Conflict (psychology)

In psychology, conflict refers to a mental struggle between two or more opposing needs, goals, or demands that arise at the same time. Psychologists generally classify conflicts into four categories: approach-approach, avoidance-avoidance, approach-avoidance, and double approach-avoidance. The needs, goals, or demands that result in the conflict may have positive (approach) and/or negative (avoidance) aspects. In some cases, the source of a conflict may be unconscious, and a person may not be able to identify it.

Approach versus Avoidance

Approach means "the act of moving nearer to something." Avoidance means "the act of staying away from something." In terms of conflict, people generally want to approach needs, goals, or demands that have positive aspects. They generally want to avoid needs, goals, or demands that have negative aspects.

In 1935, psychologist Kurt Lewin identified and distinguished among three main types of conflict based on these behaviors: approach-approach, avoidance-avoidance, and approach-avoidance. A fourth type—double approach-avoidance—has been added since then.

Approach-Approach Conflict

An approach-approach conflict arises when a person must choose between two positive outcomes. For example, a woman has a week of vacation from work and must decide between relaxing at home and relaxing at the beach. If the woman finds both options appealing, then either choice will result in a desirable outcome and a positive experience.

Psychologists consider approach-approach conflicts the least stressful of the four types. People usually are able to resolve such conflicts with relative ease. The reason for this is because approach-approach conflicts exist in a state of unstable equilibrium. As soon as one begins to approach a particular outcome, the attractiveness of that outcome increases. The closer one moves toward it, the more desirable that outcome becomes and the less desirable the other outcome becomes. Other types of conflict are generally more difficult to solve.

Avoidance-Avoidance Conflict

An avoidance-avoidance conflict arises when a person must choose between two negative outcomes. The person is caught between the proverbial "rock" and "hard place." A simple example involves a child who must choose between two equally unpleasant household chores: washing the dishes or taking out the trash. Since neither option is appealing, either choice will result in an undesirable outcome and a negative experience.

Research has shown that resolving avoidance-avoidance conflicts can be incredibly difficult and often takes a long time. People embroiled in such conflicts often experience great stress. The reason for this is because avoidance-avoidance conflicts exist in a state of stable equilibrium. As one moves toward a particular outcome, the outcome’s negative aspects become clearer and its repellant force increases. In turn, the person’s desire to avoid the outcome grows, and the person retreats to the point where they started.

Approach-Avoidance Conflict

An approach-avoidance conflict arises when a single goal or outcome has both positive and negative aspects. For example, a man wants to eat pizza but often experiences indigestion after eating it. If the man decides to eat pizza, he will experience positive feelings at first, because the pizza tastes good, and he wants to eat it. However, he will experience negative feelings later, when he develops indigestion. If the man decides not to eat pizza, he will experience negative feelings at first, because he cannot eat what he wants, but ultimately he will have a positive experience, because he avoided the discomfort of indigestion.

Like avoidance-avoidance conflict, approach-avoidance conflict exists in a state of stable equilibrium. As one approaches a decision about a particular outcome, the desire to avoid the negative aspects of that outcome increases and pushes the person back toward the middle. For this reason, research has shown that people involved in approach-avoidance conflicts often waver in their decision making and may try to find some way to avoid making the decision at all.

Double Approach-Avoidance Conflict

Double approach-avoidance conflicts arise when a person must choose between two or more outcomes, each of which has both attractive and unattractive qualities. Double approach-avoidance conflicts are quite common. For example, a high school student must decide between two colleges. While both colleges offer a quality education, one is located close to home but has very high tuition; the other is more affordable but is located halfway across the country. If the student chooses the nearby college, he will receive a good education and get to see his family often, but he will accrue great debt by the time he graduates. If the student chooses the distant college, he will receive a good education and leave college with minimal debt, but he will get to see his family very little, if at all, during the school year.

People involved in double approach-avoidance conflicts tend to take a long time to make decisions, often approaching and avoiding each of the outcomes several times when trying to make a decision. Like approach-avoidance conflict, double approach-avoidance conflict has a fairly stable equilibrium, because each time the person tries to approach one of the outcomes, the negative aspects of that outcome loom large and cause the person to retreat toward the middle.

The Role of the Unconscious

When a factor in any form of conflict is unconscious, it can increase the stress a person experiences when trying to choose an outcome. A situation may seem like a clear-cut approach-approach conflict on its surface; for example, a woman must decide between two attractive job offers. However, the woman experiences great anxiety and finds it impossible to choose. The woman does not realize that the source of her distress is an underlying fear of change, which makes her afraid to choose either of the new positions over her current job. Thus, the woman is actually unconsciously involved in a double approach-avoidance conflict.

Bibliography

"Conflict." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Ed. David L. Sills. Vol. 3. New York: Macmillan, 1968. 220–242. Print.

Förster, Jens. "Approach-Avoidance Conflict." Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. Ed. Roy F. Baumeister and Kathleen D. Vohs. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2007. 48–49. Print.

"Module 1: Conflict." Psychology 200. San Francisco State University. 27 Oct. 2005. Web. 4 Aug. 2015. http://online.sfsu.edu/psych200/unit10/101.htm

Sharma, Aman. "Conflicts: Notes on 3 Types of Conflicts." Psychology Discussion. PsychologyDiscussion.Net. Web. 4 Aug. 2015. http://www.psychologydiscussion.net/conflicts/conflicts-notes-on-3-types-of-conflictspsychology/688

Resnick, Ariane. "The Psychology of Conflict Theory: A Comprehensive Guide." Reviewed by David Susman. Verywell Mind, 26 Mar. 2024, www.verywellmind.com/conflict-theory-7561321. Accessed 7 Nov. 2024.