conflict

There are many aspects that influence conflict. Culture impacts how we engage in conflict, as well as sex and gender. Your personality and expectations will determine how you react in conflict. And, with our growing use of technology in interpersonal relationships, technology impacts how we participate in conflict.

Culture and Conflict

Write down the cultures you identify with. For a quick refresher review Unit 4, as you can see you probably identify with many different cultures. Your culture will impact how you respond to conflict.

Think of how you view yourself and how you would define your self-concept. Cross (2011) states that you will define yourself either independently or interdependently. Westerners were thought to have an independent self-construal meaning they placed emphasis on their traits, preferences, wishes, and goals over the group. Conversely, East Asians were thought to have an interdependent self-construal. This places more meaning of a connectedness with others within the group, placing the group goals over their own goals. Depending on whether you identify as independent self-construal or interdependent self-construal will impact how you interact with conflict.

Does your culture reflect a high context or low context value? In high context cultures if a conflict is recognized an indirect approach may be utilized, whereas low context cultures use more of a direct approach.

One theoretical approach to conflict is Face Negotiation Theory (Ting-Toomey, 1998) and the use of facework. Facework is the “communicative strategies you use to enact self-face and to uphold, support, or challenge another person’s face” (Oetzel et al., 2000, p. 398).

Face Negotiation Theory states:

1. People in all cultures will try to maintain face in all communication scenarios;
2. Saving face is more important in emotionally vulnerable situations; such as situations that could be potentially embarrassing or conflict inducing situations;
3. Dependent on whether the culture is dominantly individualistic or collectivistic will determine the amount of facework that goes into the communication situation.

In high context collectivistic cultures, the conflict will be viewed from the perspective of both parties. Therefore, in an effort to maintain faces for all parties, an indirect approach to conflict may be used. In a study conducted by Croucher et al. (2012) they noted that individuals who identified with either India or Thailand cultures, they utilized more non-confrontational strategies. These strategies included avoidance or obliging behaviors.

In low context individualistic cultures, a more dominating approach to conflict may be used. In the same study individuals who identified with the American or Irish culture tended to use a more dominating approach to conflict (Croucher, et al., 2012). These individuals may try to control the conflict over solving the situation.

High context cultures utilized a more solution-oriented styles more than low context cultures (Croucher et al., 2012). These styles work to solve the problem together rather than control the other party. When it comes to facework, if you work with your communication partner to solve the problem then you are potentially saving their ego, opposed to trying to control them.

Sex, gender, and conflict

Your sex and gender can influence your approach to conflict. If you recall, sex is a person’s biology, whereas your gender is a “complex, culturally-constructed and psychologically-based perception of oneself as feminine, masculine, or androgynous” (Beebe et al., 2019, p. 119). Therefore, a biological female can be masculine or a biological male can be feminine. Some individuals identify as androgynous, meaning they blend traits from both masculine and feminine perspectives.

As our society grows and becomes more open, we are now encountering more individuals who identify as transgender. Transgender individuals are individuals whose “gender identity is different than the sex assigned at birth” (Human Rights Campaign, 2020, para. 2).

Each of these components, sex and gender, will influence how we approach conflict. Feminine women found avoidance strategies to conflict more dissatisfying than men (Afifi et al., 2012). This could be that feminine women are more socialized to discuss the nature of a relationship and thus less satisfied when their partner avoided a conflict. If a conflict can be used to grow a relationship and the partner is avoiding, then the potential to become deeper and more intimate in the relationship is lost.

Furthermore, research has indicated that in married couples women will demand in the relationship only to be followed by a withdrawal pattern from their partner. This type of demand/withdraw pattern can lead to marital dissatisfaction (Christensen & Heavey, 1990). In reference to conflict, if a woman demands something of their husband, for example being more involved with their dog parenting, but is met with the husband withdrawing or avoiding the topic, then this pattern can negatively impact the wife’s marital satisfaction.

