1.2.3 Interpersonal issues and social behaviour

Interpersonal Issues: Person Perception, Affiliation and Friendship

Types of interpersonal conflicts:

Interpersonal conflict is any type of conflict that involves two or more people. Workplace conflicts arise whenever two or more people express different points of view. This can happen between co-workers, managers or clients and customers. To understand interpersonal conflicts and how best to approach a resolution, it’s important to consider every type. Here are the four types of interpersonal conflicts:

(1) Pseudo-conflicts: arise when two parties want different things and can’t come to an agreement. If two team leaders are working on a project but one wants everyone to take notes on a computer and the other wants everyone to use pen and paper, this would be a pseudo-conflict. Their desire to approach a project in two different ways and failing to see eye-to-eye is the reason for the conflict.

(2) Policy-related interpersonal conflict: When conflict relates to a decision or situation that involves both parties, it can be a policy-related interpersonal conflict. For example, if a leader assigns a work project to a team, the members of the team may disagree on the best way to complete it. When policy-related interpersonal conflicts arise in the workplace, it’s best to resolve them through compromise.

(3) Value-related interpersonal conflicts: Sometimes conflicts occur between two people when they have different underlying value systems. This kind of conflict can be hard to identify when it first occurs because the people who are in the conflict often think the other party is being stubborn or disagreeable, wherein they just have different underlying values. One colleague may put such a high value on their time outside of the office that they refuse to check e-mails or be reachable during non-office hours.

(4) Ego-related interpersonal conflicts: In ego conflicts, losing the argument has the potential to damage a person’s pride. Sometimes ego conflicts arise when many small conflicts are unresolved. One example of ego-related interpersonal conflict results is if one co-worker is already sensitive about a manager favouring another employee. If the manager then asks both parties for their opinion, the co-worker who is already sensitive about the manager favouring the other employee might say or represent his or her bigger feelings about the manager’s favouring. This would escalate the conflict further than the situation might warrant.

Potential resolution methods:

Withdrawal: Withdrawal avoids conflict, and this method may be helpful for intense conflicts or minor disagreements that may not warrant thorough discussions. For example, it may not be productive to argue with a co-worker about whether hot or iced coffee is better.

Accommodation: Accommodation is a conflict resolution method in which you consider the other person’s needs over your own. For example, you may enact accommodation in a conflict over an office re-design by letting a colleague make the colour scheme decisions.

Competition: Those who choose the competition resolution to strive to convince others to see why their perspective is best. For example, during a road construction project, you may argue for more safety measures and provide safety data to support your claim.

Compromise: When you choose a compromise, both parties work to find a solution that satisfies everyone. For example, during the office re-design, your colleague may choose the colour scheme while you choose the new furniture.

Collaboration: Though collaboration often takes more time and effort than other resolution methods, it may provide more long-term benefits. When your team has the time, choosing collaboration can help build relationships and communication skills.

Attribution Theory, ‘Naive Psychology’ and the Fundamental Attribution Error

Attribution theory formally described by Fiske and Taylor in 1991 is: “Attribution theory deals with how the social perceiver uses the information to arrive at causal explanations for events.  It examines what information is gathered and how it is combined to form a causal judgment”.

Dispositional (internal) attribution:

Dispositional attribution is where an individual’s actions are explained by their personality, beliefs, or opinions. In other words, something that is inherently characteristic of that person. For instance, Johnny may always insist on putting his socks on before his pants because it brings him good luck.

Situational (external) attribution:

Situational attribution is where an individual’s actions are explained by their environment, people, or perhaps their circumstances. In other words, their actions are driven by external factors from them as a person. For instance, Jill loses her temper with one of the staff at the shop. However, she had just been fired which resulted in an emotional reaction.

‘Naive psychology’:

In social psychology, naive psychology (realism) is the human tendency to believe that we see the world around us objectively and that people who disagree with us must be uninformed, irrational, or biased.

Naive psychology provides a theoretical basis for several cognitive biases, which are systematic errors when it comes to thinking and making decisions. These include the:

• False consensus effect – the tendency to see one’s own behavioural choices and judgements as common and appropriate to present circumstances while viewing alternative responses as uncommon.
• Actor-observer bias – a tendency to attribute one’s own actions to external causes while attributing other people’s behaviours to internal causes.
• Bias blind spot – the tendency of recognizing the impact of biases on the judgment of others, while failing to see the impact of biases on one’s own judgment.
• Fundamental attribution error

The term was coined by social psychologist Lee Ross in the 1990s. It is related to the philosophical concept of naive realism, which is the concept that our senses allow us to perceive objects directly, without any intervening processes. Against this concept, it was argued in the mid-20th century that perception is inherently subjective.

