9.5: Unproductive Conflict

Learned Communication Responses to Conflict

Have you ever walked away from a conflict feeling bad about your behavior? You are not alone, as conflict can be a frustrating emotional experience that can bring out the worst in us. Unproductive conflict behaviors consist of learned communication responses to conflict that can damage relationships, escalate a conflict, stifle conflict resolution, and contribute to dysfunction in relationships. Unproductive conflict behaviors are often used to set up attacks in conflict. They may lead to short-term wins, but they sacrifice the health of the relationship and the self-concept of the other people in the conflict. In this section, you will first learn about the Four Horsemen of the Relationship Apocalypse, which are broad patterns of responses to conflict that harm relationships. Second, you will be introduced to unproductive communication behaviors that are ineffective for conflict resolution.

Four Horsemen of the Relationship Apocalypse

Imagine that you are about to get married, and a family member comes to you and tells you that they can predict whether or not you will be divorced in five years. Would you like to know their prediction? While much of interpersonal research has focused on what we can do with our communication to have happy relationships, researcher John Gottman has made a career of studying communication behaviors that sabotage our closest relationships and what we can do to change these negative patterns. He has identified four communication styles that can predict the end of a relationship due to their unproductive and dysfunctional nature (Gottman & Driver, 2005; Gottman, 2014). He calls them the Four Horsemen of the Relational Apocalypse: criticism, contempt, stonewalling, and defensiveness. These four forms of communication can sabotage your successful management of conflict.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): The Four Horsemen are used by permission from The Gottman Institute. Image by Julie Schwartz Gottman, John Gottman, and The Gottman Institute. Source: The Four Horsemen: The Antidotes.

Criticism

This occurs when we publicly or privately call out someone’s faults in a negative manner. In Figure 9.5.1, criticism is described as verbally attacking someone's character or personality. In relationships, it can be necessary to offer feedback, share complaints, or offer a critique. However, criticism is different in that in addition to the issues being discussed, it relies on making a personal attack on the other person's self-concept. Criticism can be private, such as between two people, or public, such as when someone criticizes their partner in front of other people. Public criticism can feel more damaging because it is shared in front of other people, causing the recipient to lose face or experience shame. Ongoing criticism can lead to conflict.

Complaint: “I feel frustrated because you keep buying candy for the kids. I thought we agreed that we are going to try to limit how much candy they eat.”

Criticism: “You are a horrible partner and parent. Not only do you not honor our agreement, but you are also encouraging unhealthy eating habits in our kids by loading them up with sugar.”

Contempt

This refers to the extreme dislike of another person and may include negative verbal and nonverbal expressions towards another person. Figure 9.5.1 captures that contempt leads to attacks, insults, and abuse. Specific communication messages that fall under contempt include insults, mockery, sarcasm, disapproval, judgment, name-calling, and negative labels (Gottman, 1994). Nonverbal indicators of contempt include eye-rolling, facial expressions indicating disgust and anger (such as the nose wrinkle), and aggressive hand gestures. Contempt is considered to be one of the most corrosive behaviors for relationships.

Consider this exchange between David and Stephanie, where Stephanie’s response indicates she is feeling contempt for David.

David: “I would like us to take another look at our family budget. I am worried that our family is making too many materialistic purchases that are not in our family's best interest.”

Stephanie: “Hah! Are you suggesting I’m materialistic? Give me a break (rolling eyes)! If you learned to manage your money better and figure out a simple budget, I wouldn’t have to break my back trying to support this family. I should have listened to my family when they told me you were going to bleed me dry financially.”

Defensiveness

This is a common response to feedback and criticism. Figure 9.5.1 identifies that when people are defensive, they assume the role of the victim and try to reverse the blame. Rather than listening and considering the feedback, the recipient tries to protect themselves by making excuses, denying responsibility, blaming and or accusing the other person, justifying their behavior, or offering a counter-criticism. The problem is that deflecting criticism with defensiveness leaves conflict issues unresolved. Gottman found that there are specific communication behaviors that trigger defensiveness, including negative mind-reading and the speaker's tone of voice. Negative mind-reading occurs when someone makes negative attributions about our thoughts, motives, and behavior, such as “You always put yourself first and you never think about how I feel.” Negative mind-reading is further exacerbated by a negative tone of voice, which can receive a different response than if the message was delivered with a neutral or positive tone of voice.

Stonewalling

This occurs when the receiver emotionally or physically withdraws from the interaction, closing themselves off from the other person because they feel overwhelmed. Stonewalling is a form of avoidance that is often a response to criticism and contempt. As Figure 9.5.1 indicates, stonewalling is used to create distance, indicate disapproval, and create separation. According to Gottman, it is common for people to become physiologically flooded during conflict exchanges (in other words, overcome with negative emotions), which leaves them needing a break from the interaction. When we use stonewalling as a response, we tend to stop listening, try to change or avoid the subject, and physically turn away from the other person. Nonverbal indicators of stonewalling include a lack of eye contact, minimal facial expressions, head movement, and vocalizations.

For example, consider the situation of Rebecca and Javier, the happy new parents of a baby boy. Javier’s mother lives just five minutes away from the new parents and has taken to dropping in daily to visit her grandson. Rebecca is frustrated by the unannounced visits and would like Javier to intervene with his mother. Javier believes his mom just wants to help and feels trapped between his wife and mother. The next time that Rebecca brings up the issue, Javier is overwhelmed with feelings of guilt. Rather than dealing with the problem, he tells Rebecca that he does not have time to discuss the issue and he leaves for a walk. Continued unresolved conflict may lead to defensiveness.

Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): Four horsemen of the apocalypse by Humber Museums Partnership from Flickr is licensed CC BY NC SA

Communication Barriers to Conflict Management

Now that you understand the Four Horsemen of the Relationship Apocalypse and the negative communication patterns that can harm relationships, let’s examine some specific unproductive responses to conflict. Increasing your awareness of unproductive conflict can help you recognize how these behaviors can create negative conflict spirals, identify these behaviors in your interactions with others, and promote awareness of alternative, more collaborative and peaceful, responses.

Gunnysacking

A gunnysack is a large burlap sack. In the world of conflict, gunnysacking refers to storing up one’s grievances and unloading them all at once at a later date on the other party. For example, consider the couple Erin and Gavin who have been dating for two years. Erin would like to discuss the future of their relationship, but Gavin, in a defensive response, uses gunnysacking and starts to unload all sorts of grievances, such as Erin’s money and time management, and lack of cooking skills, as reasons he is not ready to discuss the future of their relationship. Erin is caught off guard and is curious why she hasn’t been made aware of these issues before this time. Another conflict behavior that is closely related to gunnysacking is known as kitchen sinking.

Kitchen Sinking

Whereas with gunnysacking people store up their grievances to unload them at a later date, kitchen sinking refers to bringing up past conflicts, even those resolved, to gain leverage in the conflict. The challenge created by kitchen sinking is that it can distract from the conflict at hand by bringing up the past.

Blame

Some conflicts have a clearly identifiable source, but often there are multiple causes for the conflicts we experience. Blame, or trying to place responsibility for the conflict on another person, is primarily only effective in making the other party feel defensive. In the landmark book Getting to yes the authors recommend separating people from the issues. In other words, rather than blaming the other person, recognize that we all play a part in the conflict process and that we must isolate the conflict as the source of the problem, not the other party (Fisher et al., 2011).

Beltlining

This refers to a boxing move that means to hit below the belt. In terms of conflict, this metaphor refers to using intimate information against each other to cause hurt and anger. For example, Annabelle and Ariana are having a conflict over their friendship and Ariana beltlines Annabelle with this comment: “You have often wondered why you don’t have more friends. Based on how you are acting right now, I don’t need to wonder anymore.”

Force

In January of 2021, Kanye West made headlines when he dropped a new song with the lyrics “God saved me from that crash / just so I can beat Pete Davidson’s a**.” We live in a society where images of force are often glorified not only in song lyrics, but also in movies, gaming, and professional fighting. Unfortunately, the use of force to control conflict is too common in interpersonal relationships. Force refers to using physical pressure to exert control in conflict exchanges and can include both exertions directed at inanimate objects, such as throwing and breaking a vase, or physical assault against another person. Of all the unproductive conflict behaviors listed here, this one is the most harmful and dangerous. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence Statistics (2015), 21% of college students report dating violence by a current partner, and 32% of college students have experienced dating violence from a previous romantic partner.

Manipulation

This unproductive conflict strategy includes one party being extremely charming and even generous to help sway the conflict outcome in their direction. For example, Ian wants to buy a new surfboard. To soften up his wife, Lily, for the big purchase, he makes favorite dinner and brings home a bouquet of roses, thinking that she won’t say no after he was so “considerate.” However, if Lily finds out that Ian was merely being nice to gain an advantage, this may harm the trust in their relationship over the long run.

Personal Rejection

This occurs when one party in the conflict withholds love, affection, and attention from the other party. The strategy is designed to reject the other person in hopes that they will give in to the other person and come back to reconcile. For example, after a family conflict with his parents, Darren refuses to accept holiday gifts from his parents for his kids and sends them back, unopened.

Counterpunch

This is a defensive response to conflict whereby rather than responding to the initial topic of conflict, the other person reacts by sharing their own, often unrelated criticism. For example, Sara asks Ethan to make a better effort cleaning up after himself in the kitchen. Rather than responding to Sara’s request, Ethan responds with, “If you were a better cook, it might motivate me to clean up my dishes.”

Labeling

This occurs when you assign negative terms to the other person’s behavior. We can do this internally by just thinking about it in our heads, or externally by sharing our labels with others, or by labeling the other person during our interaction. Not only can labels be extremely hurtful, but when we use labels to assign meaning to the behavior of other people, we begin to view those people through the labels. For example, Mason works up the courage to tell their father that they do not want to go into the family business, but instead would like to go to college. His father, who is extremely disappointed, responds by telling Mason that they are “ungrateful,” “selfish,” and a “bad son.”

Silencers

These behaviors can stifle and silence the conflict, such as crying, yelling, and heavy breathing. When conflict escalates quickly, parties may use silencers to deflect attention away from the conflict issue and instead make the conflict about the silencers. For example, let’s say that friends Jasmine and Sam are having a conflict over money. Jasmine assertively tells Sam that she expects to be repaid for the money she lent them. Rather than responding to Jasmine’s request, Sam begins crying and suggests that Jasmine is a bully for bringing up the topic. The conflict now becomes about Jasmine’s approach and Sam’s crying; the money problem is left without being addressed.

As we can see, there are a variety of ways we can worsen conflict, hurt the other person, and hurt our relationships. It is now time to turn our attention to positive communication behaviors that you can use to resolve your differences.