Abstract
We studied the behavioral and emotional dynamics displayed by two people trying to resolve a conflict. 59 groups of two people were asked to talk for 20 minutes to try to reach a consensus about a topic on which they disagreed. The topics were abortion, affirmative action, death penalty, and euthanasia. Behavior data were determined from audio recordings where each second of the conversation was assessed as proself, neutral, or prosocial. We determined the probability density function of the durations of time spent in each behavioral state. These durations were well fit by a stretched exponential distribution, with an exponent, , of approximately 0.3. This indicates that the switching between behavioral states is not a random Markov process, but one where the probability to switch behavioral states decreases with the time already spent in that behavioral state. The degree of this “memory” was stronger in those groups who did not reach a consensus and where the conflict grew more destructive than in those that did. Emotion data were measured by having each person listen to the audio recording and moving a computer mouse to recall their negative or positive emotional valence at each moment in the conversation. We used the Hurst rescaled range analysis and power spectrum to determine the correlations in the fluctuations of the emotional valence. The emotional valence was well described by a random walk whose increments were uncorrelated. Thus, the behavior data demonstrated a “memory” of the duration already spent in a behavioral state while the emotion data fluctuated as a random walk whose steps did not have a “memory” of previous steps. This work demonstrates that statistical analysis, more commonly used to analyze physical phenomena, can also shed interesting light on the dynamics of processes in social psychology and conflict management.
Highlights
In all facets of life when individuals, groups, or nations interact with each other there is a possibility that a conflict can arise
The study conducted by Kugler, Coleman and Fuchs [15] provide a unique laboratory setting to study how people behave in a conflict situation. These experiments consisted of two people engaging in a ‘‘difficult conversation’’ to prepare a joint statement on a sociopolitical and potentially intractable topic, on
The behavior and emotion data from these experiments may help us to better understand the dynamics underlying intractable conflicts with deleterious outcomes or tractable conflicts which can be addressed in a positive way
Summary
In all facets of life when individuals, groups, or nations interact with each other there is a possibility that a conflict can arise. In detailed social psychological terms, a conflict is a relational process influenced by the presence of incompatible activities. These processes typically occur in a context that has a history and a normative trajectory. A small fraction of conflicts intensify, escalate and persist, and become ‘‘intractable’’ These intractable conflicts have severe consequences including: a wasting of time and money, a threat to psychological and physiological well-being, aggression, and even violence [7],[8]. They have a high level of persistence, destructiveness [9], and resistance to resolution [10],[11],[7],[8],[12], [13], [14]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
