Intergroup Conflict Resolution Research Articles

Simulation Methodologies in Experimental Research on Negotiations by Representatives

This paper reviews recent experimental (primarily social-psychological) research on intergroup conflict resolution with an emphasis on methodology. Specifically, it focuses on the creation of conflict forces and representational role obligations in simulations. The resulting typologies clarify the numerous strategies used by investigators. The paper calls for a systematic evaluation of these strategies as researchers appear to be unaware of their potential impact. It is also argued that selected arrangements described would help to enhance simulations to be congruent with a model of intergroup bargaining processes.

Personality Correlates of Conflict Resolution Modes

This article investigates the correlation of personality variables and inter-group conflict resolution modes. In the first of two -research approaches, EPPS scores of 64 college students on aggression, dominance, affiliation, and achievement were correlated with preferences for confronting, forcing, and smoothing. A field study correlated EPPS variables of 19 boundary personnel with ratings on resolution modes by 57 interorganizational correspondents. As hypothesized, achievement was positively correlated with confronting under both research approaches. Only students' aggression scores correlated weakly and positively with preference for forcing. Affiliation and smoothing were also weakly and positively correlated with the students but not in the field.

A Prescriptive Model

Third-party consultation plays a useful role for community developers because it promotes the productive resolution of intergroup conflict in community settings. Two related case studies of third-party consultation between conflicting groups in the same neighborhood illustrates a descriptive model. Initially, the impartial consultants facilitated small group, problem-solving discussions between a recreation group, mainly identified with public housing tenants, and a political group, primarily representing private home owners. Consultations resulted in a joint proposal for a community center. This led to a conflict between proponents and opponents which became the focus for a second, but unsuccessful, intervention. The authors analyze the case studies in terms of the major components of the model and in terms of relevant principles of social psychology. Then they discuss the implications for the practice of third-party consultation by community developers.

Constituent's Bargaining Orientation and Intergroup Negotiations

The bargaining behavior of 80 pairs of female undergraduates on a competitive reward‐allocation task was examined. The participants either bargained for themselves or represented the interests of a constituent as well as themselves. Representatives were given information indicating that their constituent expected them to win or to behave cooperatively, or they were given no information concerning their constituent's bargaining orientation. Consistent with previous research, the present findings indicated that representational role obligations tend to increase competition between negotiators. However, the findings also revealed, that this tendency is reduced when pressure to cooperate is applied by constituents to at least one of the representatives. Procedures that aid in the resolution of intergroup conflict were discussed.

Accountability and negotiator behavior

The need to resolve conflict between groups exists in numerous forms within and among organizations. However, the relationship between a representative and his constituency are seen to affect the ease with which this is done. The present study focuses on spokesmen or representatives as they attempt to reach an agreement that would be mutually acceptable to the parties involved. In a laboratory experiment, mode of representative selection (election by the team versus random selection) and the nature of accountability (no, continuous, or end of negotiation session review by constituents) were manipulated to assess their impact on bargaining difficulty. Consistent with previous research these two variables were found to interact, yet the specific results were unanticipated. Elected representatives did not appear to be systematically influenced by the various levels of accountability. In contrast, randomly selected spokesmen facing no review showed the fewest deadlocks, tended to reach agreement at a faster rate, and reported least pressure, frustration, and difficulty. Selected spokesmen facing either continuous or end accountability tended to react similarly and experienced the most difficulty in the study. The notion of a representative's mandate and the emerging literature on social facilitation were used to interpret the results. Ancillary data provided by subjects on their group (team) member interactions were found to be related to felt commitment to a team's position. This further emphasized the importance of intragroup processes to intergroup conflict resolution.

The effects of intragroup forces on intergroup conflict resolution

Forces which are part of a representative's role as he negotiates intergroup disputes were examined in a laboratory experiment. Prenegotiation experience, cohesiveness, and evaluation potential were manipulated in the context of a union management bargaining problem to determine their effect on the length of time needed to reach agreement. It was found that the effects of prenegotiation experience in previous research were likely to be confounded with the latter two independent variables. Further, these variables interact in complex ways to produce longer negotiation times for representatives who faced postnegotiation evaluation by a cohesive group.