Fundamental attribution error:

The fundamental attribution error refers to an individual’s tendency to attribute another’s actions to their character or personality while attributing their behaviour to external situational factors outside of their control. Overestimating elements of a person’s personality while at the same time, underestimating situational factors has been a pervasive problem in Western culture when trying to explain the cause of an event or behaviour. The fundamental attribution error often distorts an observer’s judgment of an individual.

Social Behaviour in Social Interactions

Social interactions are defined as the acts, actions, or practices of two or more people that are mutually oriented towards each other’s selves, that is, any behaviour that attempts to influence or take into account each other’s subjective experiences or intentions.

All behaviour that influences or is influenced by other members of the same species is considered social behaviour.

Individual interactions are characterized by social behaviour. These can be aggressive, cooperative, altruistic, or parental. Individuals form social relationships when they interact repeatedly with strangers, relatives, members of the same or opposite sex, and members of the same or different generations. Sets of consistent social relationships generate social systems or social organizations that can be variations on monogamous or polygamous themes of sexual relations.

What is an example of social behaviour?

The tendency for humans to look to others for clues on how to act in a situation. For example, people tend to follow each other to find an exit in a fire even if they have knowledge of the layout of the building themselves

Interpersonal conflict refers to any type of conflict involving two or more people. It’s different from an intrapersonal conflict, which refers to an internal conflict with yourself.

Mild or severe, interpersonal conflict is a natural outcome of human interaction. People have very different personalities, values, expectations, and attitudes toward problem-solving. When you work or interact with someone who doesn’t share your opinions or goals, conflict can result.

‘Theory of Mind’ as it Might Apply to Pervasive Developmental and Personality Disorders

The ability to attribute mental states to ourselves and others is known as the ‘Theory of Mind’. In other terms ‘Theory of Mind’ refers to the ability to understand that other people have their own thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and perspectives that are distinct from our own. It is a crucial aspect of social cognition and is thought to develop in humans around the age of 4 years old. It is one of the essential elements of social interaction. ‘Theory of mind’ is a complex aspect of social cognition that is preserved in dreaming despite notable degradation of reasoning about the physical.

Numerous empirical investigations show that this capacity emerges in toddlers as young as 15 months old and declines with age. This skill has been demonstrated in apes as well. Some people with autism, Asperger’s syndrome, schizophrenia, depression, or social anxiety disorder have a problem with the ‘theory of mind’ and do badly on associated tasks.

In individuals with pervasive developmental disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the ‘Theory of mind’ can be impaired, leading to difficulties in social interactions and communication. People with autism may have difficulty understanding the mental states of others and predicting their behaviour, which can impact their ability to engage in social relationships.

Personality disorders, such as borderline personality disorder (BPD), can also be associated with impairments in the ‘Theory of mind’. People with BPD may have difficulty understanding the perspectives and emotions of others and may struggle to regulate their own emotions in response to social cues. This can lead to difficulties in interpersonal relationships and impulsive or erratic behaviour.

It is important to note that the relationship between ‘Theory of mind’ and developmental and personality disorders is complex and multifaceted and that these disorders are typically characterized by a range of symptoms and behaviours beyond impairments in ‘Theory of mind’. Further research is needed to fully understand the role of ‘Theory of Mind’ in these disorders and to develop effective interventions to support individuals affected by them.

Having a ‘Theory of Mind’ is crucial because it allows you to predict and understand the behaviour of others. Throughout infancy and childhood, children develop the skills they’ll need to develop their own theory of mind. A false-belief task, intended to examine a child’s knowledge that other people can have views about the world that contradict reality, is the conventional test for ‘Theory of Mind’.

Autism:

Although research shows that humans have the ability to understand the ‘theory of mind’, some are more capable than others. Children with autism, a spectrum disorder characterised by difficulties with social skills, repetitive activities, and nonverbal communication (Hodges, 2020), have a deficit in ‘theory of mind’ abilities.

In an original study done by Simon Baron-Cohen, 80% of people with autism failed a false belief task (1985). While further research backs up this assertion, it also shows that children with autism can pass false belief tasks when expressly instructed to do so, in contrast to five-year-old children who can do so naturally.

