The Journal of Psychology

ISSN: 0022-3980 (Print) 1940-1019 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjrl20

Personality Correlates of Verbal Conflict Resolution Douglass R. Bloomfield & Kenneth A. Blick To cite this article: Douglass R. Bloomfield & Kenneth A. Blick (1975) Personality Correlates of Verbal Conflict Resolution, The Journal of Psychology, 90:1, 45-49, DOI: 10.1080/00223980.1975.9923924 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1975.9923924

Published online: 02 Jul 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjrl20 Download by: [University of Birmingham]

Date: 05 November 2015, At: 16:23

Rblished as a separate and in The Journal of Psychology, 1975, 90, 45-49.

PERSONALITY CORRELATES O F VERBAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION"' University of Richmond

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 16:23 05 November 2015

DOUGLASS R. BLOOMFIELD*AND KENNETHA. BLICK3 SUMMARY The scores on 11 Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey scales and the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale of 80 male and female college students were related in four multiple regression analyses to verbal conflict resolution times for approach-approach, avoidance-avoidance, double approach-avoidance, and average time for all conflicts. The multiple correlations were not significant; however, an analysis of 56 Ss who gave more than four question-mzrk responses on any one Guilford-Zimmerman factor produced three significant multiple correlations. A tentative personality profile of the slow conflict resolver emerged low score on the Personal Relations and Socialibility scales. A subtle subject-experimenter interaction was proposed as an explanation of the results. A. INTRODUCTION In an attempt to fuse two separate areas of research, manifest anxiety and conflict resolution, Fracher and Blick (3) examined the effect of extremes on the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale on speed of motor conflict resolution. Using a variation of the motor conflict board, Fracher and Blick exposed high anxious and low anxious college students to approachapproach (AP-AP), avoidance-avoidance (AV-AV), and double approachavoidance @AP-AV) motor conflicts. The salient result was that high anxious Ss took significantly longer to resolve all three conflicts than did low anxious Ss. The authors concluded that performance in the motor conflict situation was adversely affected by level of manifest anxiety.

* Received imthe Editorial Office on February 5, 1975, and published immediately at Provincetown, Massachusetts. Copyright by The Journal Press. This research was supported in part by a Faculty Research Grant from the University of Richmond. Now at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Requests for reprints should be directed to the second author at the address shown at the end of this article.

'

45

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 16:23 05 November 2015

46

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

In addition to relating their findings to the general area of manifest anxiety, Fracher and Blick pointed out several lines of follow-up research. Pursuant to one of their suggestions, the present study was designed to evaluate the role of personality variables as they relate to the verbal conflict situation. The basic idea was to identify individuals who respond with indecision and vacillation and individuals who respond with dispatch and alacrity. To this end, the Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey [GZTS (2)] and the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale [TMAS (4)] were selected as psychometric measures to be included in a multiple-regression analysis with verbal conflict resolution time. B. METHOD 1. Subjects

The original sample consisted of 222 male and female college students who comprised six introductory psychology classes and one developmental class at the University of Richmond. Participation in the research project was a requirement of each course. 2 . Apparatus

The verbal conflict apparatus has been described in detail by Brame and Blick (1). Basically, the apparatus consisted of a plywood platform divided in the middle by a vertical partition. This partition contained three horizontal slots which allowed 3 x 5 index cards to be exchanged by E and S. As cards were inserted through the center slot toward S, a silent digital timer was activated automatically by a switch in the slot. A switch in either the left or right slot deactivated the timer when S passed a card back to E . The verbal conflicts were typed on 3 x 5 index cards. Across the top of each card was typed the following: “Would you rather be?”, and the alternatives were presented on the left and right sides below the question. The conflicts appeared in the three formats of AP-AP, AV-AV, and DAPAV; and each conflict statement contained 12 words. An example of the AP-AP conflict was the following: “Would you rather be? more confident than you are nowlmore honest than you are now.” The AV-AV format was produced by substituting the word less for more. The DAP-AV alternatives read as follows: “more honest but less healthy/more healthy but less honest than now.” The verbal conflicts were formed by pairing personal characteristic ad-

DOUGLASS R. BLOOMFIELD AND KENNETH A. BLICK

47

jectives in the following combinations: honest/intelligent, intelligent/ healthy, well-adjustedlconfident, sincerekonfident, well-adjusted/healthy, confidenffhonest, sincere/honest, healthy/sincere, confidenffhealthy, and honesffhealthy. Each pair was cast into the AP-AP, AV-AV, and DAP-AV form, giving a total of 30 conflicts. Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 16:23 05 November 2015

3. Procedure

In the first phase of the study the GZTS was administered to each psychology class during a regular class period. For the second phase of the study Ss reported individually to the Department of Psychology where they participated in the verbal conflict resolution tasks and then took the TMAS. Of the 222 Ss who completed the GZTS, 198 came in for conflict resolution and TMAS testing. For the individual conflict resolution task, Ss were instructed that they would receive index cards through the center slot of the apparatus. They were told to read the conflict statement and select an alternative resolution. If they chose the left alternative, they were to return the card through the slot to their left. The right alternative was to be passed through the slot on their right. Additional instructions were as follows: “Imagine that each conflict really confronts you. Be sure that your choice is one you would make if you r e d y had to decide. Take as much time or as little time with each card as you like.” The deck of 30 conflict cards was shuffled by E before administration to each S. Resolution time was recorded to the nearest hundredth of a second for each codict. Following completion of the verbal conflict task, S was given the TMAS in another experimental room. The student was told that he had to complete a simple SO-item test, and there was never any mention that the test measured manifest anxiety.