Transgendered persons may experience conflict when transitioning in a romantic relationship. This relationship is further compounded when a child or children are present. The decision to transition can have internal conflict, but to verbalize the transition to the romantic partner can result in the following scenarios: intimate joint, rational separation or emotional dissolution (Dierckx et al., 2019).

In the intimate joint result the transgendered’s romantic partner responds with understanding. The partners renegotiate their relationship and intimacy through the transition process. Rational separation results in the transgendered’s romantic partner reacting with disbelief regarding the transition, but ultimately wants to be part of the process. The romantic partner tends to feel insecure in the relationship and the protector of the children. Ultimately, the couple navigates the relationship together and if they choose to dissolve the relationship, it is done mutually. Finally, in emotional dissolution the cis partner (the partner whose sex matches their gender) reacts with hostility toward their transitioning partner and will unilaterally dissolve the relationship (Dierckx et al., 2019).

Navigating the transition process can be difficult, however if a romantic partner is involved this can exacerbate the transition process. Dependent on how the romantic partner responds to the transition process will impact how relational partners respond to each other and interact with each other.

Dependent on your sex and gender will influence how you react to conflict. Feminine women find avoiding strategies to be more dissatisfying than masculine men in relationships. Demand withdrawal pattern can lower marital satisfaction in heterosexual relationships. Transgendered persons must navigate romantic relationships and determine how to interact with their partners throughout the process. Each of these components impact how conflict is approached.

Verbal aggression and conflict

Verbal aggression is a set of communication behaviors used to attack another person. These behaviors can negatively impact the relationship. Our first ways on how to communicate is through our family structure, this includes how you react to conflict. Think about it; how did your family respond to conflict? Do you mimic these behaviors or did you change how you interact because you did not want to repeat those behaviors?

In some families the use of verbal aggression is common, and in turn when we enter romantic relationships the use of verbal aggression may be seen as appropriate and acceptable communication behaviors. Because verbal aggression attacks the other person it can lead to the perception of the destructive nature of conflict. Additionally, the use of verbal aggression is endorsed as a strategy when the partner is trying to achieve a non-relational goal. This perception can lead to the use of more aggressive conflict behaviors (Aloia, 2018).

If verbal aggression is being used in a romantic relationship, how does that impact the relationship? If the partner’s goal is to win the conflict then verbal aggression may be utilized to achieve this goal. However, if your goal is to work through the conflict then verbal aggression should be avoided as verbal aggression only aides in dismantling the other person’s character. If someone attacks you as a person, do you want to work through conflict with them? Probably not.

Technology and conflict

We live in a world where we are connected all the time. Stop right now, and think how many ways you are connected. Do you have your phone next to you? Are you reading this on your phone, but have multiple apps open and available to alert you of any notifications? Are you reading this on a computer? How many tabs do you have open? We are constantly connected, but being connected is very different than being interpersonally connected. This notion of having to be connected at all times to the outside world can be a great catalyst for conflict.

Cell phones

Since, cell phones are a norm in our society it becomes more of the question how do we utilize them in our relationships? What is acceptable and what is not? How do you negotiate cell phones usage in your romantic relationship? Do partners need to be available at all times? Are partners expected to respond immediately?

These questions surround the dialectical tension of autonomy versus connection. If you expect that your partner is readily available and respond immediately then you have a high connected need; however, what if your partner operates under the idea that it is okay to leave their phone for a few hours or disconnects? Their need for autonomy is high, and therefore conflict may arise due to the acceptable behaviors over cell phone use.

How couples negotiate the rules regarding cell phone usage can lead to conflict. Rules may be implicit. For example, it may be understood that you call your partner immediately back, but not explicitly stated in the relationship. If the rule is violated, conflict will often arise within the romantic relationship (Duran et al., 2011).

