Conflict parties demand respect from their opponents and suggest it benefits conflict transformation. This raises questions about the role of respect in conflict and why conflict parties care more about respect than about positive evaluations such as liking. I began by exploring the concept and a general definition: Respect has positive valence, involves positive value judgments, bestows influence, and has a moral quality. The definition maps onto Janoff-Bulman and Werther’s distinction between basic, generally-assumed, morality-based categorical respect, which grants targets basic rights, and exclusive, mainly competence-based contingent respect, which imparts further influence including decision power. In Study 1 a content analysis of respect and disrespect episodes described by 75 undergraduate students provided support for the definition and the distinction. Next, respect was theoretically and empirically distinguished from liking. In Study 2, 45 undergraduates were asked about individuals they respected, liked, respected but did not like, and liked but did not respect (within-subject design). As predicted, Ps judged respected targets as more competent and moral, but liked targets as somewhat warmer. To test respect benefits in conflict both for targets and “respecters,” Study 3 led 82 female students to believe they would have a dialogue about a moral topic (gay marriage), for which they had indicated firm convictions in a prescreening. Ps first received a description of their ostensible dialogue partner’s views, which were manipulated to oppose Ps’ opinions respectfully, oppose them disrespectfully, oppose them without mentioning respect, or match them. Although strongest effects were found for matching (vs. opposing) views, respect (vs. disrespect) was also beneficial, especially when controlling for Ps’ perceptions of similarity with the “respecters.” Benefits included more positive emotions; improved judgments of the “respecter” regarding morality, competence, warmth, and openness in dialogue; and increased reciprocated respect. Regression analyses additionally showed that perceived respect increased a partner-considerate conflict style and tended to increase the time Ps offered for the dialogue. Comparisons to the respect-neutral condition showed that the disrespect (vs. respect) condition primarily drove the effects. Controlling for liking left (dis)respect effects largely unaffected, suggesting both concepts are indeed distinct.

In five multi-method studies this dissertation examined how context based morality may explain increased incidence of combat related psychological difficulties among US service personnel. We were particularly interested in the relationship between causing harm to others and moral self-perceptions and related emotional consequences. In studies 1 and 2 we found that our samples of Iraq and Afghan war veterans reported that a soldier would feel increased levels of guilt and shame and negative moral judgments of the self when they return home and reflect on incidents of harm that may have occurred during their deployments. These two studies were supported by three short experiments showing that different moral judgments of harm were made depending on whether the harm doing was interpersonal or intergroup. Interpersonal harm doing was judged more harshly than intergroup harm leading us to believe that while in combat harm doing had minimal consequences on the self-perceptions and emotions of a soldier and that when they returned home to civilian life where interpersonal moral standards are more prevalent their self-perceptions and emotional wellbeing was affected by their prior conduct.

<p> Conflict management style preference and use of mediation within the Black population in the United States (US) is not well understood. The purpose of this study is to find out if there is a significant difference in conflict management style preference and use of mediation by African Americans and Afro-Caribbean (Jamaicans) living in the United States. Based on Hofstede's theory of individualism-collectivism cultural orientation, the US culture emphasizes individualism while Jamaica&rsquo;s culture emphasizes collectivism. Responses were collected from 108 African American and Jamaican respondents anonymously, of which 96 were deemed usable. The Rahim (1983) Organizational Conflict Management Style Inventory was used to collect data on the five styles and was analyzed with the appropriate statistic test. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the text-based data gathered from the two open-ended questions at the end of the survey. The thematic analysis revealed two major themes: personal and workplace relationship conflict situations. It is recommended that future study includes three groups of Blacks instead of two groups. The preferred conflict management style from the combined group result is the compromising style. A significant difference was found in the obliging and compromising conflict management styles between African Americans and Jamaicans. No significant difference was found between the groups&rsquo; conflict management style and willingness to use mediation. The open-ended questions and individual textual description of conflict experience and willingness to use mediation were used to clarify the quantitative results and provide a better understanding of the similarities and differences among people of African descent from different cultural orientations.</p><p>