Week 5: D3

Pick one concept or idea from this week’s assigned reading and discuss it.  Be sure to relate the concept/idea to you personally by using examples from your life and/or experiences.

Defensiveness is an interesting and relatable topic. It typically happens when one of the parties do not want to admit that they are sensitive to their flaw. We get defensive when it seems as if the other person is not listening to us so we attack them.

I have been in situations where the person I was in conflict with was defensive. There are times when I get defensive because I did not want to be proven wrong or I was trying to protect something.  One time when I was arguing with my friend, he started to get mad and he just did not listen to anything that I have to say. After every other sentence or so he would stop me and start talking and attacking what I have to say or defending what his thoughts were. I mean normally I would give in because I knew that maybe I was not hearing him out and I would tell him sorry. 

Week 5: D2

After reading Chapter 4 in its entirety, answer the following question: What are you thinking about when others talk?  Do you concentrate on what they are saying or do you think about your own ideas instead?  After listening to someone, can you write down most of what that person told you?  If not, why?  

Listening is important when people are caught in a conflict. The book states some interesting behavior to make one a better listener: shifting attention towards the person, looking and making eye contact with the person, and understanding the person’s feelings. I also believe that listening to help pick up the pace to resolution.

Most of the time I try really hard to listen, but it is hard. There are times when I think about my own ideas because I want to get my opinion out there and there are times when I do concentrate on what the other person is saying. I can get so caught up in trying to win the argument that I will just block out the other person. When I am able to actually listen to the other person I would remember the main points. This normally happens when I give my full attention to the other person. I can still recall what some of my friends said to me during a conflict because I gave them my undivided attention at the time. 

Week 5: D1

After reading Chapter 4 in its entirety, answer the following question: How hard is it for you to stop a conflict?  If you find it easy to not respond automatically, what advice can you give others who have trouble with this step?  Whether you find this step difficult or not, what ways do you prefer if you try to take a “time out”?

Stopping is taking some time out of the conflict. The book discuss some of the ways that one can stop in a conflict: exit temporarily to calm one self, get a glass of water and take sups of it, count backwards to 100, change the topic for a while.

I have found it difficult for me to stop a conflict. I believe that it is hard for me because I just want to win in the situation so I keep arguing. Recently I have found myself to slowing down and stopping when I need to.

Sometimes if the conflict between someone just comes up I would normally stop talking and just calm myself down for a minute or two. Many times I would not walk out of the room but instead stay there quietly; letting them know that I am not abandoning them I just need some time to think and calm myself. When it is a slight conflict I would find myself just changing the topic for a while so the argument will not get too crazy.  This does not just help me but it also helps the other person as well because it calms them down and get their mind off of the conflict for a while.

Week 4: D3

Pick one concept or idea from this week’s assigned reading and discuss it.  Be sure to relate the concept/idea to you personally by using examples from your life and/or experiences.

Under describing the dispute the term caucus was interesting. This term is used when the mediator steps aside with one of the disputant to discuss what he or she do not want the other person to know. A mediator would meet with all disputant privately so that it can help the mediator be unbiased. This also helps the parties understand and to contribute to the conversation in a more effective way. I thought this was interesting because I can relate to this concept. I often play the mediator between conflicts with my friends and I do set up meetings alone with each party to get each side of the story. Sometimes I would casually approach them and ask about how the relationship is going. Once I get them talking about it I would ask questions about if they still want to be friends with each other or not and how they have been feeling throughout this whole situation. At the end I would sometimes suggest them to talk to each other about what they are truly feeling and what they can do to compromise in the dispute. 

Week 4:D2

After reading Chapter 11 in its entirety, answer the following question: How might you use techniques such as fractionation, framing, reframing, and common ground for solving problems that don’t involve interpersonal conflicts? 

Fractionation, framing, reframing, and common ground play a good role in resolving interpersonal conflict, but these techniques can also be used to solve other problems.

Fractionation means to break down a big problem into little ones. We often can break problems down so it does not seem as overwhelming and it will also be easier to solve. For example, one might not like how the presentation of the project looks like. Instead of looking at the whole display as a problem, one should take parts of the display and figure out what makes it not pleasing, like color, placement, or the graphics.

Framing means for the mediator to ask questions so that the issue is explained with no bias or blame. In this case I might ask questions about what I should do when I have a conflicting task I need to do, like to study or to write a paper. This ties into reframing as well.

Common ground is having a basis for an agreement. With common ground, someone can use this with an intrapersonal conflict. When I am deciding on whether I should go to an all day event, I would think about the pro and cons of it. In doing so I would establish a base of what I should do, like work or homework, in order for me to go.

Week 4: D1

After reading Chapter 11 in its entirety, answer the following question: Why should communication majors make good mediators?  Why might lawyers and psychotherapists find it difficult to effectively play the role of mediator?  

A mediator is a third party of an affair with neutrality. One reason why communication majors would make a good mediator is because we understand concepts of how to communicate with people effectively. We have learned things like how to approach someone in conflicts, how to solve conflicts, how to listen, and how to have interpersonal relationships. We normally have an open mind because they are more relationship-centered, trying to restore a relationship instead of tearing it apart.

