CHAPTER

Outline
CHAPTER 13

CONFLICT
in Groups
01

02

03
Introduction
The Roots of Conflicts
Confrontation and Escalation
04 Conflict Resolution
05 How do confrontation and escalation occur?
Presentation by: Glenda L. Sanchez, LPT
06 How can problems be solved?
07

PSY 318: Group Dynamics

Introduction
Conflict is dissension, disagreement, and friction,

WHAT IS
which occurs when the actions or opinions of one or

Conflict?
more group members are not accepted and fought by
the rest of the group. Often, there are three phases
within conflict.

START OF CONFLICT CONFLICT ESCALATION

The start of a conflict (initial
disagreement) is characterized by
Group members do not always get along well. disagreements, confusion about the
goals of the group, complaints about
Even in the most serene circumstances the group members who are not working
hard enough
group’s atmosphere may shift rapidly, so that
once close collaborators become hostile CONFLICT DE-ESCALATION
adversaries. Because conflict is inevitable The conflict can reach a
aspects of group’s life, it must be managed to peak before it starts to
minimize negative effects dissolve (conflict de-
escalation).
Sometimes a conflict is quickly resolved
(false or autistic conflicts), but most times
a conflict worsens over time (conflict
escalation), because group members start
to react emotionally, stop thinking clearly,
and start to form coalitions.
CONFLICT RESOLUTION
In the final phase a
conflict is often resolved
(conflict resolution).

Types of Conflicts What are the

CONFLICT OCCURS
Conflict occur often and in any context, but most times people try to avoid
conflict. Group members often have different preferences and opinions
and this can lead to conflict. They disrespect each other and form a
coalition with group members who think the same way they do, while they
distance themselves from group members with different opinions.
CAUSES OF CONFLICTS?
INTRAGROUP CONFLICT - disagreement or
confrontation between members of the same
group Conflicts over
Power
Distribution
Competition Struggles
process
INTERGROUP CONFLICT - disagreement or
confrontation between two or more groups
and their members that can include physical
Decisional Personal Individual
violence, interpersonal discord, and
Conflicts Conflicts Differences
psychological tension
 CAUSES OF
Conflicts
MIXED-MOTIVE SITUATION
A mixed-motive situation is a performance situation where different
people's interdependence leads to competition and cooperation. This
can be measured with a technique called the prisoner's dilemma game
Competition and cooperation trigger different kinds of motivational systems. (PDG). This is a simulation of social interaction in which players must
choose a cooperative or a competitive option. It works like this:
Cooperation is a performance situation in which the success of a
group member increased the chance that the other group members
The players need to choose between two options. If both players
are also successful. Morton Deutsch called this promotive
choose the same option (cooperative choice) they both win a modest
interdependence.
amount of money or points. However, if one of both chooses a
particular answer (competitive choice), say option B, then this person
Competition evokes feelings of greed (the need to find sources and
wins a larger amount of money or points, while the other loses an
keep them to yourself) and fear (concern about the fact that others
are maximizing their outcomes, which minimizes your outcomes). amount of money or points. If both players choose option B, they
Competition is a strong motivator for people, but groups that are both lose.
more cooperative are more successful. Competition is often a
source of conflict.

BEHAVIORAL ASSIMILATION SOCIAL VALUE ORIENTATION (SVO)

The eventual matching of the behaviors displayed by The dispositional tendency to respond to conflict settings in a
particular way; cooperators for example, tend to make choices that
cooperating or competing group members.
benefit both parties in a conflict whereas competitors act to
We adjust our competition or cooperation behaviour to the maximize their own outcomes.
behaviour that our game partners are exhibiting.
People who want to earn as much as possible for
This can be explained by reciprocity: the inclination of people
themselves are called proself. People who think that
to give back what they receive from others. Cooperative
others should also earn as much as possible are
behaviour is rewarded with cooperative behaviour, and
called prosocials.
competitive behaviour is punished with competitive behaviour. A
cooperative person with a competitive partner will also be
quicker to start playing competitively. Negative reciprocity is
Individualistic and competitive SVO's are proself,
while cooperative and altruistic SVO's are prosocial.
stronger than positive reciprocity.

