COMM 512, Seminar in Communication and Conflict

COMM 512, Seminar in Communication and Conflict

Alan Sillars

Office: LA 345

Office hours: Tuesday /Thursday 9:30-11:30or by appointment (please arrange by email)

email:

Course Description

Conflict is a ubiquitous feature of personal, professional and public life that can be a disruptive force, but also a source of innovation, improved adjustment, and better decision-making. Communication lies at the heart of conflicts and determines how conflicts are managed, for better or worse. There is a diverse and vibrant literature on conflict communication combining scholarship in varied contexts (e.g., interpersonal, organizational, intercultural).

This seminar addresses basic assumptions and perspectives on conflict, conflict styles and patterns, subjective and discursive framing of conflict, conflict management/mediation, and special contexts. The greatest focus is on interpersonal and workgroup conflict, but we also consider community, environmental, and political conflict. Although the specific contextsof conflict communication have distinctive characteristics, they also have much in common. One goal for the seminar is to encourage integrative thinking about the basic properties of conflict communication that generalize across diverse situations. This is primarily a theory/research course but we also consider implications for conflict management and intervention.

Course Requirements

Grades are based on the following assignments.

Class Participation (30%): Most of the learning takes place through reading and discussion, so everyone must keep up with the readings and come to class prepared to discuss them. Bring notes and come ready to ask questions and raise issues. I hope to have lively, informed discussions. The key is to have discussion that is informed by the readings and serve to clarify, critique, and extend them, rather than discussion based primarily on personal experiences.

Reaction Papers and Leading Discussions (30%): On three occasions during the semester, you will serve as discussion leader and submit a reaction paper. These papers should be about five pages and synthesize and respond to the readings. Each paper should identify and discuss 2-3 key ideas in the readings. When discussing each idea, you may: 1) compare and contrast perspectives of different authors; 2) discuss potential implications for research, theory or application; or 3) critique the idea and suggest an alternative. Try to integrate the readings in your reaction papers by tying each issue/theme to multiple authors. The papers should reference specific points in the readings but go beyond summary and tie in all of the readings for the week.

Also construct several questions for the class to discuss. Be prepared to lead discussion of these questions and to talk about your written ideas during the seminar.Discussion leaders for a given day shouldpost questions on the course Moodle page a few days in advance and bring copies to seminar. (It’s best if all discussion leaders on a given day create a single list of questions.) Reaction papers should be turned in on the same day that you serve as discussion leader, since the papers are designed to help stimulate better discussion.

I’ll grade the reaction papers “plus,” “check,” or “minus.” You have the option of rewriting. Papers should be well edited, thoughtful, and show knowledge of the readings. You are not expected to go beyond the assigned readings to support your ideas.

Research Project(40%): The major research paper can be done alone or in teams, so long as the size of the team corresponds to the ambitiousness of the project. I suggest fourpossibilities, although I will consider other ideas as well. The first is to write a research proposal (something feasible and grounded in the literature). This is a good way to set up a research project that you plan to do later (such as a thesis). Potentially, a research proposal could be accompanied by a pilot study (a small scale study designed to help develop or test out methods for a later study). The second option is to write a synthetic/critical review of the literature that leads to a broader set of research questions and/or hypotheses, without proposing a specific study. Third, you can conduct a conflict case study (e.g., a “frame analysis”) using public documents. Fourth, if you are already working on a relevant project or have other access to data, you can work on a research report.

As with any graduate-level paper, the research paper should reflect original work and be supported by primary sources from academic journals and books. The topic of the paper should fit within the scope of the seminar. A one-page proposal is due at the beginning of week three. Please talk with me at any time that I can help in recommending sources or discussing the direction of your paper.

Please consult the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association when writing papers.

Reading Schedule

Sept. 5: Introduction and Overview

Sept. 12: Basic Assumptions and Distinctions

Sillars, A. L. (2009). Interpersonal conflict. In C. Berger, M. Roloff, & D. R. Roskos-Ewoldsen (Eds.). Handbook of communication science (2nd ed.) (pp. 273-289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Putnam, L. L. (2001). The language of opposition. In W. F. Eadie and P. E. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 10-20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes (excerpt from chapter 13, Factors influencing the resolution of conflict pp. 351-365). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Wilmot, W. W. & Hocker, J. L. (2001). Interpersonal conflict (6th ed.) (chapter 3, Interests and goals, pp. 63-84). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sept. 19: Conceptualizing and Measuring Conflict Communication

Canary, D. J., Cupach, W. R., & Messman, S. J. (1995). Relationship conflict (chapter 2, Methods for studying conflict in close relationships). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wilson, S. R., & Waltman, M. S. (1988). Assessing the Putnam Organizational Conflict Instrument (OCCI). Management Communication Quarterly, 1, 367-388.

