Foundations of Conflict in Social Psychology
Early Conflict Theories
Kurt Lewin’s field theory ‘B = f(p,e)’: framework for looking at the factors (forces) that influence individuals’ behaviours.
Game theory: Neumann and Morgenstern (1944) classic work, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior
Primary features of interdependence theory
1. the principle of structure (the situation)
2. the principle of interaction
3. the principle of transformation
4. the principle of adapation
Dual-Concerns definition
This model posits that individual and situational factors affect two critical variables that comprise a negotiator’s motivational orientation:
1) their concern about their own interests
2) their concern about the interests of the party with whom they are negotiating.
Definition of Intractable Conflicts
broadly defined as intense, deadlocked, and resistant to de-escalation, persisting over time and fluctuating in intensity
Negotiation Definition
A process through which two or more parties try to establish what each of them as part of a transaction should give and obtain or to perform and perceive
A brief history of social psychological theorizing about conflict - explanations
Social Darwinism: Instinctive human responses: explain conflict phenomena as war, intergroup hostility, and human exploitation (destructive conflict serves the purpose of the survival of the fittest)
Psychological approach: attempts to explain such phenomena in terms of “what goes on in the minds of men(sic)” (Klineberg, 1964) or “tensions that cause war” (Cantril, 1950).
The social-political-economic approach: seeks an explanation in terms of social, economic, and political factors (e.g., levels of armament, objective conflicts between economic and political interests)
Features of the structure of the situation
1) level of dependence (independence/actor control, interdependent/joint control)
2) mutuality of dependence (mutual/equal - nonmutual/assymetric)
3) basis of dependence (joint control - partner control)
4) covariation of interest (positive - negative)
5) temporal structure (passive - active)
6) information availability (certain - uncertain)
Conflict management strategies
1) Yielding: an attempt to reduce conflict by lowering one's aspirations
2) Avoiding: to remain inactive, waiting for the other side to make a move
3) Compromising: an attempt to reduce conflict by making concessions
4) Problem-solving: an attempt to find mutually appealing solutions (making concessions and discussing underlying interests)
5) Forcing: an attempt to resolve the conflict on ones own terms without regard for the other sides interests (threats, punishments, preemptive actions)
Characterizations of Intractable Conflicts
1) Protracted
2) Violent
3) Perceived as irresolvable
4) Demand extensive investment
5) Percived as zero-sum
6) Central
A mixed motives negotiation situation
Both competitive and cooperative interests are held regarding the nature of the agreement that in negotiated
What is the Tripartite model of attitudes?
Attitudes consists of affective, cognitive and behavioural components
1) The affective components refers to feelings associated with the attitude object
2) The cognitive component refers to believes about attributes associated with attitude object
3) The behavioural component refers to past behaviours and future intentions associated with the attitude object
1) Interpersonal dispositions: actor-specific inclinations to respond to particular classes of situations in a specific manner across diverse partners
2) Relationship-specific motives: inclinations to respond to particular classes of situation in a specific manner with a specific partner
Two hypothesis of dual concerns model
H1: the model can be used with similar outcomes, even if the two negotiators do not share the same objective for the negotiation
H2: the outcomes are determined by the dynamic nature of the behavioural exchange in the negotiation
Sociopsychological Infrastructure
1. Collective memory: narrative about the past
2. Ethos of conflict: narrative about the present
3. Collective emotional orientation: collective fear, hate, anger.
Anger versus Threat in Negotiation
Threat: a conditional statement, usually in the form of “if…… then” that mentions a negative consequence associated with not complying
Anger: Reflects a lack of poise, particularly in negotiation
The extent to which parties perceive aspirations as incompatible depends on?
Disadvantages of Interdependence Theory
1) Originally designed for dyadic, interpersonal interactions, making it less directly suited for analyzing macro-level power, inequality, or systemic discrimination .
2) Doesn’t fully account for historical, cultural, or ideological factors that shape group identity, prejudice, or structural oppression.
