Toward a psychology of attitude conflict

Disagreement Gets Mistaken for Bad Listening

It is important for people to feel listened to in professional and personal communications, and yet they can feel unheard even when others have listened well. We propose that this feeling may arise because speakers conflate agreement with listening quality. In 11 studies (N = 3,396 adults), we held constant or manipulated a listener's objective listening behaviors, manipulating only after the conversation whether the listener agreed with the speaker. Across various topics, mediums (e.g., video, chat), and cues of objective listening quality, speakers consistently perceived disagreeing listeners as worse listeners. This effect persisted after controlling for other positive impressions of the listener (e.g., likability). This effect seemed to emerge because speakers believe their views are correct, leading them to infer that a disagreeing listener must not have been listening very well. Indeed, it may be prohibitively difficult for someone to simultaneously convey that they disagree and that they were listening.

Intimate Relationships Weaken Female Competition: Evidence from Phase-amplitude Coupling and Event-Related Potentials

Competition, an essential component of social interaction, frequently occurs in daily life, and the impact of intimate relationships on women's competition has not yet been revealed. In this study, the visual target paradigm was used to explore the neural mechanisms underlying the regulation of female competitiveness by intimate relationships using event-related potential (ERP) data, time-frequency analysis, and brain functional connectivity. The research results indicate that, the P1, the N4, and the LPP were sensitive to the impact of intimate relationships on competition. Compared to competition between unfamiliar opposite-gender dyads, the average amplitudes of the N4 and LPP were higher in the late stage of competition between romantic partners. Compared to competition with strangers of the opposite gender, alpha band power was significantly higher when female individuals competed with their romantic partners. In addition, there was a positive correlation between the synchronization of activity in the frontal, parietal, and right temporal lobes of a female's brain and their degree of female engagement in competition. When a female individuals focused on the competition, activity synchronization was higher. The results indicate that competition with unfamiliar individuals of the opposite gender can make female focus on the competitive task, causing synchronous activation of corresponding brain regions. When competing with a romantic partner, women's focus decreases, their willingness to compete decreases, and the synchrony of brain functional connectivity decreases. This study suggests that intimate relationship weakens women's competitiveness, which is of significant importance for understanding high-quality intimate relationship and promoting the development of healthy competition.

Decoding cultural conflicts

As pioneers of the Carnegie Perspective recognized, conflicts in organizations can exist even when incentives of all parties are aligned. These can often be traced to differences in cognitions such as beliefs and values, which are foundational components of any given culture. This paper refines the operationalization of cultural clashes by identifying differences in beliefs about causality ("which actions cause which outcomes") and morality (in the broad sense of "what is evaluated as desirable") as two fundamental sources of conflict. In our first study, we demonstrate empirically that participants recognize and distinguish between these two sources of conflict. In our second study, we test the hypotheses that while misalignments in either causal or moral codes increase observers' perceptions of relationship conflict, negative affect, likelihood of avoidance, and lower perceived likelihood of conflict resolution, the effects are stronger for misalignments in moral codes than misalignments in causal codes and strongest when both causal and moral codes are misaligned. We test these arguments using vignette-based experimental studies. Our findings support our hypotheses. This research has significant implications for the understanding of conflict dynamics within and beyond organizational contexts. By recognizing the pivotal role of cultural differences in shaping conflicts, organizations and decision-makers can better anticipate, manage, and potentially preempt such conflicts.

Underestimating Counterparts' Learning Goals Impairs Conflictual Conversations

Given the many contexts in which people have difficulty engaging with views that disagree with their own-from political discussions to workplace conflicts-it is critical to understand how conflictual conversations can be improved. Whereas previous work has focused on strategies to change individual-level mindsets (e.g., encouraging open-mindedness), the present study investigated the role of partners' beliefs about their counterparts. Across seven preregistered studies (N = 2,614 adults), people consistently underestimated how willing disagreeing counterparts were to learn about opposing views (compared with how willing participants were themselves and how willing they believed agreeing others would be). Further, this belief strongly predicted greater derogation of attitude opponents and more negative expectations for conflictual conversations. Critically, in both American partisan politics and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a short informational intervention that increased beliefs that disagreeing counterparts were willing to learn about one's views decreased derogation and increased willingness to engage in the future. We built on research recognizing the power of the situation to highlight a fruitful new focus for conflict research.