PSYCHOLOGICAL

APPROACH TO
CONFLICT
AGOHA, BENEDICT., PH.D. (NIG)
DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
 DEFINING CONFLICT

Incongruity or asynchrony in social relationship resulting

from the choosing between competing goals by the
individuals in the relationship.
 Painful emotional states within the individual that result
from the existence of mutually incompatible and opposing
wish, purpose or goal or
 DEFINING CONFLICT

"an expressed struggle between at least two

interdependent parties who perceive
incompatible goals, scarce resources, and
interference from the other party in
achieving their goals"(Wood, 2010).
 DEFINITIONS

The major components of the last of the three

definitions offered above include:
 Expressed struggle
 Perceptions of goals and resources
 Unhelpful relationship towards goals.
Components may safely be re-classified into the latent
factors (psychological) and the extant factors (social,
economic, and behavioural factors).
A proper understanding would involve looking at
conflict at the psychological, the relational, and
behavioural (struggle).
This paper takes the view that
conflict is primarily a psychological
phenomenon occurring within a
given social context.
 LEVELS OF CONFLICT

The micropsychic/intrapersonal level- a

conflict that occurs within the psychical
structure of a single individual.
Dyadic level- Between two individual
persons e.g. two friends, spouses, business
partners etc.
 LEVELS OF CONFLICT

Organisational Level- organisations and

host communities, two or more
organisations, Union-Management
relations, individual and Organisations etc.
Macro-society: State or country and its components e.g.
the Nigerian-Biafran war, Sudan-South Sudan conflict,
Tutsi-Hutu (Rwanda) conflict, state versus state e.g. the
Oyo and Osun dispute over ownership of University, or
country versus country e.g. Nigerian-Cameroon Bakassi
dispute, Israeli-Palestine dispute.
 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES:
UNIVERSAL PSYCHOLOGICAL
CHARACTERISTICS
According to Dawkin’s selfish gene theory (Dawkin,
1976)
- We are born selfish and without altruism
-Humans survive at the expense of other humans
-subconsciously we try to defeat other genes
GENE COMMUNITY

Biologically, genes establish the individuality of

persons, and people with closer genetic affinity
cooperate ore closely and work as a single unit of
family, community, ethnic groups etc
So individuality of ethno-nations are genetically
established (Agoha, 2010).
Biologic (ethnic) group is an individual person with a
group soul or collective psyche shared by its members.
The cultural group lives in the person and the person
lives in the group.
The relationship defines an I-We (selfish) psychical
structure that excludes non-members
The I-we mind-set may also be formed in non-biological groups
where shared interest is strong albeit with lesser intensity.
We all possess innate Aggressive instinct that serve our survival
These instincts are civilised through processes of socialisation
and religion
 REALISTIC CONFLICT THEORY

Intergroup behaviour can be best understood with reference to

the material interests linking groups.
Conflicting interests = rivalry and hostility, Harmony = peace
and harmony are the more probable results. (Campbell, 1965;
Sherrif, 1966).
Introduction of superordinate goals for the groups diminish
intergroup conflict (Sherrif, 1966).
Findings: groups which either adopt or have imposed on
them "winlose" orientations are typically more antagonistic
or more discriminatory than those with collaborative
orientations te.g., Blake & Mouton, 1961; Brown, Condor,
Mathews, Wade,&Williams, 1985; Brown&Williams, 1984;
Diab, 1970; Ryen&Kahn, 1975).
LIMITS OF REALISTIC CONFLICT THEORY

Anticipation of competition or cooperation results in weaker

effects on intergroup attitudes in the expected directions,
provided that at least some degree of ingroup identification has
occurred.
Where group identification is minimal, differences between
anticipated competition and cooperation may disappear (Rabbie
& de Brey, 1971).
 LIMITS OF REALISTIC CONFLICT THEORY

Positive correlations between socioeconomic similarity, geographical

proximity, and attraction for other tribal groups. (Brewer & Campbell,
1976), This was contrary to the realistic conflict hypothesis, since both
similarity and proximity should imply increased competition for scarce
resources, with resultant intergroup hostility.
imposition of superordinate goals as a recipe for conflict reduction may
not always be effective. May even promote intergroup antagonism and
hostility (Blake, Shepard, and Mouton (1964)
 SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY

Categories such as nationality, ethnicity, and gender are

internalized and constitute a potentially important aspect of the
individual's self-concept, the "social identity" (Turner, 1982).
The individual will come to apply the norms and stereotypes
associated with that category to self (Turner, 1982, 1984), and
will hence come to regard self as interchangeable
Therefore functional interdependence per se may not
constitute a sufficient predictor of intergroup
cooperation.
Social categories are employed by individuals not only
to simplify their social world (cf. the social cognition
approach) but also as a means of self-reference.
Through this psychological process called "depersonalization"),
the individual's behaviour becomes normative (conformist), and,
to the extent that a number of individuals perceive themselves in
terms of the same social category at the same moment in time
Collective behaviour occur as a consequence of the existence
of shared social norms (Oakes, 1983).
PEACE-MAKING

social psychological processes of influence-

compliance, identification, and internalisation.
Three outcomes of peace process- Conflict
settlement, resolution, and reconciliation
(Kelman,2010,
1999)- correspond to the influence 3 processes
 CONFLICT RESOLUTION
IN CONTRAST TO POLITICAL SETTLEMENT,
IDENTIFICATION
In contrast to Political settlement, identification rather than
compliance is the influence process involved in conflict resolution.
Identification refers to the alignment of one’s behaviour and
attitudes with perceived qualities in another. E.g. Camp David
accord, 1976.
Proceeds from interest based negotiations to addressing the
psychological needs from which conflicts arise.
Such a relationship is marked by long-term
commitment to agreements reached during
negotiation Parties come to identify with each
other or expand their collective identities by
focusing on areas of similarity
 RECONCILIATION

Involves internalising the values and attitudes of one party

is incorporated into the behaviour repertoire of the other.
 identity becomes shared and influence is accepted to
maintain congruence with one's self-identity and keep out
dissonance.
•