The problem of this study addressed how women experience the conflict variables of beliefs about conflict, anger arousal, conflict styles, and received and expressed violence as partners in love relationships and how these factors affect their reported satisfaction. Graduate women (M = 186) from University of North Texas completed the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), a subscale of Relationship Beliefs Inventory (RBI), the Multidimensional Anger Inventory (MAI), and Interpersonal Conflict Tactics and Strategies Scale (ICTAS), and the Severity of Violence Against Women scale (SVAW). Data were analyzed using MANOVAs with ANOVAs to examine significant differences. Multiple regression procedures were used for the exploratory questions. Women reporting less satisfied relationships were expected to believe that disagreement was more destructive and to report higher anger arousal than those who were more satisfied. The hypotheses were supported. Women who were less satisfied also reported using less constructive conflict tactics and more destructive and avoidant tactics as well as receiving some forms of violence. Expressed violence was not significantly related to low satisfaction. Results suggested that these conflict variables are highly interrelated. Strong feedback loops may develop. Strongly held conflict beliefs may affect the use of destructive and avoidant conflict strategies and increase anger which may reinforce the conflict beliefs. Women who have received violence may use both destructive and avoidant tactics. Use of tactics that escalate then de-escalate conflict suggests that conflict strategies may not be mutually exclusive. However, when a woman is low in anger and has previously received violence from a partner, she may use more avoidant tactics. In contrast women who express violence to their partners may use all three conflict tactics including constructive tactics. This finding suggested that women may express violence as a last resort to get a reaction from their partners.

Women’s use of aggression in intimate partner relationships is consistently debated by researchers of intimate partner aggression. One tenet suggests women use aggression within intimate relationships at similar rates as men. Conversely, a second tenet acknowledges women’s use of aggression but suggests that the meaning and consequences associated with women’s aggression is not coercive or severely injurious, which are typical characteristics of men’s use of aggression. The current study evaluated incarcerated women in order to build upon an integrative approach that suggests that women’s use of aggression is related to the relationship dynamics generated from variations in coercive and conflictual behaviors. Further, the current study evaluated the moderating relation of childhood abuse history and posttraumatic stress symptoms between relationship dynamics and women’s use of aggression. Ninety-six women, who participated in a larger research project that investigated incarcerated women’s life experience, reported on the dynamics of their most recent abusive heterosexual relationship, their own use of aggression (minor and severe) and childhood abuse history and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Findings suggest that incarcerated women involved in intimate relationships characterized as highly conflictual use significantly more minor and severe aggression toward their partners than women involved in relationships with low levels of conflicts. The finding is significant regardless of the level of coercion present in the relationship. Lastly, neither childhood abuse history nor posttraumatic symptoms moderated the relation between intimate partner relationship dynamics and women’s use of aggression. Various reasons for the lack of support for the moderating effect of history on women’s use of aggression are discussed.

Konflikte am Arbeitsplatz sind allgegenwärtig–sie erschweren den Berufsalltag und können schlimmstenfalls auch zu privaten Problemen führen. Dennoch ist unklar, wie genau Aufgabenkonflikte das Wohlbefinden und die Leistungsfähigkeit von Beschäftigten beeinflussen. Mechanismen, wann und warum Aufgabenkonflikte negative Folgen haben, wurde bisher wenig erforscht. Begründet werden kann dies damit, dass Aufgabenkonflikte bisher zumeist in Feldstudien mittels retrospektiven (und zudem subjektiven) Momentaufnahmen untersucht wurden. Das erste Ziel meines Vorhabens war es demnach, Aufgabenkonflikte in einer Tagebuchstudie sowie in einem kontrollierten Setting im Labor zu untersuchen, um deren emotionale und kognitive Konsequenzen präzise und unmittelbar zu erfassen. Weiterhin haben bisherige Studien größtenteils situative Faktoren untersucht und persönliche Charakteristiken, die ebenfalls die Bewertung von Aufgabenkonflikten beeinflussen, außer Acht gelassen. Daher verfolgte ich als zweites Ziel eine ganzheitliche Sichtweise auf den Aufgabenkonflikt einzunehmen. Dafür explorierte ich, ob Unterschiede zwischen Personen emotionale Mimikry zu zeigen (d.h. die Emotionen anderer zu spiegeln) einen Einfluss auf die Beurteilung von Aufgabenkonflikten haben. Um das Bild auf Aufgabenkonflikte zu komplementieren bestand mein finales Ziel darin, die Wirksamkeit einer Intervention zur Abschwächung von Konfliktkonsequenzen zu untersuchen. Hierfür wählte ich eine allgemein bekannte Strategie der kognitiven Umbewertung („Reappraisal") und prüfte, ob diese Strategie einen Aufgabenkonflikt als weniger emotional aufreibend und somit weniger destruktiv erscheinen lässt. Durch die Integration von vier empirischen Studien, die in renommierten psychologischen Zeitschriften publiziert wurden, leistet meine Dissertationsschrift einen Beitrag dazu, die von Konflikten am Arbeitsplatz ausgehenden komplexen Wirkweisen besser zu verstehen, sowie Möglichkeiten aufzuzeigen Konfliktkonsequenzen zu modifizieren. / Workplace conflicts have been widely recognized as a core social stressor across occupations with detrimental effects for employees’ task progress and employees’ general stress levels and health. Yet, the presumed destructive effects of task conflicts on employee outcomes, such as well-being and performance, have not been confirmed consistently. Further, the fine-grained mechanisms that explain the effects of task conflicts on employee outcomes have not been fully explored yet. This may be because most previous research relied on retrospective self-reports and the complex nature of task conflicts and their multiple emotional and cognitive consequences are difficult to disentangle in cross-sectional field studies. The first aim of my thesis was to examine the short-term effects of task conflicts by measuring conflicts using a diary approach with event-sampling methodology in the field (Study 1) and by inducing conflicts under controlled circumstances in the laboratory (Study 2). Further, previous studies mostly investigated the effects of the conflict situation on health and productivity outcomes. Hence, my second aim was to identify participant characteristics that influence the conflict evaluation in addition to the characteristics of the situation. In Study 3, we explored whether individual differences in emotional mimicry (i.e., the imitation of emotions of others) affect the evaluation of task conflicts. Finally, my last aim was to seek for strategies that help to buffer the negative effects of task conflicts. Hence, in Study 4, we investigated the effectiveness of a conflict re-evaluation (i.e., reappraisal) intervention on several (objective) indices of negative affect. Insights gained from these four studies give a more precise picture of the nature of workplace conflicts and of the modifiability of their consequences.