READ ONLY PP. 367 TO TOP OF PP. 370 AND APPENDICES

Womack, D. F. (1988). Assessing the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Survey. Management Communication Quarterly, 1, 321-349.

READ ONLY PP. 321-325

Knapp, M. L., Putnam, L. L. & Davis, L. J. (1988). Measuring interpersonal conflict in organizations: Where do we go from here? Management Communication Quarterly, 1, 414-429.

Roloff, M. E., & Ifert, D. E. (2000). Conflict management through avoidance: Withholding complaints, suppressing arguments, and declaring topics taboo. In S. Petronio (Ed.), Balancing the secrets of private disclosures (pp. 151-163). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Malis, R. S., & Roloff, M. E. (2006). Demand/withdraw patterns in serial arguments: Implications for well-being. Human Communication Research, 32, 198-216.

Sept. 26: Sense-Making in Conflict

Schutz, A. (1999). It was your fault! Self-serving biases in autobiographical accounts of conflicts in married couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16, 193-208.

Sillars, A. (2011). Motivated misunderstanding in family conflict discussions. In J.L. Smith, W. Ickes, J. Hall, & S. Hodges (Eds.), Managing interpersonal sensitivity: Knowing when-and when not—to understand others (pp. 193-213). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

Wallenfelsz, K. P., & Dale Hample, D. (2010). The role of taking conflict personally in imagined interactions about conflict. Southern Communication Journal, 75, 471–487.

Vangelisti, A. L., Middleton, A. V., & Ebersole, D. S. (2013). Couples’ online cognitions during conflict: Links between what partners think and their relational satisfaction. Communication Monographs, 80, 125-149.

Oct. 3: Conflict Frames

Drake, L.E., & Donohue, W.A. (1996). Communicative framing theory in conflict resolution, Communication Research, 23, 297-322.

Rogan, R.G. (2011). A terrorist’s messages to the world: A frame analysis of Osama bin Laden’s declarations of war against the United States. In W.A. Donohue, R.G., Rogan, & S. Kauffman (Eds), Framing matters: Perspectives on negotiation research and practice in communication (pp. 210-233). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Brummans, B., Putnam, L., Gray, L., Hanke, Lewicki, R., Wiethoff, C. (2008). Making sense of intractable multipary conflict: A study of framing in four environmental disputes. Communication Monographs, 75, 25-51.

Dewulf, A., Gray, B., Putnam, L., & Bouwen, R. (2011). An interactional approach to framing in conflict and negotiation. In In W.A. Donohue, R.G., Rogan, & S. Kauffman (Eds), Framing matters: Perspectives on negotiation research and practice in communication (pp. 7-33). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Oct. 10: Media Framing of Conflict

Putnam, L. L., & Shoemaker, M. (2007). Changes in conflict framing in the news coverage of an environmental conflict. Journal of Dispute Resolution (1), 167-175. Retrieved April 24, 2013 from

McLeod, D. M. (2007). News coverage and social protest: How the media's protest paradigm exacerbates social conflict. Journal of Dispute Resolution (1),185-194. Retrieved April 24, 2013 from

Edy, J. A., & Meirick, P. C. (2007). Wanted, dead or alive: Media frames, frame adoption, and support for the war in Afghanistan. Journal of Communication, 57, 119-141.

Elbaz, S., & Bar-Tal, D. (2016). Dissemination of culture of conflict in the Israeli mass media: The wars in Lebanon as a case study. The Communication Review, 19, 1-34.

Oct. 17: Workplace Conflict

Garner, J. T., & Poole, M. S. (2013). Perspectives on workgroup conflict and communication. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 321-348).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and…: Quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73, 406-433.

Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. B. (1988). Getting disputes resolved (chapter 1, “Three approaches to resolving disputes,” and chapter 3, “Designing an effective dispute resolution system”). San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Oct. 24: Conflict in Romantic Couples

Caughlin, J.P., Vangelisti, A.L., & Mikucki-Enyart, S. (2013). Conflict in dating and marital relationships. In J.G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (p. 161-185). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Overall, N. C., Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., & Sibley, C. G. (2009). Regulating partners in intimate relationships: The costs and benefits of different communication strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 620-639.

Afifi, T. D., & Joseph, A. (2009). The standards for openness hypothesis: A gendered explanation for why avoidance is so dissatisfying. In T. D. Afifi, & W. A. Afifi (Eds.), Uncertainty, information management, and disclosure decisions: Theories and applications. New York: Routledge.

Aloia, L. S., & Solomon, D. H. (2015). The physiology of argumentative skill deficiency: Cognitive ability, emotional competence, communication qualities, and responses to conflict. Communication Monographs, 82, 315-338.

Oct. 31: Family Conflict

Koerner, A. (2013). Family conflict. In J.G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (p. 211-235). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.

Caughlin, J. P., & Malis, R. S. (2004). Demand/withdraw communication between parents and adolescents: Connections with self-esteem and substance use. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 125-148.

McLaren, R. M. & Sillars, A. L. (2014). Hurtful episodes in parent–adolescent relationships: How accounts and attributions contribute to the difficulty of talking about hurt. Communication Monographs, 81, 359-385.

Breshears, D. & Braithwaite, D. O. (2014). Discursive struggles animating individuals’ talk about their parents’ coming out as lesbian or gay. Journal of Family Communication, 14, 189-207.

Nov. 7: Cultural Conflict Styles

Stohl, C., McCann, R. M., & Bakar, H. A. (2013). Conflict in the global workplace. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 713-736). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ting-Toomey, S., & Kurogi, A. (1998). Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, 187–225.

READ PP. 187-211

Jabs, L. B. (2005). Collectivism and conflict: Conflict response styles in Karamoja, Uganda. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 16, 354-378.

Hample, D., & Angondahalli, D. (2015). Understandings of arguing in India and the United States: Argument frames, personalization of conflict, argumentativeness, and verbal aggressiveness. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 44, 1-26.

Nov. 14: Conflict Management

Brief Internet articles:

Glaser, T. (n.d.). Book summary: Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Conflict Research Consortium. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from

Burgess, H., & Spangler, B. (n.d.). Consensus building. In G. Burgess & H. Burgess (Eds.), Beyond intractability. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from

Nimet Beriker-Atiyas, N., & Demirel-Pegg, T. (2001). An analysis of integrative outcomes in the Dayton peace negotiations. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 11, 359-378.

Peterson, T. R., & Feldpausch-Parker, A. M. (2013). Environmental conflict communication. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 513-536). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Canary, D. J., Lakey, S. G., & Sillars, A. L. (2013). Managing conflict in a competent manner. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 513-536). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nov. 21: Individual meetings (In lieu of class, I will make appointments with each seminar participant to discuss progress on the research paper.)

Nov. 28:Thanksgiving (no class)

Dec. 5: Intractable and Crisis Conflict

Littlejohn, S. W., & Cole, K. L. (2013). Moral conflict and transcendent communication. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). (pp. 585-608).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Broome, B. J. (2013). Building cultures of peace: The role of intergroup dialogue. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 737.762). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

St-Yves, M., & Collins, P. (Eds.) (2012). The psychology of crisis intervention for law enforcement officers. Carswell: Toronto, Ontario.

READ THE FORWARD (BY TANGUAY), PP. 23-50 (BY ST-YVES AND JEAN-PIERRE VEYRAT), AND PP. 59-67 (BY ROGAN)

December 12: Mediation

Donohue, W. A. (2006). Managing interpersonal conflict: The mediation promise. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict communication: Integrating theory, research, and practice (pp. 211-233). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Donohue, W. A. (1991). Communication, marital dispute, and divorce mediation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

READ CHAPTER 6 (PP. 133-160 ) & EXCERPTS FROM CHAPTER 7 (PP. 161-167) & CHAPTER 8 (PP. 186-210)

Bush, R. A., & Folger, J. P. (2005). The promise of mediation (Revised edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

READ CHAPTER 2, A TRANSFORMATIVE VIEW…

December 19: Research Reports (no new readings)