INTERPERSONAL AND INTERGROUP COMMUNICATION | Makerere University Courses
A strong bond between two or more people refers to interpersonal relationship. Attraction between individuals brings them close to each other and eventually. This course explores inter-individual and inter-group relationships in communication using insights from a variety of disciplines like speech communication. "Interpersonal and Intergroup Processes" in The Handbook of Conflict In response Deutsch offers his eponymous Crude Law of Social Relations: "The.
Attachment styles are created during childhood but can adapt and evolve to become a different attachment style based on individual experiences. On the contrary, a good romantic relationship can take a person from an avoidant attachment style to more of a secure attachment style.
Romantic love The capacity for love gives depth to human relationships, brings people closer to each other physically and emotionally, and makes people think expansively about themselves and the world. Attraction — Premeditated or automatic, attraction can occur between acquaintances, coworkers, lovers, etc.
Studies have shown that attraction can be susceptible to influence based on context and externally induced arousal, with the caveat that participants be unaware of the source of their arousal. A study by Cantor, J. As supported by a series of studies, Zillman and colleagues showed that a preexisting state of arousal can heighten reactions to affective stimuli.
One commonly studied factor is physical proximity also known as propinquity.
Communication and Intergroup Relations - Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology
The MIT Westgate studies famously showed that greater physical proximity between incoming students in a university residential hall led to greater relationship initiation. Another important factor in the initiation of new relationships is similarity.
Put simply, individuals tend to be attracted to and start new relationships with those who are similar to them. These similarities can include beliefs, rules, interests, culture, education, etc. Individuals seek relationships with like others because like others are most likely to validate shared beliefs and perspectives, thus facilitating interactions that are positive, rewarding and without conflict.
Development — Development of interpersonal relationships can be further split into committed versus non-committed romantic relationships, which have different behavioral characteristics. More committed relationships by both genders were characterized by greater resource display, appearance enhancement, love and care, and verbal signs of possession. In contrast, less committed relationships by both genders were characterized by greater jealousy induction.
In terms of gender differences, men used greater resource display than women, who used more appearance enhancement as a mate-retention strategy than men. Some important qualities of strong, enduring relationships include emotional understanding and effective communication between partners. Idealization of one's partner is linked to stronger interpersonal bonds. Idealization is the pattern of overestimating a romantic partner's positive virtues or underestimating a partner's negative faults in comparison to the partner's own self-evaluation.
In general, individuals who idealize their romantic partners tend to report higher levels of relationship satisfaction. The presence of all three components characterizes consummate lovethe most durable type of love.
In addition, the presence of intimacy and passion in marital relationships predicts marital satisfaction. Also, commitment is the best predictor of relationship satisfaction, especially in long-term relationships. Positive consequences of being in love include increased self-esteem and self-efficacy. The emotion of love comes from the anticipation of pleasure. Particular duties arise from each person's particular situation in relation to others.
The individual stands simultaneously in several different relationships with different people: Juniors are considered in Confucianism to owe their seniors reverence and seniors have duties of benevolence and concern toward juniors. A focus on mutuality is prevalent in East Asian cultures to this day. Minding relationships[ edit ] The mindfulness theory of relationships shows how closeness in relationships may be enhanced. Minding is the "reciprocal knowing process involving the nonstop, interrelated thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of persons in a relationship.
He then explores the implications of this definition for conflict resolution, focusing on power strategies commonly used during conflicts. Finally, he examines the implications of his findings for training in conflict resolution. Popular misconceptions about power include the belief that it has some physical location, that there is only a fixed amount of it, that it operates in only one direction, and that the use of power is basically adversarial or competitive.
Within the social sciences Coleman finds four perspectives on power. Some theorists emphasize "power over"--the ability to compel someone to do something. This view suggests a view of power as coercive and competitive. Other theorists have developed the concept of "power with," which emphasizes the effectiveness of joint or cooperative action. A third set of theorists focus on issues of powerlessness and dependence, while other explore the obverse: Empowerment theorists employ the notion of "power to," as in the power to act effectively without constraint or disability.
Coleman draws on Deutsch's work to synthesize a working definition of power. Coleman then seeks to identify which aspects of persons and of situations are most relevant to power. Personal factors include different cognitive, motivational and moral orientations regarding power.