SOCIAL VALUE ORIENTATION (SVO)

Social Dilemmas are interpersonal situations in which

WHEN DOES A
individuals need to choose between maximizing

resource conflict occur?

personal outcomes or maximizing the outcomes of
Individualistic orientation: proself people with an individualistic orientation are only interested in their the group.
own outcomes. They decide based on what these decisions will bring them personally. They do not
Social Trap or Common Dilemmas - a social dilemma
interfere with others and do not try to help others. Their actions can influence other group members, but
where individuals can maximize their outcome by
this is not their goal.
Competitive orientation: proself people with a competitive orientation try to maximize their own seeking personal goals rather than the collective
outcomes, but also try to keep other people's losses as small as possible. Disagreements are seen as a goals
win-lose situation and they like to impose their ideas on others. They believe that making concessions is
for losers and that everyone should try to maximize their own outcomes.
The public goods dilemma is a social dilemma in which a
Cooperative orientation: prosocial people with a cooperative orientation try to maximize their own outcomes, person does not contribute the public good (like keeping a
but they also try to maximize the outcomes of others. They want to create win-win situations. These people park clean), but is not excluded from the benefits (being able
think that outcomes should be distributed equally and that there are no real losers and winners. to relax in the park).
Altruistic orientation: prosocial people with an altruistic orientation want to help people in need. They
don't care about self-interest, which means they are inclined to give up their own outcomes in order to The honesty dilemma is influenced by two kinds of social
help others. justice: 1) procedural justice is about the methods that are used
to decide about the distribution of resources and 2) distributive
People with competitive SVO's are more likely to experience conflict. When they are criticised for their competitive behaviour, they are justice is the perceived equity of the distribution of rights and
unlikely to change this behaviour. This is because they do not value interpersonal relationships. For cooperative people, their own
cooperation is positively correlated with the cooperation of others: when others are cooperative a cooperator will cooperate.
resources.
 Distributive justice is about the question whether people have received a fair amount of the resources.
The answer to this question is dependent on the norms within a group. These norms are described
below:
The equity norm: the person who has done the most for the group receives the most, the
person who has done the least receives the least.
The equality norm: every group member is rewarded equally, regardless of the work they have
done.
The power norm: the biggest reward goes to the person with the most power.
The need norm: is sometimes called the social responsibility norm: those who have the most
should share it with those who have the least.
Negative inequity, the sense that you receive less than you deserve, is obviously more often a source of conflict than
positive inequity, the sense that you receive more than you deserve. Negative inequity causes people to withdraw from
a group and contribute less. Negative inequity is more likely to cause conflict, because it gives people the feeling that
they are being treated unjustly and that they have a low status.
Egocentrism is when a person feels more responsible for an outcome or situation than they really are. Often, this is a
result of comparing their own estimate of personal responsibility with the estimate of responsibility of others.
Egocentrism is often caused by members being more aware of their own contributions than the contributions of others.
WHEN DOES A PERSONAL CONFLICT OCCUR?
Personal conflict (or affective
conflict/personality conflict/emotional
conflict/relationship conflict) is a
disagreement between individuals who
do not like each other. People often
explain conflicts with others by talking
about their personalities. They call the
other moody or unqualified.
HOW DO CONFRONTATION AND ESCALATION OCCUR?
What is the reason that conflicts escalate? Below are a few possible explanations.
When a conflict increases, both parties will use stronger and stronger tactics in order to convince the
other. This can eventually lead to threats. Research has shown that parties who do not threaten
each other are quicker to come to a solution. The use of hard tactics in order to convince the other
only leads to escalating the conflict. This has been shown through the trucking game experiment.
Opponents who are equally powerful avoid using power, when the fear for retribution is strong.
Generally, threats from one party lead to threats from the other party (reciprocity), which causes an
upwards spiral. The upwards spiral is mediated by the norm of reciprocity: a mild threat evokes a
mild threat. In conflicts however, there is rough reciprocity: either too much or too little is returned
(overmatching and undermatching). It is often the case that at the start of a conflict people react too
strongly (overmatching) and after that people react less strongly (undermatching). Overmatching can
be seen as a strong warning and undermatching can be seen as a message of reconciliation.
WHAT IS A TASK AND PROCESS CONFLICT?
Substantive conflicts (also called task conflicts or content
conflicts) are disagreements concerning affairs that are
important for the recognized goals and procedures of the
group. It stems from disagreements about issues that are
relevant to the group’s goals and outcomes.
Process conflict (or procedural conflict) arises because
strategies, policy, and methods clash. In this case,
disagreement about what methods should be used by the
group in order to complete tasks is concerned
HOW DO CONFRONTATION AND ESCALATION OCCUR?
What is the reason that conflicts escalate? Below are a few possible explanations.
When conflicts worsen, insecurities and doubts of the group members are replaced by
commitment to their own opinion. Additionally, reactance and occur: when group
members experience strong disagreement, they become even more convinced of their
own opinion.
The observation of an individual often shapes the reactions that follow. During a conflict,
perception is distorted. People often make the fundamental attribution error. They
assume that the behavior of others is caused by personality instead of situational
characteristics. In conflict this can lead to a difference in opinion being attributed to
personal characteristics. Because of conflict, group members lose trust in each other.
Because the conflict makes them start to use competitive behaviors, they have difficulty
being cooperative afterwards.
HOW DO CONFRONTATION AND ESCALATION OCCUR?
What is the reason that conflicts escalate? Below are a few possible explanations.
Most people get annoyed in a conflict, which can lead to anger. When one party has
shown negative emotions, they are often followed by negative emotions of the other
party. This leads to a vicious cycle: anger is followed by more conflict, which leads to
more anger etcetera.
Individuals who are in conflict often seek supporters and form a coalition. Individuals who
are excluded from the coalition respond in a hostile way and form their own coalition.
Coalitions increase conflicts, because they pull more people into a certain direction. Aside
from that, they don't just want to maximize their own outcomes, but minimize the outcomes
of people outside of the coalition.