C. RESULTS A criterion for invalidation of GZTS results was set at greater than four question-mark responses on any one factor. Accordingly, of the 198 Ss who completed the GZTS, TMAS, and conflict resolution phases, 56 Ss were eliminated on the basis of their question-mark responses. The mean and SD Gross Falsification (GF is used as an indicator of whether or not S answered the GZTS accurately) score of the remaining 142 Ss was calculated. Males averaged 8.97 G F responses with an SD of 3.24, while the females averaged 10.40 with an SD of 4.40. Dropping from the final

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 16:23 05 November 2015

48

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

analysis any individual G F score that was greater than 2 SDs above the mean resulted in the elimination of an additional three males and two males. There remained 137 Ss, 71 males and 66 females, who both satisfied GZTS criteria and had participated in the conflict resolution and TMAS phases of the study. Eighty of these Ss were randomly selected to be used in the multiple regression analysis, and the remaining 5 7 Ss were reserved for cross-validation purposes. Multiple regressions were performed with use of the following scores as predictor variables: the TMAS score; the Gross Falsification score; and 10 additional GZTS scale scores-General Activity, Restraint, Ascendance, Sociability, Emotional Stability, Objectivity, Friendliness, Thoughtfulness, Personal Relations, and Masculinity. The 12 predictor variables were correlated with each of following conflict resolution time scores: AP-AP, AV-AV, DAP-AV, and an average score (TOTAL) for all three conflicts. None of the four multiple correlations approached significance; consequently, a cross-validation using the 57 Ss reserved for this purpose was nor performed. The 10 GZTS scale scores and the TMAS score of the 56 5’s who were initially eliminated because they had more than four question marks on any one GZTS factor were put into a multiple regression analysis with each of the four conflict scores. The multiple correlations involving AP-AP, DAP-AV, and TOTAL scores were .64, .60, and .64, respectively, and were significant at the 5% level of confidence. The Personal Relations factor consistently accounted for the largest proportion of variance in all three regressions. The factors of Masculinity and Sociability appeared as significant predictors, also. D. DISCUSSION The original four multiple regressions, which turned out to be insignificant, can be interpreted as providing no support for personality correlates of verbal conflict behavior. Perhaps, conflict resolution, as simulated in the present study, is a situational phenomenon and cannot logically be correlated with stable personality factors like those reflected on the GZTS. It became clear that maybe Ss who were eliminated from the initial regression analysis because of excessive question-mark responses (greater than four) on any GZTS factor were actually persons who avoided a yes or no conflict situation by responding with a question-mark answer. Conse-

Downloaded by [University of Birmingham] at 16:23 05 November 2015

DOUGLASS R. BLOOMFIELD AND KENNETH A. BLICK

49

quently, their GZTS and TMAS scores were related to the four conflict times, and three significant multiple correlations resulted. It is possible to construct a tentative personality profile of high question-mark Ss as it relates to their conflict behavior. A high Personal Relations score indicates tolerance and understanding of other people, whereas a low score indicates fault finding and criticalness of other people and institutions. A high Sociability score reflects a person at ease with others, easy to get to know, while a low score indicates a withdrawn, introverted individual. Since the regression analysis included both men and women, any interpretation of the Masculinity scale is rendered invalid. The profile that emerged suggests that low Personal Relations and Sociability scores were indicative of the slow conflict resolver. This could be the result of a subtle S-E interaction. A very rough hypothesis would be that persons scoring high on these two factors could have interpreted speedy resolution as a means of pleasing E thereby winning his approval. Although E was careful to give no indication to S as to what type of resolution was desired and was partially shielded from S’s view by a partition, S could still have imposed his own standards and performed accordingly. At least the hypothesis is open to experimental evaluation and presents an avenue for future research. REFERENCES 1. 2.

BRAME,J. M., & BLICK,K. A. Absolute and relative bidirectional transfer in verbal conflict resolution tasks. J . of Psychol., 1974, 88, 113-119. Bmos, 0. K. Personality Tests and Reviews. Highland Park, N. J.: Gryphon Press, 1970.

Pp. 49-52.

FRACHER, J. C., & BLICK,K. A. Speed of motor conflict resolution as related to type of confiict and manifest anxiety. J . of Psychol., 1973, 83, 277-285. J. A. A personality scale of manifest anxiety. J . Abn. 6.SOC.Psychol., 1953, 4. TAYLOR,

3.

48, 285-290.

Department of Psychology University of Richmond Richmond, Virginia 231 73

Personality correlates of verbal conflict resolution.

The scores on 11 Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey scales and the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale of 80 male and female college students were relate...
357KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views