Intimate

Relationships

Rowland S.Miller

习读专用，不作商用，如侵联删。

C H A P T E R 11

Conflict

The Nature of Conflict ◆ The Course of Conflict

◆ The Outcomes of Conflict ◆ For Your Consideration

◆ Chapter Summary

Do your friends and lovers always do everything you want, when you want it? Of course not. There’s no such thing as an intimate relationship that does not involve occasional friction and incompatibility in the desires, opinions, and actions of the two partners. No matter how much two people care for each other, no matter how well-suited they are to each other, dispute and disagree- ment will occur (Canary & Lakey, 2013). And the more interdependent they are—the more time they spend together and the wider the variety of activities and tasks they try to coordinate––the more likely occasional conflict becomes (Miller, 1997b). Conflict is inevitable in close relationships.

It’s also very influential. Over time, the manner in which two partners manage their conflicts may either enhance or erode their love and regard for each other. In this chapter, then, we’ll examine the nature and sources of this sometimes frustrating, sometimes fulfilling, but ultimately unavoidable aspect of intimate relationships. We’ll look at how conflicts unfold, how they esca- late, and how people can respond to them more effectively. We’ll also consider whether conflict can be beneficial to relationships. (What do you think the answer will be? Can conflict be advantageous?)

11.1 THE NATURE OF CONFLICT

What Is Conflict?

Interpersonal conflict occurs whenever one person’s motives, goals, beliefs, opin- ions, or behavior interfere with, or are incompatible with, those of another. Con- flict is born of dissimilarity, which may be passing in the form of moods, or lasting in the form of beliefs and personality. Two people always differ in important ways, but I’ll employ a definition of conflict that involves active interference with another’s goals: Conflict occurs when one’s wishes or actions actually obstruct or impede those of someone else. When two partners are both able to do as they wish, no conflict exists. On the other hand, if one or both of them have to give up something that they want because of the other’s influence, conflict occurs. Anger and hostility aren’t necessary; we make some sacrifices to accommodate our part- ners generously and happily. And not all conflicts are overt; we are sometimes unaware of the difficulties we are causing our partners (Fincham & Beach, 1999). It’s enough that someone knowingly or unknowingly prevents another from get- ting or doing everything he or she wants.

Conflict is inescapable for two reasons. First, the moods and preferences of any two people will occasionally differ. Intermittent incompatibilities between two partners’ goals and behaviors will inevitably arise. For instance, even if both members of a couple are extraverted, hard-partying social animals, one of them will occasionally be disappointed by the other’s wish to leave a party before it’s over; a case of the flu or an upcoming exam in a close relationships class will make one of them, but not the other, unwilling to stay late.

Second, conflict is unavoidable because there are certain tensions that are woven into the fabric of close relationships that will, sooner or later, always cause some strain. When they devote themselves to an intimate relationship, people often experience opposing motivations called dialectics that can never be entirely satisfied because they contradict each other (Baxter, 2004). Fulfilling one goal may endanger another, so partners must engage in a delicate balanc- ing act that leaves them drawn in different directions at different times. And with each partner vacillating between the pursuit of these opposing goals, occasional conflict between their predominant individual motives is inescap- able (Erbert, 2000).

For instance, one potent dialectic in close relationships is the continual ten- sion between personal autonomy and connection to others. On one hand, people often want to be free to do what they want, so they value their independence and autonomy. On the other hand, they also seek warm, close connections to others that can make them dependent on particular partners. So, which do they pursue? Intimacy or freedom? Independence or belonging? It’s rea- sonable to assume that most people want some of both, but embracing one of them can mean deny- ing the other. So people’s preferences may swing back and forth as they come to be more influenced by whichever motive has lately been less fulfilled. Maintaining an equilibrium between the two desires is a tricky balancing act (Slotter et al., 2014), and we can’t simultaneously maintain high independence from a romantic partner and high interdependence with him or her, so something’s got to give. Conflict between the partners is likely to occur as they strive to fulfill opposing motives at different rates and at different times.

Another powerful dialectic is the tension between openness and closedness. Intimacy involves self-disclosure, and intimate partners are expected to share their thoughts and feelings with one another. However, people also like their privacy, and there are some things that prudent partners want to keep to themselves (Petronio, 2010). On the one hand, there’s candor and transparent authenticity, and on the other hand, there’s discretion and restraint.

