Six Pack

Professor Morse

COM 390

10/13/17

Assignment #2 Rationale

Independent Variables

1) Number of Siblings - The number of siblings' variable would count the quantity of siblings

the subject has. This variable would range from zero (if the subject is an only child) upwards,

based upon their individual family circumstances (Minnett, 1983, p. 1066).

2) Birth Order - The birth order variable measures if the subject is the oldest, youngest, or a

middle sibling. This can range from one, if the subject is the first born (or only born child)

upwards to the number of siblings each individual has. This variable includes having another

option (yes or no) if they are a twin, since birth order would be equal (Minnett, 1983, p. 1066).

3) Age Difference The age difference variable measures what is the age difference between the

subject and their siblings. For this variable the measurement could be taken by asking the age

difference between the subject and their oldest/youngest/middle sibling or the subject and the

first (second, third, etc.) born (Minnett, 1983, p. 1066).

Differences between siblings of varying age gaps have been found to affect relationships.

"However, siblings 1 year apart at Time 1 were more similar to each other than were siblings 2

years apart, suggesting that shared environmental influences counteract sibling differentiation

processes for these siblings." (Feinberg, 2000, p. 3). This variable is important in analyzing the

types of relationships that siblings have with one another.

4) Sex Sex measures if the subject is male, female, or other (Minnett, 1983, p. 1068).
5) Age The age variable measures the age of the participant in years (Minnett, 1983, p. 1065).

Dependent Variables

Interpersonal Conflict Styles -

This variable is based off the interpersonal conflict

styles developed by Blake and Mouton (1964) and

reinterpreted and furthered by Thomas (1976) and Rahim and

Bonoma (1979). The interpersonal conflict styles are

measured by concern for others and concern for self, ranging

on a high to low scale (Rahim, 1986, p. 80). This scale breaks

down into five interpersonal conflict styles (Rahim, 1986, p.

81):

Integrating (high concern for others and high concern for self)

Obliging (high concern for others and low concern for self)

Dominating (low concern for others and high concern for self)

Avoiding (low concern for others and low concern for self)

Compromising (middle ground of both concern for others and concern for self)

Interpersonal Conflict Resolution Styles

Another potential dependent variable is the different styles of resolution that can result

from these conflicts. Resolution is the act of solving a problem, and in this case we can look at

the after effects of a sibling conflict. Stand-off, win/lose, and compromise are examples of some

of the possible outcomes from disputes between siblings. We will be able to collect this data and

analyze how individuals choose to handle their conflicts within families and in other

relationships based off of how they grew up. We can to collect this data from families, and see
which ones appear to be the most popular, then can narrow it down to why some work better than

others and what has lead people to those decisions.

This is an important field to look into, because we can study and measure the resolution

tactic's resemblance to other variables. "Similarly, childrens conflicts with siblings and parents

provide very different affordances for learning about constructive conflict resolution." (Dunn,

Slomkowski, Donelan, & Herrera, 1995, p.4). The ability to tackle conflicts and come up with

resolutions is directly related to power, understanding that in most cases there is a "loser". More

powerful individuals are more ambitious is in trying to obtain their goals, while equal-power

relationships lead to more compromise.

These interpersonal conflict resolution

styles that can be measured. This diagram,

which displays these styles, is called the,

"ThomasKilmann Mode Instrument [which]

was created by deriving two dimensions from

Blake and Moutons typology (1964): an

assertiveness dimension and a cooperativeness

dimension... conflict resolution behavior can be simultaneously classified according to whether

the behavior is cooperative or uncooperative, and whether it is assertive or unassertive" (Wood,

V. F., & Bell, 2008, p.127). This model is broken into four styles:

Forcing (high assertiveness and low cooperativeness)

Confronting (high assertiveness and high cooperativeness)

Withdraw (low assertiveness and low cooperativeness)

Smoothing (low assertiveness and high cooperativeness)

(More information on styles in Friedman, Ridd, Curral, Tsai, 2000, pg. 38-40).)

Research Areas

Conflict & Romantic Relationships

For our dependent variable, we chose conflict style in romantic relationships. This

variable will provide the opportunity to collect data from any population due to how romantic

conflict occurs in all of our lives. Breaking down our dependent variable first, we look at what is

conflict, and what role it plays in communication. Conflict is the process of losing face or feeling

the need to save face in a situation (Fletcher, 2010, p. 3). The concept of face is one's belief of

how they are seen according to others in society, and we "create our own image to try and look

good in the eyes of others..." (Sriubait, 2014, p. 333). When our idea of our face is threatened

by an individual, a group, an event, or a concept, it creates conflict.

