CONFLICT MANAGEMENT The Psychology of conflict and conflict ...

1. CONFLICT IN THE WORKPLACE 19
Source #3: Cognitive Consistency, Social Validation, and Sociocognitive Conflicts
The third theoretical perspective on conflict that can be applied to multiple
levels of analysis is rooted in work around so-called sociocognitive
conflict. It combines early thinking by developmental and child psychologists
(e.g., Doise, Mugny, & Perret-Clermont, 1975; see also Levine, Resnick,
& Higgins, 1993) with social psychological thinking about the individual’s
need for cognitive consistency and socially validated knowledge about
oneself and the (immediate) surroundings (e.g., Festinger, 1954). Sociocognitive
conflict theory is not about scarce resources and opposing interests,
or about opposing values and the search for a positive identity. Instead,
it addresses incompatible or diverging understanding and interpretation
of facts and figures, and concerns the way people manage these conflicts
of information, as well as the consequences of such conflicts for learning,
understanding, and perceptual accuracy (e.g., Brehmer, 1976).
Sociocognitive conflict theory proceeds on the basis of three fundamental
assumptions. First, it is assumed that people are motivated to hold
accurate perceptions and insights about themselves, about others, and
about the nonsocial world around them, including the (joint) tasks they
are facing. Second, it is assumed that people are bounded in their rationality
and lack both relevant information and information-processing
capacities. As a result, different people develop distinct, diverging insights,
beliefs, and understandings of otherwise identical objects of perception.
Third, it is assumed that people seek cognitive consistency and social validation
of their beliefs, insights, and understandings, and that divergence
vis-à-vis others’ perceptions, insights, and understandings creates tension
that needs to be resolved.
Sociocognitive conflicts can be about intellective and judgmental problems.
Intellective issues have correct solutions according to commonly
accepted standards. Examples are “What is the shortest way from A to B?”
and “Which procedure is most efficient?” Judgmental issues, however,
have no correct solution and are a matter of taste. Examples are the question
of how to get from A to B, and whether efficiency should be the prevailing
criterion in selecting a procedure (cf. Baron, Kerr, & Miller, 1993;
Kaplan & Miller, 1987). Intellective issues are associated with the influence
to accept information about reality from another person (informational
influence), while judgmental problems are associated with the influence
to conform with the positive expectations of another person (normative
influence; Deutsch & Gerard, 1955). Either way, divergent viewpoints
regarding intellective or judgmental problems—sociocognitive conflict—
create cognitive dissonance that needs to be resolved by (a) persuading
the opponent, (b) changing one’s own perspective or opinion, (c) integrating
seemingly opposing viewpoints, or (d) dissolving the relationship.
Taken together, an important third source of conflict in organizations
involves opinions, insights, and beliefs that are not consensually shared
and that trigger opposition and debate (Brehmer, 1976; De Dreu et al., 1999;