There’s also friction between stability and change. People with pleas- ant partnerships will want to maintain and protect them, keeping things the way they are. But people also relish novelty and excitement (Sheldon et al., 2013). Too much stagnant predictability becomes mundane and monotonous (Harasymchuk & Fehr, 2013). So, people are attracted to both the familiar and the new, and occasional indecision and conflict may result.

Finally, there’s dialectic tension between integration with and separation from one’s social network. Would you rather go to that party with your friends or stay home and snuggle with your sweetheart tonight? Will you travel to your in-law’s home for Thanksgiving again this year or stay home and begin your own family tradition? One’s motive to stay involved with other people is sometimes at odds with the wish to devote oneself to a romantic partnership. People see less of their friends when they invest time and effort into a romantic relationship (Fehr, 1999), and finding a satisfying ratio of time spent with and time apart from other people can be difficult.

Altogether, these four dialectics––autonomy versus connection, openness versus closedness, stability versus change, and integration versus separation— accounted for more than one-third of the recent fights and arguments reported by married couples in one study (Erbert, 2000). And what’s important is that these tensions typically continue to some degree throughout the entire life of a relationship (Baxter, 2004). The dilemmas posed by fluctuating, opposing motives in close relationships never end. Sooner or later, conflict occurs.

The Frequency of Conflict

How often do partners engage in conflict? Frequently, but the answer var- ies with the population studied and the way in which conflict is defined and assessed. Little children and their parents are often at odds; one study deter- mined that some conflict occurred every 3.6 minutes in conversations between 4-year-olds and their mothers (Eisenberg, 1992)! Adolescents encounter an aver- age of seven disagreements per day in their various relationships (Laursen & Collins, 1994), and dating couples report 2.3 conflicts per week when they keep diaries of their interactions (Lloyd, 1987). Spouses report seven memorable “differences of opinion” every 2 weeks (Papp et al., 2009), and they experi- ence one or two “unpleasant disagreements” each month (McGonagle et al., 1992). And, importantly, many conflicts are never addressed; in one investi- gation, Northwestern University students didn’t mention to their partners 40 percent of the conflicts and irritations they identified in their dating relationships (Roloff & Cloven, 1990). Conflict not only is common in close rela- tionships, it also probably occurs more often than we realize.

However, as you might expect, some people experience more conflict than other people do. Various influences are correlated with the amount of conflict we encounter:

Personality. People who are high in neuroticism are impulsive and irascible, and they have more unhappy disagreements with others than people of low neuroticism do (Heaven et al., 2006). In contrast, people high in agreeableness are good natured, cooperative, and generally easy to get along with, and they

have fewer conflicts; if conflict does occur, they also react more constructively than people of low agreeableness do (Jensen-Campbell & Graziano, 2001).

Attachment style. Secure people encounter less conflict—and manage it bet- ter when it does occur—than insecure people do (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2013). In particular, because they fret that their partners may leave them, people who are anxious about abandonment nervously perceive dissension and difficulty where it does not exist, and then respond with greater hurt and distress than others would (Overall et al., 2014). A married couple comprised of an anxious wife and an avoidant husband is especially combustible: Her exaggerated fears chase him away, and his withdrawal then further fuels her worries (Barry & Lawrence, 2013). In the lab, both members of such couples evidence elevated levels of stress before a discussion of a disagreement even begins (L. Beck et al., 2013).

Stage of life. If you’re a young adult, you may be experiencing more conflict with your partners than you used to. It’s typical for people to develop lasting romances and to begin professional careers in their mid-20s, and, according to a longitudinal study of young adults in New York state, these life changes are routinely associated with increased conflict (Chen et al., 2006). As you can see in Figure 11.1, conflict with romantic partners increases steadily from our late teens to our mid-20s, but things settle down somewhat thereafter.

Relationships get even more placid in our elder years. Older couples usu- ally have fewer disagreements about children and money and other touchy top- ics than middle-aged couples do (Levenson et al., 1993), and they tend to shy away from talking about the things they do disagree about (Holley et al., 2013).

Similarity. Conflict emerges from incompatibility, so it’s not surprising that the less similar dating partners are, the more conflict they experience (Surra & Longstreth, 1990). This pattern continues if people marry; spouses who share similar tastes and expectations encounter less conflict and enjoy happier mar- riages than do those who have less in common (Huston & Houts, 1998). Indeed, those who really believe that “opposites attract” are likely to learn some hard lessons if they start living with someone who is notably different from them. Dissimilarity fuels friction, not smooth sailing.