Kişilerarası Çatışma Çözme Yaklaşımlarında Kontrol Odağının Rolü

Bu çalışmada, iletişim süreçlerine odaklanan kişilerarasıçatışma çözme yaklaşımlarıile kişisel bir değişken olan kontrol odağının bu yaklaşımların benimsenmesinde herhangi bir rolünün olup olmadığının araştırılmasıamaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini Ankara’da öğrenim gören ve yaşları18 ile 26 arasında değişen 307 üniversite öğrencisi oluşmaktadır. Araştırmada anket yöntemiyle veri toplanmışve ölçüm araçlarıolarak; ulusal kültüre uyarlama çalışmalarıyapılmışolan KişilerarasıÇatışma Çözme YaklaşımlarıÖlçeği ve Kontrol OdağıÖlçeği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular; özellikle iç kontrol odaklıkişilerin yapıcıve olumlu çözüm süreçleri açısından yüzleşmeye daha çok önem verdiklerini, genel davranışsergilediklerini, çatışmaya yaklaştıklarını, kendilerini daha çok açtıklarınıve duygularınıdaha fazla sergilediklerini göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte demografik değişkenlerden cinsiyetin de çözüm yaklaşımlarının benimsenmesinde önemli rol oynadığıve kadınların çatışma süreçlerinde daha fazla yüzleştikleri, kendilerini daha çok açtıklarıve daha fazla duygusal ifadeler sergileyerek çözüme yönelik daha aktif ve etkili davranışlarda bulunduklarıortaya çıkmıştır. Tüm bu bulgular, kişilerarasıçatışma çözme süreçlerinde kişilik ve cinsiyet değişkenlerinin önemli rol oynadığınıgöstermektedir.

This study is conducted for the purpose of determining the role of locus of control as personality characteristics in adopting the communication oriented conflict resolution approaches. Conflict is regarded as an interaction process that occurs when there is disharmony or incompatibility in or between social beings. This interaction process comprises of cognitive, emotional and behavioral dimensions Interpersonal conflict becomes a fact that originates from consequences of feeling of negative emotional reaction emotional , realizing prevention behavioral and perceiving incompatibilities cognitive . Interpersonal conflict, seen in all kinds of groups in the social life, can be a result of different needs and interests, discord and tension, the structure of conflict, individual values, communication processes, restrictions, history of conflict, anxiety, hostility, or negative statements. Interpersonal conflict generally is seen as a negative and adverse event at first glance; however, it can be also a source of innovation and creativity. From this point of view, conflict fulfils a function that brings out a positive change. This opinion, regarding conflict as a desired situation, has many positive results; improving interpersonal relationship, creativity, new ideas, decisions, mutual understanding, work performance and constructive personal attributes. Constructive or destructive results of conflict based on how conflict is perceived and which resolution approaches are adopted. This addresses the conflict resolution concept. Conflict resolution can be defined as making equal the resolution with the accommodation, focusing on the resolving strategies. There is several conflict resolution approaches ranging from two to five dimensions reported in the literature. Most of them focus on the results of the communication process or the interests of the involved parties, and generally are used in organizational settings to enhance the managerial process and improve dysfunctional relationships within organizations. When interpersonal conflict is seen as an interaction process which is influenced by culture, situation or personal structure, the importance of communication process comes into prominence in terms of both the reason and the resolution of conflict. In addition to this, the communication process should be taken into consideration instead of result of the interaction process in conflict situations in order to increase the interference of attitudes and behaviors in the conflict situations. One conflict resolution strategy, focusing the communication process, comprises of confrontation, public/private behavior, approach/avoidance, self disclosure and emotional expression dimensions. The adoption of these approaches can vary with personal characteristics. There are differences between those that accept the consequences of their behaviors as rewards and punishment, and those that do not. We can argue that locus of control, may have a role in predicting the choices adopted in the conflict resolution process. Locus of control refers to an expectation that a behavior will have the desired affect, and that the expectation is significant indicators of what the person has done. Some people suppose that there is a relationship between their own behavior and reinforcements, while others believe that there is no such relationship and assume that reinforcements are controlled by an external power. Those that believe there is a relationship between their behaviors and reinforcements or consequences are said to have an internal locus of control; those that believe that there is no such relationship are said to have an external locus of control. People with an internal locus of control view themselves as responsible for the consequences of their actions and think that they have control over reinforcements. They are reported to be successful, effective, aggressive, enterprising, trusting, and independent. In addition, they are more successful academically, superior in a competitive context, and more socially active. People with an external locus of control think that reinforcements are a function of fate, luck, or powerful others. Believing they have no control over the environment, externals are reported to be inactive, have low self-esteem, and not trusting of others. These people also feel generally incompetent, passive, skeptical, and dogmatic, and as a result they have higher levels of anxiety, stress, and depression. Considering the interpersonal relationship domain, people with an external locus of control are reported to be less capable in interpersonal relationships and weaker in social skill than internals. While internally controlled individuals are said to adopt more compromising strategies, externally controlled people are said to use more avoidance strategies in conflict situations. The sample of the study was composed of 307 students 180 female [%58.6] and 127 male [%41.4] aged between 18 and 26 years Mean= 20.56, Sd= 1.69 from universities in Ankara. The survey battery, included a demographic data form along with the Interpersonal Conflict Resolution Approaches Scale and the Locus of Control Scale, was administered to volunteer students that were studying at several universities in Ankara. The data were analyzed using SPSS v.15.0. First, correlation analysis was conducted in order to determine the relationship between the study variables. Next, hierarchal regression analysis was conducted for the purpose of determining the role of locus of control in predicting the choice of interpersonal conflict resolution approaches. Finally we conducted one-way ANOVA for comparing the means of male and female’s resolution approach scores. The results showed that people with a more internal locus of control seem to adopt more confrontation, more general behaviors, more approach, more self-disclosure and more emotional expression approaches in interpersonal conflict resolution process in terms of constructive and positive results. Besides it was determined that gender as a demographic variable played important a role in resolution process. Females employed more active and influential behaviors with using more confrontation, more self-disclosure and more emotional expression approaches. All the findings displayed that personality and gender play important roles in interpersonal conflict resolution process. The present study has some limitations. One is the observed correlations between the conflict resolution approaches and selfconcept is limited to the selected sample. The other is that resolution approaches can be more effectively explained by determining the cultural, situational, and relational factors that can affect these approaches. In addition, in order to obtain more generalizable results, it is essential to compare the existing findings with qualitatively and quantitatively different samples