PSYC | Intergroup Relations and Interpersonal Influence | University of Southampton
In their concepts of power, people may adopt any of the four perspectives commonly found in the social sciences. In terms of motivation, some people have an authoritarian orientation that stresses obedience to authority.
People may be motivated to pursue personal power, or power for their group. Peoples' moral orientations toward power vary with their degree of moral development, their degree of egalitarian sentiment, and with their perception of the scope of justice. Understanding situational factors requires examining the larger structural and historical context. One significant aspect of situation is role a person plays.
Also significant is the individual's place in the hierarchy. Culture is also an important factor, influencing, for instance, peoples' attitudes toward power inequalities.
This approach to understanding power has significant implications for understanding conflict. First, Coleman argues that the predominant understanding of power is the competitive "power over" view. Given this understanding, power conflicts are then viewed as win-lose competitions, thus impairing their chances of a satisfactory resolution. More emphasis on cooperative, dependent and independent power is needed.
Cooperative conflicts, for instance, actually generate power, understood as "power with. Here again a broader understanding of power would offer alternatives to the competitive strategy.
Third, when evaluating the balance of power between parties in conflict, it is important to note that some of the parties' power may be irrelevant or useless in that particular situation.
Assessments of relative power must focus on relevant power.
Similarly, parties should reflect carefully on their goals in a conflict, and ask themselves which types of power could be effective, and which detrimental, in reaching those goals. Finally, research shows that high-power groups "tend to like power, use it, justify having it, and attempt to keep it. Low-power groups, on the other hand, tend to be shortsighted and discontent.
They may express their discontent by projecting blame onto even less powerful groups, undermining their ability to empower themselves through cooperation and coalition building. In conclusion, Coleman makes suggestions for training in conflict resolution, and offers an example of a useful training exercise.
Students should reflect on their current conceptions of power, and on their own typical reactions to being powerful of powerless. They should become aware of structural sources of privilege or disadvantage. Students should be able to identify the various types of power, of personal orientations to power, and available sources and strategies of power, in a given conflict setting.
Communication and Conflict, Robert M. Krauss, Ezequiel Morsella, pp. The authors seek to address the question: Under what conditions does communication reduce conflict? They examine four models of communication.
From these models they derive seven principles of conflict-reducing communication. The encoding-decoding model views human communication as a matter of encoding information e. Successful communication requires clear channels of transmission, and shared codes. Misunderstandings result from mistranslated messages, or from gaps or extraneous noise in the message.
From this model the authors derive their first principle: The intentionalist model recognizes that the same words can have different meanings.
On this model communication involves recognizing each other's communicative intentions.
Communication and Intergroup Relations
Effective communication requires a background of shared knowledge, particularly a common language and shared culture. Miscommunication results from a lack of common background. Miscommunication happens during conflicts as speakers' words are interpreted according to their listeners preconceived notions of their intentions.
The authors' second principle directs listeners to try to grasp the speaker's intended meaning. The third principle directs speakers, when deciding what to say, to consider what their listeners will take them to mean.
The perspective -taking model recognizes that even individuals with a common language and culture have different perspectives on the world. This model directs speakers to design their messages to fit their audience's perspective. Miscommunication may occur when the speaker assumes more similarity in perspective with the listener than actually exists, or when the speaker's understanding of the listener's perspective is based in prejudice and inaccurate stereotypes.
Another difficulty arises when a speaker is simultaneously addressing different audiences. Despite these problems, the authors' fourth principle directs speakers to take their listener's perspective into account in formulating their message. The dialogic model views communication as a cooperative, collaborative process. Meaning arises from the communicative situation, and can only be understood within that context.
This model, unlike the others, treats the listener as an active participant in the creation of a shared understanding.
Be an active listener. In conflict situations, principle six suggests "focus initially on establishing conditions that allow effective communication to occur; the cooperation that communication requires, once established, may generalize to other contexts.
For instance, an ironic form of address can reverse the usual meaning of words. The authors' seventh principle then is this: Communication does not assure conflict resolution. Indeed, research has shown that in certain cases, communication can actually worsen bargaining outcomes. The authors stress however that poor communication is very likely to exacerbate conflicts. Good communication, coupled with a genuine desire to resolve a conflict and with quality proposals, makes conflict resolution more likely.