Additionally, when is it appropriate to be on your cell phone when you are with someone? How many times have you hung out with a friend or romantic partner and had your cell phone close by? Is it okay to check the stats on that game or check your social media? These behaviors will need to be negotiated within your relationships, and if they do not correspond then conflict ensues.

Because cell phones are such a staple in our society it is assumed that they will be present in our relationships. When is it acceptable for your partner to look at their phone and disengage from the current interaction? Dependent on the context of the cell phone use can impact the relationship satisfaction. Responding to a text is deemed acceptable as long as it is not overly excessive; however, if a partner is using the phone for entertainment (social media, playing a game, etc) when they should be spending quality time together is viewed unfavorably (Kelly et al. 2017; McDaniel & Coyne, 2016).

Since technology is only growing in our society, it is best to negotiate in our relationships what is acceptable. Is it okay to go to a restaurant and have your phones out during your meals? Do you expect there to be a time where both of you disconnect and focus on one another? These are all questions that need to be addressed. If parties have different views on technology then more than likely conflict will arise, especially if one party feels neglected. The next time you go out to eat, I challenge you to look around. How many people do you see out together, but are immersed in their phones instead? It may almost seem like two strangers are sitting together instead of friends or partners because no interaction is taking place between the parties.

Social media

You have just had the greatest day of your life or the worst day of your life, and you want to share the news with everyone. What do you do? You post about it on social media and watch the comments, likes, etc. roll in. We have become more dependent on social media to help define ourselves. It can also be the source of the conflict. Jealousy may stem from the amount of time being spent on a social platform. Are you engaging online, and ignoring the partner in front of you? It can also result from what people place on your wall. Have you ever heard: well why did they put that? Why did they post that on your wall? These potential questions can lead to conflict (Muise, et al., 2009)

Additionally, conflict can be carried out over social media. How many times have you seen the drama between parties take place in the public domain? Do you grab the popcorn and see what unfolds? All joking aside, we have become accustomed to air out our dirty laundry for all to see.

In a study, teenage girls aired their grievances regarding a friend on Facebook, but when hurtful comments were displayed they were either ignored or deleted. They were less likely to label the attack as cyberbullying and thus less likely to confront the aggressor. It could be because they do not want to risk friendships or the pressure to be popular (Ging & Norman, 2016). If we continue to avoid openly discussing the hurtful comments being posted, we are neglecting our ability to work through conflict intelligently and mindfully.

Social media is a form of communication, and at times even a way for us to remain connected to other people. However, social media is also an outlet for conflict to occur. How you view posted comments will impact how or if you engage in conflict with the person who posted them. Additionally, the amount of time a romantic partner spends on social media can create jealous feelings within a relationship.

Your culture impacts how you engage in conflict. Do you value a more direct approach, or do you approach conflict more indirectly? Sex and gender also influence how you interact during conflict. Technology is extremely prevalent in our society and a factor in creating conflict. The amount of time and how we use social media can aide in creating conflict in our relationships.

Summary

Variables exist in conflict. Our cultures impact how we engage in conflict, along with our sex and gender. Face Negation Theory argues that we engage in saving face strategies in emotionally vulnerable situations. Verbal aggression when used in conflict can be used to achieve a goal but will also dismantle the relationship if used frequently. Finally, technology is becoming a large variable in conflict. Technology can create conflict if it is not discussed what is appropriate use of technology within the relationship. It can also serve as variable of jealousy in romantic relationships. Culture, sex and gender and technology are all variables in conflict

1. Discussion questions

In your own life how has technology played a role in conflict? Have cell phones or social media impacted your relationship? What about your culture, sex or gender?

2. High Context and Low Context

Let’s imagine the following conflict scenario: rent is due and you have your portion, but your roommate does not have their half. How could this situation look if the parties were from a high context culture? A low context culture? And, finally one from a high context culture and the other from a low context culture?

3. Technology:

Have students refer to their social media and reflect on comments that be conflict inducing. Have them explain why they believe that comment can create conflict. Additionally, have students discuss if that conflict will take place face to face, over Social Media, a combination of both or not at all. Why or why not do they feel this way?