The distinction is that persons with autism cannot demonstrate spontaneous false belief attribution outside of the lab context (Senju, 2012). On the neurological side, children and adults with autism have reduced activation in brain regions related to the ‘theory of mind’, such as the medial prefrontal cortex and temporoparietal junction (Castelli et al., 2002).

Schizophrenia:

Patients suffering from schizophrenia, a mental condition marked by a lack of contact with reality, also struggle with the ‘theory of mind’. A meta-analysis published in 2007 found that patients with schizophrenia had a consistent deficiency in the ‘theory of mind’, as indicated by their consistently low performance on false belief tasks (Sprong et al., 2007).

Furthermore, schizophrenics, like people with autism and Asperger’s, have lower recruitment of the mPFC during false belief tasks (Dodell-Feder, 2014).

Depression and anxiety:

Patients suffering from depression also struggle with the ‘theory of mind’ and have impairments in integrating contextual information about other people, as well as deficiencies in ‘theory of mind’ (Wolkenstein et al., 2011).

According to a 2008 study, both non-psychotic and psychotic depressed people performed significantly worse on tests involving the ‘theory of mind’ social-perceptual and social-cognitive components (Wang et al., 2008).

Similarly, patients with social anxiety disorder, which is characterized by interpersonal dysfunction, are much less accurate than control groups at reading mental states (Washburn et al., 2016).

Elemental Linguistics as Applied to Interpersonal Communication

The interpersonal communication model has six major elements: a sender, a receiver, a medium, encoding and decoding, and feedback. Information flows between sender and receiver. This flow represents both the core problem and the core opportunity.

The importance of interpersonal communication:

• Improved Relationships with Family
• Improved Relationships with Friends and Lovers
• Improved Relationships with Colleagues
• Improved Physical and Emotional Health

References:

(1) Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”. Cognition, 21(1), 37-46.

(2) Berry, Z. and Frederickson, J. (2015). Explanations and implications of the fundamental attribution error: a review and proposal. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences www.JISS.org, [online] 5(1), pp.44–57. Available at: https://jiss.org/documents/volume_5/issue_1/JISS%202015%205(1)%2044-57%20FAE.pdf.

(3) Castelli, F., Frith, C., Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2002). Autism, Asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes. Brain, 125(8), 1839-1849.

(4) Dawkins, R. (2010). Robert Seyfarth: Theory of Mind. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtjLSa50uk.

(5) Dodell-Feder, D., Tully, L. M., Lincoln, S. H., & Hooker, C. I. (2014). The neural basis of theory of mind and its relationship to social functioning and social anhedonia in individuals with schizophrenia. NeuroImage: Clinical, 4, 154-163.

(6) Hodges, H., Fealko, C. and Soares, N. (2020). Autism spectrum disorder: definition, epidemiology, causes, and clinical evaluation. Translational Pediatrics, [online] 9(Suppl 1), pp.S55–S65. doi:10.21037/tp.2019.09.09.

(7) Marks, G. and Miller, N. (1987). Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), pp.72–90. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.102.1.72.

(8) Pronin, E., Lin, D.Y. and Ross, L. (2002). The Bias Blind Spot: Perceptions of Bias in Self Versus Others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(3), pp.369–381. doi:10.1177/0146167202286008.

(9) Senju, A. (2012). Spontaneous theory of mind and its absence in autism spectrum disorders. The Neuroscientist, 18(2), 108-113.

(10) Sprong, M., Schothorst, P., Vos, E., Hox, J., & Van Engeland, H. (2007). Theory of mind in schizophrenia: meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 191(1), 5-13.

(11) Wang, Y. G., Wang, Y. Q., Chen, S. L., Zhu, C. Y., & Wang, K. (2008). Theory of mind disability in major depression with or without psychotic symptoms: a componential view. Psychiatry research, 161(2), 153-161.

(12) Washburn, D., Wilson, G., Roes, M., Rnic, K., & Harkness, K. L. (2016). Theory of mind in social anxiety disorder, depression, and comorbid conditions. Journal of anxiety disorders, 37, 71-77.

(13) Wolkenstein, L., Schönenberg, M., Schirm, E. and Hautzinger, M. (2011). I can see what you feel, but I can’t deal with it: Impaired theory of mind in depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 132(1-2), pp.104–111. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2011.02.010.

(14) www.simplypsychology.org. (n.d.). Theory of Mind | Simply Psychology. [online] Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/theory-of-mind.html#problem.