Sibling relationships greatly impact many phases in the life cycle; "except for time spent

together by spouses in long-standing marriages, cumulative time spent with siblings during our

formative years far surpasses time in any other relationship during our lifetime." (Mones, 2001,

p. 455) Our group will be looking at the different independent variables such as number of

siblings, birth order, age difference, sex, and years to study the effect on the dependent variable

of conflict in romantic relationships. We will be looking at the different types of conflict and

what the participants' goals are when in a romantic conflict, or what one desires to attain or avoid

(Bevan, 2010, p. 53). Different types of relational argument goals include "positive relational

expression", or communicating constructive relational thoughts and feelings; "mutual

understanding/resolution", which is reaching a shared outcome and possibly an increased insight

into the partner's perspective; "relational termination", or ending a relationship;

"dominance/control", or overpowering the partner or issue; "expressiveness negative" implies

communicating destructive feelings; "change target" is adjusting a partner's actions; and finally

"hurt partner/benefit self" is purposely harming the partner for personal gain. (Bevan, 2010, p.

53) The first two conflict goals are positive results, whereas the rest are negative.

Romantic relationships were chosen as the outlet for studying conflict and conflict

resolution because of the high amounts of potential content that participants would have to draw

from to answer the survey. Wood describes in his article about romantic relationships and

conflict that humans create and sustain romantic relationships based on their experiences when

they are young (p. 4). If the way that individuals create relationships is based on their childhood,

their rank in sibling order can be studied to determine its potential role.

Research Questions & Hypotheses

1) Being the youngest child will lead to a dominating conflict style in romantic relationships.

2) Being the youngest child will lead to a forcing conflict resolution style in romantic

relationships.

3) Being the oldest child will lead to a compromising conflict style in romantic relationships.

4) Being the oldest child will lead to a smoothing conflict resolution style in romantic

relationships.

5) Do middle children have a common conflict style and/or conflict resolution style within their

romantic relationships?

6) Does having a greater age difference between siblings (greater than or equal to five years) lead

to different conflict styles and/or conflict resolution styles than the norm?
References

Bevan, J. L. (2010). Serial Argument Goals and Conflict Strategies: A Comparison between

Romantic Partners and Family Members. Communication Reports, 23(1), 52-64.

doi:10.1080/08934211003598734

Doughty, S. E., Lam, C. B., Stanik, C. E., & Mchale, S. M. (2015). Links between sibling

experiences and romantic competence from adolescence through young adulthood.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(11), 2054-2066.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0177-9

Dorrance Hall, E., & McNallie, J. (2016). The mediating role of sibling maintenance

behavior expectations and perceptions in the relationship between family communication

patterns and relationship satisfaction. Journal Of Family Communication, 16(4), 386-402.

doi:10.1080/15267431.2016.1215316

Dunn, J., Slomkowski, C., Donelan, N., & Herrera, C. (1995). Conflict, understanding, and

relationships: Developments and differences in the preschool years. Early Education and

Development, 6(4), 303-316. doi:10.1207/s15566935eed0604_2

Feinberg, M. E., & Hetherington, E. M. (2000). Sibling differentiation in adolescence:

Implications for behavioral genetic theory. Child Development, 71(6), 1512-1524.

doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00243

Fletcher, C. (2010). Defining Face and Conflict in Romantic Relationships: A Cross-Cultural

Comparison of Uganda and Ethiopia. Conference Papers International Communiation

Association, 1.

Friedman, R. A., Tidd, S. T., Currall, S. C., & Tsai, J. C. (2000). What goes around comes
 around: The impact of personal conflict style on work conflict and stress. International

Journal of Conflict Management, 11(1), 32-55.

Laursen, B., & Collins, W. A. (1994). Interpersonal conflict during adolescence. Psychological

bulletin, 115, 197-197.

Minnett, A., Vandell, D., & Santrock, J. (1983). The Effects of Sibling Status on Sibling

Interaction: Influence of Birth Order, Age Spacing, Sex of Child, and Sex of Sibling.

Child Development, 54(4), 1064-1072. doi:10.2307/1129910

Mones, A. G. (2001). Exploring Themes of Sibling Experience to Help Resolve Couples

Conflict. Family Journal, 9(4), 455-460.

Rahim, M. A. (1986). Referent Role and Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict. The Journal

of Social Psychology, 126(1), 79-86. doi:10.1080/00224545.1986.9713573

Recchia, H. E., Ross, H. S., & Vickar, M. (2010). Power and conflict resolution in sibling,

parentchild, and spousal negotiations. Journal Of Family Psychology, 24(5), 605-615.

doi:10.1037/a002087

Robertson, R., Shepherd, D., & Goedeke, S. (2014). Fighting Like Brother and Sister: Sibling

Relationships and Future Adult Romantic Relationship Quality. Australian Psychologist,

49(1), 37-43.

Sriubait, J. (2014). FACE-SAVING AND FACE-THREATENING ACTS IN ART

REVIEWS. Language In Different Contexts / Kalba Ir Kontekstai, 6(1, Part 1&2), 332-

340.

Watson-Currie, E. (2012). Attachment, Accommodation, and Love: Positing Conflict Resolution

Strategies as Adult Attachment Behaviors in a Mediational Model. Conference Papers --

International Communication Association, 1-33.

Wood, V. F., & Bell, P. A. (2008). Predicting interpersonal conflict resolution styles from

personality characteristics. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(2), 126-131.