Gruenfeld, and Charles M. The authors offer an overview of persuasion theory, directed toward negotiators. Persuasion is defined as "the principles and processes by which people's attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are formed, are modified, or resist change in the face of others' attempt at influence.
They hope that a better understanding of persuasion will improve negotiators' competence and success. Systemic processing involves thinking deeply about information, examining its background reasoning or causes, searching for further information, and formulating subsequent attitudes and behaviors in light of the information.
It takes significant time and mental effort, and so requires an able and motivated subject. In contrast, heuristic processing is more nearly automatic. Heuristic thinkers focus on relevant cues, and automatically apply simple rules heuristics to evaluate information.
Cues include such elements as the speaker's credibility or the number of supporting arguments. Rules include "experts' statements are trustworthy" and "argument length implies argument strength. Both types of processing can be valid, or can be fallible. Heuristics rules may be well grounded in experience, and allow for effective decision-making in a complex, fast-paced environment.
Yet they will yield poor judgements in cases which deviate from prior experience. Some heuristics are little more than bias or prejudice. Systemic processing can yield more depth of understanding and be more responsive to the particular situation. Systematic processing yields less overconfidence, less bias, more tolerance for alternative viewpoints, and deeper and more lasting cognitive changes.
Research has also associated systematic processing with improved performance in-group problem-solving, identifying integrative solutions, facilitating political compromise and avoiding war. However, systematic processing may serve to reinforce existing bias, as people tend to select, remember and more positively evaluate information that agrees with their existing attitudes.
Unbiased, systemic processing is more likely to be used when people need very accurate judgements. People who are primarily defensive, or who are trying to make a specific impression on another, typically use heuristic processing or biased forms of systematic processing. Persuasion plays a crucial role in successful conflict resolution.
The authors explain, "negotiated settlements most typically fall apart if the parties to the settlement do not truly believe that it is in their self-interest. For a negotiated settlement to stand the test of time, both parties have to be persuaded that the settlement is in some sense optimal.
Early in negotiations, parties tend to be dominated by impression and defense motives. Heuristic processing predominates and systematic thinking tends to be skewed toward reinforcing existing attitudes. Persuasion is unlikely, since these forms of information processing tend to reinforce existing attitudes and habitual way of thinking.
Unbiased, systematic processing is more conducive to persuasion and creative problem-solving. The authors suggest two approaches to changing parties ' modes of information processing toward unbiased systematic processes. The first is to decrease the parties' impression and defense motives and increase accuracy motivation. This can be done by acting in ways that explicitly violate the other party's heuristic expectation of self-interested action: A direct way to increase parties' accuracy motivation is to focus interests rather than positions.
Second, parties can facilitate a shift toward a more open, information seeking process by asking questions rather than making assertions. This constitutes a direct shift to information-seeking on the part of the questioner. Answering questions often causes parties to think more systematically about their own interests and goals. In addition, questions may be targeted to elicit information that disconfirms heuristic norms, and hence encourage a shift toward systematic thinking.
Intergroup Conflict, Ronald J. Fisher offers a social-psychological approach to understanding intergroup conflicts, that is, conflicts between people that occur in terms of their group identities. He considers the implications of this approach both for conflict resolution and for the training in conflict resolution.
Fisher argues that intergroup conflicts arise from objective differences of interest, coupled with antagonistic or controlling attitudes or behaviors. Incompatibilities, which can prompt conflict, include economic, power or value differences, or differences in needs-satisfaction. Often intergroup conflicts have a mixture of these elements.
People working in the same team. Relationship between a man and a woman Love, Marriage. Relationship with immediate family members and relatives. Relationship of a child with his parents. Relationship can also develop in a group Relationship of students with their teacher, relationship of a religious guru with his disciples and so on Must have in an Interpersonal Relationship Individuals in an interpersonal relationship must share common goals and objectives.
They should have more or less similar interests and think on the same lines. It is always better if individuals come from similar backgrounds. A sense of trust is important. Individuals must be attached to each other for a healthy interpersonal relationship. Transparency plays a pivotal role in interpersonal relationship. It is important for an individual to be honest and transparent.