It will be hard for lawyers to play an effective role as a mediator because they might not be able to help restore communication and normalize the relationship. Lawyers will be biases because they have the their client’s or one person’s view in their mind.  A psychotherapist will not be a good mediator because this person will try to figure out the problem and will think of a way to fix the problem. As communication majors, we are to be always natural and listen to all sides of the story. 

Week 3: D3

Pick one concept or idea from this week’s assigned reading and discuss it.  Be sure to relate the concept/idea to you personally by using examples from your life and/or experiences.  

Gunny sacking means storing up anger or dissatisfaction until the person cannot hide it anymore. Normally the person will explode into anger because they cannot take what is being done anymore. This happens when a person is assertive in the conflict.

I have experience this a number of times throughout my life. A vivid memory of this was back in middle school when my teacher exploded on one of my friends. She was normally really nice and patient but one day she yelled at my friend in front of the whole class because he was being too disruptive. I remember how in shocked I was because I never seen her use such a tone on anyone. It must have been her last straw for her to yell at him like that. Afterwards he was quiet for the rest of class. I think she bottled it up every time my friend was being disruptive in class and that day she just couldn’t hide her anger anymore. Gunny sacking can be pretty scary and could be avoided by the person was not assertive in the conflict. 

Week 3: D2

After reading Chapter 3 in its entirety, answer the following question: Sometimes abusive parents say they merely teach strict discipline.  What do you think is the difference between punishing and disciplining a child?  When do people overstep their paternal authority to punish their children? 

This is a very debatable topic because there is no clear distinction definition of disciplining and punishing. A part of disciplining a child is punishment. But to me I believe punishment and discipline does not have to be abusive. Discipline means to train the child to follow certain rules. This means the parents can remind a child to follow the rules by taking away a certain toy away or lowering allowance money. Parents can use gentle words to show how a child can follow the rules.  Punishment is the penalty inflicted for a wrong behavior. A parent can punish a child with verbal as well as physical abuse. These are harsh words and pain inflicting punishment because a child did something wrong.

When parents overstep the line and become abusive to punish their child, the parent is using a self-centered aggressive orientation to deal with the conflict. They are yelling at the kid because the parents have to win. Sometimes parents will get physically abusive after the verbal abusing. I believe that a lot of parents go over to the physical abusive because they are so angry with their child.

Week 3:D1

After reading Chapter 3 in its entirety, answer the following question: In dealing with conflicts, do you find that you tend toward one orientation over another?  Are you satisfied with the outcome of conflicts when you act from this orientation?  Do you favor the orientation all the time or are there exceptions?

I believe I tend to lean more to the other-centered orientation. Most of my outcomes are I lose-You win. According to the chart I am accommodating since I tend to give in and give power to the other person. There times when I am satisfied with this orientation because I believe that it does end the conflict faster, but there are times when I am not happy with it. The reason being because I believe I actually should be the “winner” because I am right or my suggestions are better. Also it does not allow me to voice out my opinion like I should.

Most of the time I lean towards this orientation because I think I just want to accommodate to what the other person wants because I do not have interest in the topic anymore. I simply give up because I do not want to deal with the problem so to make the problem go away I give in. When I do have interest to do what I want to do I will lean toward the relationship-option, mostly with the compromise at the end of the conflict. 

Week 2: D3

Pick one concept or idea from this week’s assigned reading and discuss it.  Be sure to relate the concept/idea to you personally by using examples from your life and/or experiences.

I thought that the competitive argument concept was pretty interesting. I have seen this applied to the others as well as myself when there are conflicts. This type of argument can harm a relationship forever because there is one party who is determine to win in the argument. I think it is pretty scary to get into situations like this. Thankfully even though I have been in these types of arguments, one of us in the situation eventually gives in.  A lot of times the relationship can be saved because the other party is willing to give in or compromise with the competitive person.

I have been caught in a competitive argument numerous of times. When I got into an argument with my close friends it seems to never end because we were both competitive and we wanted to win. Of course another reason why one of us wanted to win was because we were also both stubborn and too prideful to give in. After what seem like days, one of us do eventually give in because we either know that this is not going anywhere or we are tired and someone just had to end it. Thankfully this has not destroyed our relationship because we learn to eventually give in. 

Week 2: D2

After reading Chapter 2 in its entirety, answer the following question: In what ways do you take a non-process view of communication, relationships, or conflict?  How can you change your thinking?

It took me a while to grasp this concept. I used to have the non-process view of conflict. It was definitely a struggle for me to give people benefit of the doubt, but I do believe it is much better now because I do try to have a process view. Most of the time I do give people a second chance after a conflict because I have confidence that they can change. I believe that a lot of people do have the non-process view because they do not think that things can change or there are not reasons why something is a certain way. For example I remember back in high school my teachers would always assume one of my friends would fail out of college because he was lazy and he would party his life away. They had this assumption because they saw the pattern of life he was living in high school. I have to say as of right now he is still in school and he is not partying his life way.

A way that I can change my thinking is that people are not perfect and they will fail you in many ways. The good thing about it is that people can change and can correct their mistakes. I also need to remember that relationships can grow to be better after conflicts. This is all a learning experience.