HDF 337 1st EditionExam # 2 Study Guide Lectures: 9 - 17Note: The information included in this study guide is chosen based on the study guide the class was provided by the professor. Please use this asa supplement to your class notes and readings. The topics written in red are included in the professor’s study guide. Additionally, the exam will cover both material covered in class as well as from the assigned readings. I answer the study guide questions using information from both lecture and the readings and will include the page numbers where you can find the information next to each question in blue.Conflict and Aggression (Chapter 8 and pp. 127-135 from Chapter 3)Lectures 9 and 10 (February 19th and 24th)1. How did Lewin define conflict? (p. 264)A definition of conflict begins with the recognition that participants in social interaction have goals. These goals need not be conscious, they may be specific or general, and they may be short-term or long-term in nature. Conflict arises when one person pursues his or her goals and in doing so interferes with the other person’s goals. The goals can be trivial or monumental, and the people can be keenly aware of them or barely able to articulate them, but the main idea is that conflict arises from goal interference. This interference can be direct or indirect. Responses to this interference can vary in many ways.Key implications:1) Conflicts between people (conflicts of interest) are inevitable, and are particularly likely when the two people are highly interdependent and in frequent contact (conflict is common)2) Responses to conflicts can vary. Conflict need not be adversarial or destructive; we must focus on howconflict is managed to understand why it is sometimes destructive. What matters is how couples respondto conflict.2. What does social learning theory say about relationship development? (p. 114; 266)People learn about their relationships from their experience of each interaction with their partners, suchthat positive interactions strengthen initial satisfaction, whereas negative interactions and unresolved conflicts decrease satisfaction.Fundamental Assumption #1: Behavioral interactions define a relationship (the ongoing exchange of behaviors between partners is the essence of any interpersonal relationship).*Any factor that influences relationships does so by influencing the behaviors exchanged between partners (variables like values, personality, etc. are important as they affect the way partners treat and react to each other)Fundamental Assumption #2: Our behavior is molded and shaped within relationships (partners learn from their experiences in each interaction about the quality of their relationship).*Rewards and punishments affect subsequent behaviors*Relationships deteriorate because partners do not have the skills needed to manage conflicts. Poor behaviors are rewarded. Mismanaged conflict breeds further conflict (the doubts of less satisfied couples lead to negative interactions, confirming their fears, and contributing to distressin the relationship)-Inevitably, couples have wants and needs that conflict. Distress results from couples’ aversive and ineffectual responses to conflict. When conflicts arise, one or both partners may respond aversively by nagging, complaining, distancing, or becoming violent until the other gives in, creating a coercive cycle that each partner contributes to and maintains.*On the other hand, the confidence of satisfied couples leads to rewarding interactions, strengthening their confidence and satisfaction in the relationship.3. Why would destructive behaviors be reinforced in relationships (e.g., what is the coercion trap)? (p. 115)Partners may inadvertently reinforce each other’s negative behaviors by giving in only when the partner’s negative behavior has grown particularly intense.Example 1: One partner wants the other to do some unpleasant chore. The requesting partner asks nicely at first, and is ignored. Then the partner asks a little less nicely, but is still ignored. Finally, the partner is reduced to nagging and demanding whereupon the other partner finally complies and completes the chore. *When one partner has to nag before the other partner agrees to a desired change, that partner is reinforced for nagging and thus nagging will probably recur. Example 2: ~Carol asks Ted to do some chore. Ted agrees  Carol is rewarded for asking and Ted is rewarded for agreeing but doing nothing.~A week later Carol becomes more insistent. Ted agrees and apologizes  Carol is again rewarded for insisting and Ted is rewarded for making false promises.~A month later Carol explodes when she realizes the chore has not been done. Ted does the chore  Carol is rewarded for exploding and is more likely to do this in the future, even when Ted initially agrees to do something. She sees Ted as unreliable, selfish, careless with money. Ted resents this, sees her as controlling and a nag. Distrust starts to grow.4. How is conflict behavior studied (e.g., observed vs. self-report, content vs. affect)? (p. 267)Self-reports of conflict quickly proved inadequate. Couples are poor reporters of their own behaviors. To understand conflict, we must observe it directly. Locate happy and unhappy couples. In a controlled setting, ask each couple to identify a source of tension and work toward resolving it. HOW couples talk about the disagreement is assumed to be more important than the topic itself. Divide interactions into “speaking turns” and assign each turn a code, using trained raters, noting both what they said (content) and how they said it (affect – the feeling or emotional expression/tone of verbal communication). Distinguish between verbal ‘content’ codes and nonverbal ‘affect’ codes. Code for sequences of behavior.5. How do happy and unhappy coupes differ when discussing conflict issues? (p. 270)1. Unhappy couples express less positive behavior and more negative behavior with each.*Unhappy couples are 10x more likely to use a negative tone of voice as are happy couples in disagreement situations.*Kitchen-Sinking: bringing up all kinds of unrelated issues at the same time; partners throw accusations at each other that have little to do with the disagreement at hand*Presumptive Attributions: i.e., mind-reading*Prescription: demanding/ordering another person on what they should do in a situation*Hostile Questions: lawyering questions/asking questions you already know