This is a model building study which addresses itself to observing and investigating what transpires between two couples as they complete the process of resolving a marital conflict. Four therapy sessions where the couples successfully resolved a marital conflict and one therapy session where a resolution was attempted but was unsuccessful were selected for investigation. A task analysis was completed in which the moment-by-moment interactions of the couples were rigorously tracked to reveal the interactional patterns that distinguish couples who resolve marital conflicts from those who are not successful at resolving their conflicts. The interactional task analysis involved six strategies. The investigator's cognitive map of the resolution process was outlined. The task was defined as a pursue-distance conflict in which one partner was identified as an emotional pursuer and the other identified as an emotional withdrawer. The task environment, an emotionally focused therapy session, was specified. In the first rational analysis the investigator's model was presented. The transcripts of the resolution events were reviewed and repeated patterns were identified in the first empirical analysis. In the second rational analysis process indicators that would discriminate between the stages of resolution were chosen from four process measures. In the second empirical analysis two process measures (the SASB and the Experiencing scale) were used to identify the stages of resolution and produce a final model of marital conflict resolution. The final model consists of four steps which the couples move through to reach resolution. These steps are; Escalation, De-escalation, Testing, and Mutual Openness. Escalation involves either an 'attack-defend', 'attack-withdraw', or 'attack-attack' pattern where the pursuer is blaming their partner and the other partner is either defending, withdrawing or attacking. Each partners focus is on representing their own position and both partners usually feel angry, frustrated or unheard. In De-escalation one partner openly discloses their experience or asks for what he or she needs. This usually involves an expression of vulnerability. The other partner responds with either 'affirming and understanding' or 'helping and protecting' behavior. With Testing there is an initial positive interaction in which the withdrawer responds to the pursuer's open expression of feelings or needs with 'helping and protecting', 'nurturing and comforting' or 'trusting and relying' behavior. The pursuer however suddenly switch to 'belitting and blaming', 'sulking and appeasing' or 'walling off and avoiding' behavior. The pursuer appears to be dealing with the issue of trust, they are not sure if they can trust their partners response to them as totally genuine and likely to occur again. Mutual Openness resembles De-escalation however it this stage both partners complete 'disclose/trust rely' or 'affirm/help protect' sequences. Both partners rather than just one complete a sequence in which they explore their part in the problem openly while the other partner listens and affirms them. A failure to move from Escalation to De-escalation and the absence of 'affirming and and understanding' communication behaviors distinguished the non-resolution event from the resolution events. / Education, Faculty of / Educational and Counselling Psychology, and Special Education (ECPS), Department of / Graduate

Two major theoretical controversies were addressed in this study: (1) whether conflict behavior can best be explained by personal characteristics or by situational characteristics and (2) whether there is one best way to handle conflict or several effective ways depending on the situation. Specifically, it explored the relationship between locus of control (internal, powerful others, chance) and conflict behavior (nonconfrontation, solution-orientation, control) in situations where choosing each of these strategies was regarded most appropriate. The study gathered data relevant to four questions: (1) Is there a relationship between an individual's conflict behavior style and personal characteristics such as feelings of power and control? (2) If there is a relationship, does it affect one's choice of conflict behavior in particular situations? (3) Can situations be defined so that a particular conflict behavior could be considered effective and therefore most appropriate? (4) Are all individuals equally disposed to choose the effective conflict behavior in the situation? Characteristics were defined by this researcher forming the basis for regarding choice of a particular conflict strategy as most appropriate in the situation. Conflict situations incorporating those characteristics were then developed and pretested for use in administering the Organizational Communication Conflict Instrument (OCCI) (Putnam & Wilson, 1982). Four conflict situations were used. Levenson's I, P, and C Locus of Control Scale (1973) and Putnam & Wilson's OCCI (1982) were administered to 163 undergraduates at Portland State University. Females comprised 63% of the sample, males--37%. Results of canonical correlations indicated that "powerful others" locus of control orientation was related to choice of nonconfrontation conflict behavior. Multivariate analysis of variance results indicated that the situation, sex, and locus of control variables account significantly for differences in choice of conflict behavior. The Newman-Keuls procedure revealed an unexpected outcome; all subjects reflected a significant tendency to choose the appropriate behavior in the situation. The findings of this study suggest that conflict behavior can be explained by both personal characteristics and situational characteristics. The study also provides evidence that there is not one best way to handle conflict across all situations, supporting a contingency approach to interpersonal conflict.