HOW CAN PROBLEMS BE SOLVED?
Negotiation. This is considered to be mutual communication, whereby
two or more parties consider specific situations, explain their
positions, and exchange bids and counter offers in order to come to
an agreement. Two kinds of negotiation can be distinguished: 1)
distributive and 2) integrative negotiation.
In distributive negotiation, both parties retain their
competitive orientation and take turns making small
concessions until some equally satisfying middle ground is
reached.
In integrative negotiation, a way is sought to integrate both
viewpoints. In this case the parties work together and they
do not compete.. It is a collaborative conflict resolution
method.
The dual concern model posits that people can deal with conflict through
4 tactics: 1) avoiding, 2) yielding, 3) fighting, and 4) cooperating. These 4
tactics are related to two dimension: self-interest and thinking of the
other.
COOPERATIVE TACTICS
Fighting is an active and proself way to deal with conflict.
Fighting (forcing, dominating) can take many shapes, from
insulting to blaming the other. Sometimes there can even
be a physical fight.
Cooperation is an active, prosocial and proself way to
deal with conflicts. People who cooperate first determine
what the problem is exactly and then search for a solution
that is satisfying for both parties. There is collaboration,
problem solving and a win-win situation.
THREE BASIC KINDS OF
Negotiators
Soft negotiators (or soft bargainers) choose a friendly way of
negotiating. They try to avoid confrontation and try to have
good relationships with others.
Hard negotiators (or hard bargainers) are very competitive
and take extreme positions about the conflict.
Principled negotiators search for solutions without choosing
a side. They are aimed at the problem instead of the
intentions, motivations and needs that are related to the
problem.
See next slide for the summary
COOPERATIVE TACTICS
Avoidance is a passive way to deal with conflict. People who want to
avoid conflict wait and see, and let it happen. They do little in order
to prevent conflict and do not talk about points of conflict. They don't
often go to group meetings.
Yielding is a passive, but prosocial way to deal with conflict. Yielders
solve problems by giving in to the demands of others. Sometimes
they yield because they are aware that their own opinion is incorrect,
but sometimes they yield while holding on to their own opinion.
TIT FOR TAT (TFT)
A bargaining strategy that begins with cooperation, but
then imitates the other person’s choice so that
cooperation is met with cooperation and competition
with competition.
In this strategy you start with cooperation, but then the
method is chosen by the opposing party, so the
cooperation is either followed by competition or
cooperation. It is said that TFT is nice, provocable, clear,
forgiving, and reciprocal.
 TIT FOR TAT (TFT)
TFT is nice, because you start with cooperation instead of
competition
TFT is provocable, because competitive behaviour is met with
competitive behaviour. The method is also very clear, because one
party quickly notices the conflict strategy of the other.
TFT is forgiving, because one party will choose cooperation when they
see that the other, competitive oriented party also chooses
cooperation.
TFT is reciprocal, in the sense that competitive behaviour in one party
evokes competitive behaviour in the other party and cooperative
behaviour in one party evokes cooperative behaviour in the other
party.
MEDIATION
A conflict can sometimes be solved by a mediator: someone who mediates
between two people who are in a conflict, with the aim to reconcile them.
Mediation can be done in three ways:
1. Inquisitorial procedure: the parties are interviewed by the mediator, after
which she thinks of a solution that both parties need to accept.
2. Arbitration: both parties explain their standpoint to the mediator. The
mediator bases her opinion on the standpoints of the parties.
3. Moot: the parties and the mediator go through the standpoints together and
following that the mediator gives advice, but she does not have the final say.
Her decision is not binding.