3) May oversimplify motivations by treating groups like individuals
4) Limited attention to structural forces, such as institutional racism or colonial legacies, which can't be reduced to mutual dependence or outcome matrices.
Behavioral context of negotiation
Negotiators’ reactions to their opponents’ behavior is typically discussed in terms of matching and mismatching:
-> Matching refers to a negotiator’s choice to mimic the strategy or tactic used by his or her opponent.
-> Mismatching is the converse: cooperating with a competitive opponent or competing with a cooperative one.
Six key functions of sociopsychological infrastructure
1. Fulfills the epistemic function of illuminating the conflict situation.
2. Justify the acts of the in-group toward the enemy, including violence and destruction
3. Creates a sense of differentiation and superiority
4. Prepares the society members to be ready for threatening and violent acts of the enemy, as well as for difficult life conditions
5. Has the function of motivating for solidarity, mobilization, and action
6. Contribute to the formation, maintenance, and strengthening of a social identity that reflects the lasting conditions and experiences of intractable conflict
The influence of anger and compassion on negotiation (Allred, Malozzi, Matsui & Raia, 1997)
Hypotheses:
1. Emotional regard (anger/compassion) influences willingness to work together
2. Compassion → more helping, less punishment; anger does the opposite
3. High anger + low compassion = fewer joint gains, no personal gain boost
Negotiation success =
• Claiming value (distributive)
• Creating value (integrative)
• Relationship quality
Findings:
• Anger/compassion influenced outcomes more than mood
• Emotional regard explains how blame affects willingness to cooperate + joint gains
• High anger + low compassion = worse outcomes with no benefits
Perceived valence of conflict (Tjosvold, 1991)
Negative
1. Conflict as a problem
2. Conflict has no value
3. Conflict resolution is perceived as a win-lose (zero sum) issue
4. Conflict creates anxiety and triggers self-defence
Positive
1. Conflict as part of the solution
2. Conflict can be constructive
3. Conflict is positively valued
4. Motivation to solve conflict
5. Promotes and encourages conflict
Advantages of Interdependence Theory
1) Provides a formal structure for analyzing cooperation and conflict in group settings, by defining dependence, mutuality, and outcome correspondence between groups
2) Explains how intergroup trust can be undermined by low correspondence of outcomes or power asymmetries
3) Can be applied across time and culture using added dimensions like temporal structure and information availability
4) Complements identity-based theories (like SIT) by explaining the situational constraints that activate or suppress group-based motives
What happens with mismatched orientations (Rhoades & Carnevale, 1999)
Studied how people respond when their negotiation style doesn’t match their opponent’s
Manipulated: concern for self, concern for other, opponent’s behavior
Measured: what strategy participants used (e.g., contending, conceding, problem-solving)
Findings
• People usually matched their opponent’s behavior
• Problem-solving only worked if the opponent was also cooperative
• Cooperative people stopped cooperating if met with contention
• Mismatched styles → weaker or inconsistent responses
Consequences of the sociopsychological infrastructure
1. Creates a syndrom of animosity
2. Bias: focus on the consistent part of the absorbed information
3. Distortion: a change of the absorbed information, even when it is unambiguous, to adapt it to the contents of the held repertoire
4. Addition: adds parts of the help repertoire that change the information to be consistent with the repertoire
The role of threat and communication in negotiation (Deutsch & Krauss, 1962)
Acme vs Bolt in a driving game → earn $0.60 per trip minus 1¢ per second
One-lane road vs longer detour (detour = -$0.10)
Max profit = use one-lane road cooperatively
• 3 threat conditions:
1. No threat (no gate)
2. One-sided threat (1 gate)
3. Two-sided threat (2 gates)
Study 1 (no talking):
• Highest profit = no threat
• One-sided threat = starts bad, improves
• Two-sided threat = worst profit
Study 2 (optional talking):
• No effect — most didn’t use communication
Study 3 (forced talking):
• Only helped in one-sided threat
• No benefit when both could threaten