This study sets out to investigate how conflict is managed at schools. The literature review clearly indicated the complexity of the management of conflict in school organisations. Schools, by virtue of being social organisations aiming at providing education services to learners, cannot thrive under conditions of dysfunctional conflict. However, it is also clear that not all conflict is bad and can be functional in school improvement and renewal. The most important aspect pertaining to conflict in schools, is that it must be managed. This actually implies that conflict has to be managed from its sources, apparent or potential and that, this must involve a process that ranges from conflict diagnosis to school organisational learning and effectiveness. This clearly relates to all types of conflict and includes, conflict resolution, prevention and management. The empirical study established that school principals largely used the dominating and avoiding styles of handling conflict. The variance between categories of responses indicated that conflict handling styles were used contingent on situational conditions. To this end, it was found that educators from big schools showed statistically significant differences with educators from small schools in so far as principals' conflict handling styles are concerned. Based on this finding and nothwistanding the results of the frequency analysis which generally indicated almost equal responses in terms of the agree and disagree responses, it was concluded that the dominating and avoidng styles, and to an extent, the compromising styles were used predominantly in the surveyed schools. The study thus recommends that peer group and needs-specific capacity building programmes for school principals should be initiated so as to expose principals to conflict management learning experiences from practice, and in relaxed atmospheres facilitated by peer coaching and mentoring. Keywords: conflict; conflict management; conflict management styles, conflict theories, conflict models; conflict resolution; organisational conflict / Thesis (M.Ed. (Education Management))--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2008.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Ashland Theological Seminary, 2002. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-71, 79-80).

This study sets out to investigate how conflict is managed at schools. The literature review clearly indicated the complexity of the management of conflict in school organisations. Schools, by virtue of being social organisations aiming at providing education services to learners, cannot thrive under conditions of dysfunctional conflict. However, it is also clear that not all conflict is bad and can be functional in school improvement and renewal. The most important aspect pertaining to conflict in schools, is that it must be managed. This actually implies that conflict has to be managed from its sources, apparent or potential and that, this must involve a process that ranges from conflict diagnosis to school organisational learning and effectiveness. This clearly relates to all types of conflict and includes, conflict resolution, prevention and management. The empirical study established that school principals largely used the dominating and avoiding styles of handling conflict. The variance between categories of responses indicated that conflict handling styles were used contingent on situational conditions. To this end, it was found that educators from big schools showed statistically significant differences with educators from small schools in so far as principals' conflict handling styles are concerned. Based on this finding and nothwistanding the results of the frequency analysis which generally indicated almost equal responses in terms of the agree and disagree responses, it was concluded that the dominating and avoidng styles, and to an extent, the compromising styles were used predominantly in the surveyed schools. The study thus recommends that peer group and needs-specific capacity building programmes for school principals should be initiated so as to expose principals to conflict management learning experiences from practice, and in relaxed atmospheres facilitated by peer coaching and mentoring. Keywords: conflict; conflict management; conflict management styles, conflict theories, conflict models; conflict resolution; organisational conflict / Thesis (M.Ed. (Education Management))--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2008.

Thesis (M.S.)--George Mason University, 2008. / Vita: p. 75. Thesis director: Wallace Warfield. Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conflict Analysis and Resolution. Title from PDF t.p. (viewed July 18, 2008). Also issued in print.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Canterbury, 2008. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 125-135). Also available via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Ashland Theological Seminary, 2002. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 69-71, 79-80).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Cornell University, 1995. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 236-248).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Emmanuel School of Religion, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 215-219).