Conflict Resolution from Evolutionary and Cognitive Development Perspectives - Term Paper Example

?Conflict Resolution as Explained by Evolutionary and Cognitive-Development Perspective 0 Introduction The inability to resolve conflict negativelyaffects the individual’s well being. Tedeschi, Schlenker, and Bonoma (as cited in Rahim, 2010) defined conflict as an interactive state whereby interests and goals of an individual are incompatible with those considered as important by others (p. 15). The constant presence of conflict entails the need to find effective means to address it (Sponsel, 1996, p. 95). Evolutionary and Cognitive-Development perspectives offer different explanations of conflict and conflict resolution. In addition, those present means of resolving conflicts, as well as the benefits of conflict resolution. The next sections of this paper discuss these perspectives in detail. In addition, the paper also presents a case, which demonstrates conflict between a mother and a daughter. Lastly, it exhibits how Evolutionary and Cognitive-Development perspectives explain such case. 2.0 Perspectives of Conflict and Conflict Resolution 2.1 Evolutionary Perspective Evolutionary perspective considers conflict as costly and carries numerous risks. This perspective highlights the functional importance of behaviors that facilitate individuals’ reproductive success. It supports the assumption that behavior may entail benefits and costs for individuals (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 42). However, natural selection ensures that individuals’ perform behaviors that maximize benefits and minimize cost (Mitchell, 1999). Thus, two individuals benefit from resolving a certain conflict as they avoid incurring injury or its cost. In addition, Maestripieri (2005) asserted that it seems futile to engage in conflict where an individual continues to lose (p. 42). Likewise, it seems unnecessary for individuals who “won” the fight to risk injury by provoking an adversary who has withdrawn. Maestripieri (2006) further added that the mechanisms that enable individuals and animals to resolve conflicts are favored through natural selection (p. 2006). Maestripieri (2005) successfully demonstrated the importance of conflict resolution through the living arrangements of most primates (p. 42). Most of the primates reside in stable social groups. They derived benefits from living in the group as they can find themselves better from predators, as well as improve their competitive ability over the neighboring groups (Maestripieri, 2005, p. 42). These primates eliminate the cost of competition in the group through successful resolution of conflict. The increased need for co-existence and dependence in social groups foster a conflict resolution strategy that entails minimal cost to individuals (Sponsel, 1996, p. 100). Maestripieri (2005) also reiterated that non-kin primates still benefit from effective conflict resolution strategies (p. 42). He explained that promoting a healthy relationship with a partner through exchange and reciprocity increases their competitive ability. Such long-term relationship necessitates effective means of resolving conflict (Maestripieri, 2005, p. 42). Sandole and Merwe (1993) stress that individuals are biologically hardwired to manifest affection, reciprocal grooming, and bonding to increase their chances of survival (p. 47). Individuals’ limbic system is connected with the cortex and hypothalamus, which are primarily responsible for all affective relations. It also promotes effective means of dealing with a particular conflict (Sandole & Merwe, 1993). 3.0 Cognitive-Development Perspective This perspective concentrates on the developmental changes and adaptive social functioning, which occur as individuals have learned to adjust and adapt to the conflict-inducing circumstances. Cognitive-Development perspective considers conflict as inevitable due to individual differences in beliefs, principles, and values (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 45). Thus, individuals concentrate in dealing with conflict instead of eliminating it. They learn new strategies as they become familiar to the complexity of interpersonal interaction. They eventually possess the competence to deal with such complexities (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 45). Larsen (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005) found that the conflict resolution strategies utilized by children changed according to their age. Young children from two to three years old employ one-sided strategies tailored to elicit one-sided outcomes. Meanwhile, older children utilized negotiations to resolve the conflict (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 45). Several developmental changes in the means of resolving conflicts are associated with acquisition of abstract moral reasoning and linguistic skill. This consequently reflects the development