowledge existence of a conflict to raise possibility of seeking  third-party assistance, may lose face in eyes of others. 

-eager to find fault wiht other parties operations. deters from good differentiation. 

- can turn to a negative direction : inflexibiliyt/stalemate

-threat of face

Assertiveness is

• direct expression of one's feelings, needs, opinions, or preferences. neither threatening nor punishing to another, does not cause undue anxiety or fear
• standing up for personal rights in direct/honest ways. 
• not violating others righs. or humiliating/degrading. 
• this is what i think/feel and how i see situation. 
• involves: resepct and deference. 

-contributes to negative interation  leading to an escalation on relational lvl

-adds new issue

-decreases flexibility 

-more likely to involve deception 

Contributing to others face

preventing conflict, establishing enought of the realtionship. 

1. corrective strategies: face saving after a threat to own or others
2. preventative: defensive (prevents threats to own face) and protective (precents threats to others face) 

-self perceveid flaw that one is unwilling to admit openly. i.e. not as honest

-sensitivey surround that flaw (not knowing how to write)

-percevied attack by another

-it draws attention to the perceived flaw 

Communication and mutuality: get and give respect, fair place, compromise

Not to say "to get ones wants":leads to irreposnsbile behavior

Advocated responsbile assertion : mutualit, help others become assertive as well. 

2 types of respect- asertiveness

for onself and other.

needs and wants. 

Purpose: level, accomplish goals though directness/honesty

Verbal: states needs/wants/feelings. 

nonverbal: erect, balanced, relaxed, eye contact, not out to attack

decision making: chooses for self

conflict style: chooses sytle that fits situation 

Basic assertion - statement about option,needs beleifs "glad we talk" 

I-messages 

Empathy

increasing firmness - loudness, repeatition

enforcing agreements. 

increase self-respect

greater self-confidence 

reduce need for others approval

others repeat in assertiveness.

admiration for being courageous, dealing with conflict openly. 

standing up for personal rights, beliefs, feelings, opinions

doesnt involve other social skills

empathic assertion

-sensitive to others

-conveys recognition of others situations followed by a statement which stands up for the speakers rights

-personal power within empathic assertion (others respond to assertion when they have been recognized first) 

-speaker totake a moment to try to understand the others feelings before the speaker reacts (keep perspecive on situaion; reduces liklihood of speakers/aggressively overreacting.) 

used when other person words contradict his deeds

objectively describing what the other person said would be done and what others did. 

matter of fact. 

nonevaluative

judgin others people rather than describing behavrion and mkaing them feel guilty 

Passive Communication

A.purpose: avoid conflict. 

Verbal comm: apologetic, hedging, qualifiying, rambling 

nonverbal: nodding head, downcast eyes, soft voice, small personal space

Decisino making-lets others decide. 

conflict stytle: avoid/accommodate. 

violates owns rights/beleifs. lack of respect for self and others.

Goal: to appease others and avoid conflict

Purpose: to dominate/control others&situation 

verbal comm: states needs/wants/feelings

nonverbla: erect, balanced, relaxed, eye contact

decision making: chooses for others 

conflict style: compete 

fear of aggressive people. 

increases greate feelings of self confidence, reduces insercruity, and vulnerbility. 

closer, more emotionally satisfying relaionthips 

maximizes likelihood that both parties can at least partially achieve their goals and met needs.

-starts with minimal that can usually accomplish speakers goal with minimum of effort and negative emotion and small possibility of negative consequences

-ex. guy at bar not going anywhere 

assertively express difficult negative feelings. helping others how to determine when feelings stem from violation.

4 part statement

when....the effects are....I feel.... i'd prefer...

all about timing (prioritze issues) and tact (finding something good about ohter person. )

1. mistaking firm assertion for aggression
2. mistaking assertion for politeness 
1. by holding back think its consideration
3. failure to accept personal rights
1. feel they dont have right to express reactions or stand up for selves. shouldn't have those feelings in the first place
4. anixety about negative consequences (hurt feelings) 
5. mistakin nonassertion for being helpful
6. deficient skills (may not know otherwise)

-goal of nonassertion: to avoid

-some encouraged by being praised for nonassertiveness

-loss of self esteem. 

-powerlessness and threat: feeling of vulnerbility. 

-prior nonassertion- feel they need to be aggressive after being passive

-overreaction due to past emotional expereinces

beliefs about aggression

-reinforcement and skills deficits:postive reinforcement 

losing family friends/ jobs/promotins

high blood pressue

fights/trouble for law.

feeling misunderstand, unloved, unlovable

retailation 

feeling guilt, shame, embarssment. 

stand ground. defend self w/o belittling aggressor. aggressor can calm dwonw and become more able to focus on central issues. if nonassertieve=reinforces aggression 

ways to maintain: reflection, repeated aggression; pointing out implicit assumptions; I-language; questions to diffuse anger;paradoxical statements

discounting technique as if it doesnt show your emotions. 

not an example of assertion. 

-find what you dislike within youself and embrace it. how does that flaw help you? what could be good,useful, acceptable about this dislike? 

-desire for public approval.

-the need to be included, and need to be respected. 

-parties needs are not being met or addressed, idenity claims are being challenged or ignored. 

-consequence of face looss: causes party to be momentarily confused/shocked.

-feeling shame/embarassement. 

-feel infereior and less powerful

face saving will occur afterwards to regain image. 

alignment actions- to resolve discrepancies. align with cultural norms

accounts- making failure or inappropriate behavior ok. i.e. apologies, excuses, justifications

apolgy- regret over action. 

Conflict

and the 3 I's

Conflict is the "interactin of interdepenent people who perceive incompatible goasl and interference from each other in achieveing those goals"

Incompative goals

Interdepenency 

Interaction