Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Conflict avoidance is a set of behaviors aimed at preventing or minimizing disagreement with another person. These behaviors can occur before the conflict emerges (e.g., avoiding certain topics, changing the subject) or after the conflict has been expressed (e.g., withholding disagreement, withdrawing from the conversation, giving in).
Approach-avoidance conflicts occur when there is one goal or event that has both positive and negative effects or characteristics that make the goal appealing and unappealing simultaneously. [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] For example, marriage is a momentous decision that has both positive and negative aspects.
Avoidance coping is measured via a self-reported questionnaire. Initially, the Multidimensional Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire (MEAQ) was used, which is a 62-item questionnaire that assesses experiential avoidance, and thus avoidance coping, by measuring how many avoidant behaviors a person exhibits and how strongly they agree with each statement on a scale of 1–6. [1]
Conflict theories are perspectives in political philosophy and sociology which argue that individuals and groups (social classes) within society interact on the basis of conflict rather than agreement, while also emphasizing social psychology, historical materialism, power dynamics, and their roles in creating power structures, social movements, and social arrangements within a society.
The psychological literature has distinguished between several different forms of ambivalence. [4] One, often called subjective ambivalence or felt ambivalence, represents the psychological experience of conflict (affective manifestation), mixed feelings, mixed reactions (cognitive manifestation), and indecision (behavioral manifestation) in the evaluation of some object.
In many cases, upward conflict spirals are sustained by the norms of reciprocity: if one group or person criticizes the other, the criticized person or group feels justified in doing the same. In conflict situations, opponents often follow the norm of rough reciprocity, i.e. they give too much (overmatching) or too little (undermatching) in return.
Avoidance: Members of the in-group actively avoid people in the out-group. [2] No direct harm may be intended, but psychological harm often results through isolation (see also social exclusion). Discrimination: The out-group is discriminated against by denying them opportunities and services, putting prejudice into action. [2]
In some subfields of criminology, psychology, and sociology, intergroup contact has been described as one of the best ways to improve relations among groups in conflict. [3] [4] Nonetheless, the effects of intergroup contact vary widely from context to context, and empirical inquiry continues to this day. [5]