in the structures and neural connections in the brain. Researchers reiterated that developments in the manner of resolving conflict may also be influenced by teachers, parents, siblings, and peers (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 45). The differences in the cognitive skill can be accounted to development changes in the means of resolving conflict, as well as to differences between human beings and animals. For instance, the capacity to consider other individuals’ desires and needs may influence the development and the use of effective means of resolving conflict. Children acquire the capacity to consider other individuals’ needs and desires at the age of 3. This consequently influences their conflict resolution strategies and skills (as cited in Maestripieri, 2005, p. 45). 4.0 Sample Case Betty is our neighbor who relentlessly works to meet the needs of her 5 year-old daughter named Anne. She often asks her mother to look after Anne during weekdays since she no longer has a husband. She is well aware that she could not give her daughter the time and things that she deserves. However, she tried hard to allot sufficient time for her daughter during weekends. On a Saturday morning, she took Anne to the zoo and then to the mall. Things went smoothly, until Anne saw a doll at the mall that she liked. She began to beg Betty to buy it. However, Betty knew that she could not afford it, so she told Anne that they would buy it some other time. Anne reacted violently and incessantly begs her mother. Betty kept telling her that there are more good toys compared to the one that she liked. The people at the mall start to stare at them. For fear of making a scene, Betty was impelled to tell Anne that she will leave her at the mall if she will not stop. Reluctantly, Anne obeyed her mother even if the disappointment is evident in her face. 4.1 Evolutionary Perspective The aforementioned case presents the conflict of interest between Betty and Anne. Anne wanted to purchase the doll, while Betty did not have means to buy it. Evolutionary perspective views this conflict between Betty and Anne as costly and entails numerous risks. Thus, in the end Anne obeyed her mother. Evolutionary perspective explains that Anne may unknowingly fear being denied of support and care necessary for her survival. In addition, Anne’s failure to obey his mother may potentially put a strain in the relationship. Thus, conflict resolution functions to increase individuals’ chances of survival. 4.2 Cognitive-Development Perspective Cognitive-development perspective considers conflict between Betty and Anne as inevitable in a mother-daughter relationship. Thus, it is essential to learn how to deal with conflict instead of deny its existence. Anne initially exhibited a one-sided conflict resolution strategy through persistently begging her mother to buy the doll that she liked. She unknowingly sought to elicit one-sided outcome where she gets what she wanted regardless of other individuals’ needs and interest. However, she stopped when her mother told her that she would be left in the mall. This indicates that Anne is in the stage of slowly grasping effective means in resolving conflict. In addition, this may reflect the development in abstract moral reasoning and concepts of punishment. 5.0 Conclusion Conflict is considered as unhealthy and costly to individuals by evolutionary psychologists. Thus, there is a need to effectively address such conflict to enhance individual’s well being and consequently increase the chances of survival. Meanwhile, Cognitive-Development perspective viewed conflict as inevitable; thus, individuals must concentrate on addressing such conflict. This perspective proposed that individuals utilized a particular conflict resolution strategy according to their age. Young children commonly employ one-sided strategies, while older children used negotiations to resolve conflicts. This may reflect the acquisition of abstract moral reasoning and linguistic skill. I have thoroughly discussed conflict and conflict resolution in two different perspectives namely evolutionary and Cognitive-Development. However, it may be necessary to elaborate more on how these two perspectives explain the aforementioned case. Overall, I think I perform average in this paper. References Maestripieri, D. (2005). Primate Psychology. USA: Harvard University. Mitchell, M. (1999). Can evolution explain how the mind works? A review of the evolutionary psychology debates. Complexity, 3 (3), 17-24. Rahim, M. A. (2010). Managing conflict in organizations. USA: Transactions. Sandole, D., & Merwe, H. V. (1993). Conflict resolution theory: integration and application. USA: Manchester University Press. Sponsel, L. E. (1996). The natural history of peace: A positive view of human nature and its potential. In T. Gregor (Ed.), A natural history of peace (pp.95-125). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Read More