Afifi, T. D., Joseph, A., & Aldeis, D. (2012). The “standards for openness hypothesis”: why women find (conflict) avoidance more dissatisfying than men. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(1), 102–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407511420193

Aloia, L. (2018). Verbal aggression in romantic relationships: the influence of family history, destructive beliefs about conflict, and conflict goals. Communication Quarterly, 66(3), 308-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2017.1381626

Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S.J., & Ivy, D.K. (2019). Communication: Principles for a Lifetime (7^th ed). Pearson Education Inc.

Christensen, A., & Heavey, C.L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand-withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(1), 73-81.

Cross, S. (2011). Self-construal. Oxford Bibliographies. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199828340/obo-9780199828340-0051.xml

Croucher, S.M., Bruno, A., McGrath, P., Adams, C., McGahan, C., Suits, A., & Huckins, A. (2012). Conflict styles and high-low cultures: a cross-cultural extension. Communication Research Reports, 29(1), 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.640093

Dierckx, M., Mortelmans, D., & Motmans, J. (2019). Role ambiguity and role conflict among partners of trans people. Journal of Family Issues, 40(1), 85-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X18800362

Duran, R.L., Kelly, L., & Rotaru, T. (2011). Mobile phones in romantic relationships and the dialectic of autonomy versus connection. Communication Quarterly, 59(1), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2011.541336

Ging, D., & Norman, J. O. (2016). Cyberbullying, conflict management or just messing? Teenage girls’ understandings and experiences of gender, friendship, and conflict on Facebook in an irish second-level school. Feminist Media Studies, 16(5), 805–821. https://doi-org.libproxy.txstate.edu/10.1080/14680777.2015.1137959

Human Rights Campaign. (2020). Understanding the transgender community. https://www.hrc.org/resources/understanding-the-transgender-community

Kelly, L., Duran, R.L., & Miller-Ott, A.E. (2017). Sports scores and intimate moments: an expectancy violations theory approach to partner cell phone behaviors in adult romantic relationships. Western Journal of Communication 81(5), 619-640. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2017.1299206

McDaniel, B. T., & Coyne, S.M. (2016). ‘Technoference’: the interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(1), 85-98. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.txstate.edu/10.1037/ppm0000065

Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmaris, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? Cyberpsychology & Behavior: The Impact Of The Internet, Multimedia And Virtual Reality On Behavior And Society, 12(4), 441-444. https://doi-org.libproxy.txstate.edu/10.1089/cpb.2008.0263

Oetzel, J. G., Ting-Toomey, S., Yokochi, Y., Masumoto, T., & Takai, J. (2000). A Typology of Facework Behaviors in Conflicts with Best Friends and Relative Strangers. Communication Quarterly, 48(4), 397–419. https://doi org.lsproxy.austincc.edu/10.1080/01463370009385606

Cis partner: The partner whose sex matches their gender.

Face Negotiation Theory: All cultures work on preserving face, however dependent on one’s culture, the amount of facework will vary.

Independent self-construal: Emphasis is on individual traits, preferences, wishes, and goals over the group.

Interdependent self-construal: emphasis is placed on connectedness with others within the group, placing group goals over their own goals.

Transgender: One’s gender identity is different that the sex assigned at birth

Verbal Aggression: Communication behaviors used to attack the communication partner

1. Crazy Rich Asians:

Watch the two clips below. Relate the clips to Culture and Conflict. How does culture play into the conflict between Rachel and Eleanor?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JkBmeMCf4c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh_oOd5JGpU

2. The Break Up:

Review the clip and discuss the use of verbal aggression and how sex and gender impacted the conflict between Gary and Brooke. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn3I6-DBLJM

"Two Dinner Plates on Square Brown Wooden Bar Table" licensed by Helena Lopes is in the Public Domain, CC0.