Abstract

Socio-cognitive conflict has been defined as a situation of confrontation with a disagreeing other. Previous research suggests that individuals can regulate conflict in a relational way, namely by focusing on social comparison between relative levels of competences. Relational conflict regulation has been described as yielding particularly negative effects on social interactions and learning, but has been understudied. The present research addresses the question of the origin of relational conflict regulation by introducing a fundamental distinction between two types of regulation, one based on the affirmation of one's own point of view and the invalidation of the other's (i.e., 'competitive' regulation), the other corresponding to the protection of self-competence via compliance (i.e., 'protective' regulation). Three studies show that these modes of relational conflict regulation result from the endorsement of distinct performance goals, respectively, performance-approach goals (trying to outperform others) and performance-avoidance goals (avoiding performing more poorly than others). Theoretical implications for the literature on both conflict regulation and achievement goals are discussed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.