Positional vs Interest-based communications

 Positional vs Interest-based communications

 Often, positional versus interest-based communications results in conflict.  A personal stance on a particular issue often conflicts with common or underlying interests, while interest-based communications focuses on the utilization of common interests in effort to benefit the resolution process.  These differences in communication patterns typically hinder effective conflict resolution due to the fact that they do not compliment one another.  However, in order to achieve a favorable resolve, the utilization of dialogue would benefit the conflict of communication.

First, “positional bargaining is a negotiation that involves holding on to a fixed idea, or position, of what you want and arguing for it and it alone, regardless of any underlying interests” (Spangler, 2003).  Often times this is the initial strategy sought within a negotiation or bartering scenario.  Unfortunately, “as the negotiation advances, the negotiators become more and more committed to their positions, continually restating and defending them. A strong commitment to defending a position usually leads to a lack of attention to both parties' underlying interests” (Spangler, 2003).  Commonly this approach is considered a less constructive and less efficient strategy for negotiation, due to the fact that it is less likely to result in a win-win outcome and may also tarnish the relationship between parties.

On the other hand, interest-based communications encourages opposing parties to collaborate to see if they can resolve their issues by addressing their mutual concerns and common interests.  This approach increases the likelihood that:

1. The parties will feel that the decision-making process has been a fair one.

2. The parties will be more committed to carrying out the agreements made.

3. They are more likely to have a greater understanding of, and respect for, each        other.

4. If future conflicts arise, they will have an example to follow, making it easier for the parties to address the conflict and deal with it constructively.

5. It is more cost and time efficient than positional communication, and it may improve the relationship (Office of the Dispute Resolution Specialist, 2004).

Interest-based communications tend to yield a win-win outcome, due to the fact that both parties are collectively working together by negotiating, joint problem-solving, mutual gains bargaining, and brainstorming (Furlong, 2005).

When experiencing communication conflicts, dialogue is an effective approach to resolution.  “Participants in conversations and similar highly interactive communicative forms behave less like autonomous information processors and more like participants in an intrinsically cooperative activity” (Deutsch, Coleman, Marcus, 2006, p. 152).  The utilization of dialogue allows the parties to collaborate and actively communicate.  “In dialogic perspective, communication is regarded as a joint accomplishment of the participants, who have collaborated to achieve some set of communicative goals” (Deutsch, Coleman, Marcus, 2006, p. 153).  Therapists, religious leaders, and mediators encourage the usage of these processes to break down stereotypes, and to build up mutual understanding and trust between members of opposing parties. They are commonly used to resolve domestic disputes, in peer mediation, in public policy conflicts in the U.S., as well as in international conflicts and communal or ethnic conflicts around the world (Conflict Research Consortium, 1998).

References:

Conflict Research Consortium: University of Colorado (1998). Dialogue Projects.

            Retrieved July 31, 2010, from

            http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/treatment/dialog2.htm.

Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T., Marcus, E.C., (Eds.). (2006). The Handbook of Conflict

Resolution: Theory & Practice. (2^nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Furlong, G.T. (2005). The Conflict Resolution Toolbox. Ontario, Canada: John Wiley &

            Sons Canada, Ltd.

Office of the Dispute Resolution Specialist (2004). A Four-Step Way of Dealing

With Conflict. Retrieved July 31, 2010 from

            http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/va/mediation/fourstep.htm.

Spangler, B., (2003). Positional Bargaining. Retrieved July 31, 2010, from

            http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/positional_bargaining/?nid=1285.

History’s Influence on Modern Psychology

 

History’s Influence on Modern Psychology

             In terms of the most influential portion of the history of psychology in relation to current practice, the era consuming the emergence of experimental psychology is highly regarded.  During the greater part of 19^th century, from 1820-1920, experimental psychology was developed and laid the foundation for modern studies, setting numerous standards within the field.  Beginning in Germany and flourishing throughout the United States, a greater scientific approach emerged.  Pioneers such as Weber, Fechner, Ebbinghaus, Muller, Kulpe, Freud, and notably the ‘father’ of the movement, Wundt established research, experiments, techniques, laboratories, schools, and ideologies which led to widespread usage and applicability within various areas of psychology to date (Goodwin, 2008).

