Taking conflict personally and the use of the demand/withdraw pattern in intraethnic serial arguments.
Author | Cionea, Ioana A. |
Position | Report |
Trapp and Hoff (1985) proposed the term serial arguments to characterize continuing discussions of the same topic that occur over time (at least twice) within a dyad in which the two individuals try to resolve some incompatibility between them through arguing. Trapp and Hoff found that interpersonal arguments often remained unresolved, which made them resurface later. Research about this topic has examined perceived resolvability, relational satisfaction (e.g., K. Johnson & Roloff, 1998), well-being (e.g., Malis & Roloff, 2006), and goals and tactics used in serial arguments (e.g., Bevan, Finan, & Kaminsky, 2008).
Demand/withdraw (DM/W) is a behavioral pattern in which "one partner pressures the other through emotional demands, criticism, and complaints while the other retreats through withdrawal, defensiveness, and passive inaction" (Christensen & Heavey, 1993, p. 73). This strategy is particularly important to examine in serial arguments because it "represents one of the most destructive interaction patterns in interpersonal relationships" (Schrodt, Witt, & Shimkowski, 2013, p. 2). It has been associated, for example, with lower relationship satisfaction (Caughlin & Huston, 2002) and depression (Byrne, Carr, & Clark, 2004). The present study seeks to identify possible antecedents that may trigger the use of this pattern in serial arguments. We propose that the trait of taking conflict personally [(TCP), "the feeling of being personally engaged in a punishing life event" that makes a person feel devalued, threatened, anxious, and insulted while engaging in conflict (Hample & Dallinger, 1995, p. 306)] may predict the use of the DM/W pattern.
A second goal of this study is to examine whether ethnicity is associated with serial argument behaviors. The majority of research on this topic has relied mainly on Caucasian samples. Other ethnic, racial, or cultural groups have not been studied closely [for exceptions, see Cionea & Hopartean (2011) and Radanielina-Hita (2010)]. However, ethnicity can no longer be a simple demographic variable in the study of communication phenomena, particularly in the United States, where ethnic and racial minorities account for 91.7% of the overall population growth since 2000 (Pew Research Center, 2011). Ethnic group membership matters because ethnic identity affects communication (Betancourt & Lopez, 1993; Stephan & Stephan, 2000a). Particularly, how individuals are socialized and enculturated may result in different patterns of communication in serial arguments. Identifying and examining such possibilities is necessary if research is to explain this phenomenon thoroughly. Our investigation is thus useful as it enhances knowledge about serial arguments in different contexts and has practical applications for argumentation, conflict management, and interethnic communication.
ETHNICITY AND ARGUING BEHAVIORS
Ethnicity is a multifaceted construct. It captures the social construction of identity (Light & Lee, 1987; Stephan & Stephan, 2000b) and the subjective experience of negotiating ascribed and avowed characteristics within society (Collier, 1998; Collier & Thomas, 1988; Hecht, Collier & Ribeau, 1993). According to Ting-Toomey, Yee-Jung, Shapiro, Garcia, Wright, and Oetzel (2000), the study of ethnicity entails two important aspects: (1) the content (i.e., ethnic values adopted and practiced) and (2) the salience (i.e., importance for a person) of ethnic identity. This study proceeds along these two dimensions. Ethnicity is used to refer to ethnic group membership, capturing the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that a group sanctions and values. Strength of one's ethnic identity refers to salience, the degree to which one identifies with one's ethnic group (Phinney, 1992), or embodies "ethnic values associated with their ethnic group memberships" (Ting-Toomey et al., 2000, p. 50).
Ethnic identity is important because it functions as a "source of socialization" (Collier, 1991, p. 132). According to Collier (1991), people learn how to perceive conflict from interacting with their family and social networks. By extension, people learn how to argue as part of their socialization process. Ting-Toomey et al. (2000) explained that ethnicity captures the unique aspects that a group shares, which, we propose, include modes of argument. These unique characteristics may be exhibited during serial arguments with other individuals from the same ethnic group, as intraethnic arguments would develop and proceed based on shared schemas, and would potentially be different from interethnic arguments. In conflict research, Collier (1991) found that Anglo-Americans, African-Americans, and Mexican Americans defined conflict in friendships, and what constituted competent behavior during those conflicts, in different ways. It is possible, then, that serial argument behaviors may differ across ethnic groups as well.
Importantly, ethnic differences in individuals' serial arguing behaviors have not been examined closely. Hample and Cionea (2012) examined interethnic serial arguments, by asking respondents about serial arguments with someone of another ethnicity. Most of their respondents were Caucasians, however, reporting about arguing with members of other cultural groups. In the present study, the focus is on intraethnic serial arguments. Specifically, we examine whether ethnicity relates to serial argument behaviors, and compare any patterns of association that may emerge across ethnic groups.
Ethnic group membership may relate to specific serial argument behaviors, but the strength of one's ethnic identity should also be examined, as it reflects how closely one identifies with a group's values and behaviors. Those who strongly identify with their ethnic group are invested and involved in ethnic practices (Phinney, 1991). Thus, one would expect these individuals to enact specific ways of arguing that capture the values and practices the group endorses regarding arguing. Ting-Toomey et al. (2000) found that different ethnic groups varied in their strength of ethnic identity. African-Americans had a stronger ethnic identity and Anglo-Americans had a weaker ethnic identity than did both Hispanics and Asian-Americans. Furthermore, both ethnic group membership and ethnic identity salience affected individuals' reported conflict style. Thus, strength of ethnic identity has an influence on conflict style, and, possibly, on the way people argue.
The discussion above offers a rationale for hypothesizing that ethnicity and strength of one's ethnic identity would be related to individuals' intraethnic serial argument behaviors. Ethnic group membership and strength of ethnicity often intersect, so they may interact to predict serial argument behaviors. Prior to proposing specific research questions examining this possibility, however, a brief review of serial argument research pertaining to TCP and the DM/W pattern is presented.
TAKING CONFLICT PERSONALLY AND THE DEMAND/WITHDRAW PATTERN IN SERIAL ARGUMENTS
TCP is a multidimensional trait variable that includes both cognitive and affective ways of reacting to conflict along six dimensions (Hample & Cionea, 2010). The first three dimensions examine negative emotional reactions: (1) direct personalization-the perception that a conflict is personal; (2) persecution feelings-the assumption that conflict is directed at one's self; and (3) stress reaction-the association of conflict with feeling stressed. Two additional subscales measure (4) positive and (5) negative relational effects-the belief that conflict has positive or negative consequences for relationships. The last subscale measures a (6) like/dislike valence, which is associated with overall feelings about conflict; that is, whether one enjoys or seeks out conflict (Hample & Cionea, 2010).
TCP is relevant to the study of serial arguments because people's predispositions for personalizing conflict may affect how they approach such exchanges. For example, Hample and Dallinger (1995) proposed that those who take conflict personally are negatively affected by conflict situations. They feel persecuted and stressed, and avoid interactions in which conflict may occur. In a study comparing TCP and conflict styles in the United States and Japan, Kim, Yamaguchi, Kim, and Miyahara (2015) argued that people from different cultures may personalize conflict in different ways, given that criticism is...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.