             To begin with, from 1815 to 1871 European and American students ventured to Germany in effort to experience a research and experimental approach to psychology, particularly in Leipzig (due south of Berlin).  These methods included measurement, replicability, public data, and controlled tests, which were implemented into the study of the nervous system and human behavior (Goodwin, 2008).  This scientific methodology forged the new frontier in the field.  Prior to these practices, for centuries dating back to Ancient Greece and Egypt, philosophy, the study of “wisdom; in actual usage, the knowledge of phenomena as explained by, and resolved into, causes and reasons, powers and laws” (Webster, 2011), was the basis for the awareness and speculation of brain function, dream interpretation, mental imbalance, and inner thoughts or feelings.  Yet with the surfacing of experimental psychology, laboratory progression expanded and has been imitated and utilized since.  “This new psychology called for the scientific examination of human conscious experience, using methods borrowed from experimental physiology and supplemented by new strategies” (Goodwin, 2008, p. 110).

            Although early studies centered on visual and auditory sensation, Ernst Weber (1795-1878) concluded that skin sensitivity was a result of the combination of a psychological and physical process.  In addition, his interests in kinesthesis proved that mental stimuli affect an individual’s physical reaction or interpretation.  These findings (Weber’s Law as it is referred to at present day) have enabled practitioners to determine mental perceptions and were the precursors to the formation of psychophysics (Goodwin, 2008).

            Furthermore, Gustav Fechner (1801-1889) appended Weber’s research.  His belief in the systematic unification of the mind and body, with the mind serving as the dominant figure, nurtured the development of psychophysics.  His methods (still in present use) identified limits, constant stimuli, and adjustments through the utilization of thresholds.  Fechner’s research fostered scientific methodology as a means of measuring psychological condition (Goodwin, 2008). 

Consequently, Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) constructed modern psychology from the works of Weber and Fechner.  In particular his focal point consisted of the psychophysical process.  He originated the theory of relating mental occurrences to actual reactions.  He deemed the mind as a movement rather than a mere immobile form of matter.  Researches during this era enabled practitioners to measure mental capacity and validate psychology as a credible experimental science (Indiana University, 2012).

The following timeline highlights pertinent advancements and expansions relative to the significance of experimental psychology to modern practices:

-1834 – Weber published his perception theory entitled Just Noticeable Difference (Weber’s Law).

-1859 – Darwin published On the Origin of Species denoting his belief in the

survival of the fittest. 

-1869 – Galton published Hereditary Genius signifying that intellectual prowess

is a result of biological occurrences.

-1878 – Hall is the first American to receive a PhD in psychology and later

founds the American Psychological Association (1892).

-1879 – Wundt founds the world’s first psychology lab at the University of

Leipzig.

-1883 – The first psychology lab in America was established at Johns Hopkins

University.

-1885 – Ebbinghaus provided advancements in the study of memory processes.

-1886 – Freud commenced the study of personality theory.

-1890 – James publishes Principles of Psychology the basis of Functionalism.

-1895 – Binet establishes the first lab for psychodiagnosis.

-1896 – Clinical psychology was founded at the University of Pennsylvania.

-1900 – Freud publishes ‘Interpretation of Dreams’ innovating psychoanalytic

thought.

-1901 – The British Psychological Society established.

-1905 – Binet’s Intelligence Test was developed in France. First utilized in the

United States in 1916.

 -1912 – Stern innovates the measurement for IQ. Wertheimer fosters Gestalt

Psychology.

-1913 – J. E. Watson cultivates Behavioral Psychology.

-1920 – J. B. Watson & Raynor publish ‘The Little Albert Experiments’ proving

that fear is classically conditioned (All Psych, 2003) (Cherry, 2012).

 In summary, contemporary experimental psychologists work in an array of fields in educational settings, laboratories, government, private organizations, and counseling services, in effort to examine cognitive reasoning, behavior, neuroscience, and personality.  Without the development and standardization of experimental psychology these arenas would be rendered ineffective and unbeneficial to the field.  The contributions of such aforementioned pioneers in relative context have proved to be vital to present day practices.  To date, experimentation remains the essential means of examining human behavior (Cherry, 2012). 

References:

All Psych (2003). History of psychology: (387 B.C. to present). Retrieved March 4, 2012,

            from http://allpsych.com/timeline.html.

Cherry, K. (2012). What is experimental psychology? A closer look at the experimental side of

            psychology. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from

http://psychology.about.com/od/researchmethods/a/what-is-experimental-psychology.htm.

Goodwin, C.J. (2008). A history of modern psychology (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Indiana University. Human intelligence. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/wundt.shtml.

Webster. Philosophy. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from, http://dictionary.webster.us/search.