VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 39
Nego ia ion is one o he mos e ec i e means o
managing and sol ing dispu es be ween indi i-
duals. Howe e , in ce ain cases his p ocess ails, and
he consequences o his o bo h pa ies can be disas-
ous (Mundua e, 1993). Analysis o he p ocess o
ac ions and eac ions, which occu s h oughou a con-
lic episode, has in he las ew yea s ecei ed conside-
able a en ion om esea che s (e.g., Weinga , P ie ula,
Hyde & Geno ese, 1999). This esea ch has been
aimed p incipally a : (a) pe mi ing p ecise analysis o
he beha iou s used by pa icipan s in esponse o he
o he pa y du ing he in e ac ion, and (b) allowing in e-
ences abou he in ensi ying o mi iga ing e ec s o
con lic managemen beha iou s. Following his line o
wo k, in he p esen s udy we analyze hose con lic
beha iou s ha p o e o be mos e ec i e o dealing
wi h a con lic when i is escala ed o s imula ed by he
ad e sa y.
One o he de ini ions o con lic mos commonly used
by esea che s is ha p oposed by Pu nam and Poole
(1987), who de ine con lic as a eac ion o he indi i-
dual o he pe cep ion ha he wo pa ies ha e di e en
aspi a ions ha canno be achie ed simul aneously.
This de ini ion is based on he p emise ha con lic has
h ee inhe en p ope ies: (a) in e ac ion, (b) in e depen-
dence, in he sense ha each pa y has a deg ee o po en-
ial o in e e e wi h he o he , and (c) he pe cei ed exis-
ence o an opposi ion o incompa ibili y in he goals
pu sued by hose in dispu e.
The gene al endency in adi ional esea ch on s yles
o beha iou s in con lic managemen has been he
iden i ica ion o subjec s’ beha iou al p edisposi ions
(e.g., Rahim & Bonoma, 1979; S e nbe g & So iano,
1984). Such s udies s a ou om he basis ha he sub-
jec is p edisposed o using a pa icula con lic s yle
h oughou he con lic episode (Nico e a, 1994).
Howe e , some au ho s ha e ques ioned his line o
esea ch, s essing, i s , he need o obse e he ac ual
p ocess o social in e ac ion among he opposing sides
in he con lic episode o an unde s anding o he ea-
sons why subjec s choose ce ain beha iou s (Knapp,
Pu nam & Da is, 1988; Mundua e, Luque & Ba ón,
The o iginal Spanish e sion o his pape has been p e iously
published in Psico hema, 2003, Vol. 15, No 1, 12-18
...........
Co espondence conce ning his a icle should be add essed o
F ancisco J. Medina, Facul ad de Psicología, Uni e sidad de
Se illa, 41005 Se illa (Spain). E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
Copy igh 2004 by he
Colegio O icial de Psicólogos. Spain Psychology in Spain, 2004, Vol. 8. No 1, 38-47
Beha iou al sequences in he e ec i eness o con lic managemen . The aim o his s udy was o analyze whe he he use o
con lic beha iou o e he s ages o an escala ed con lic episode di e s be ween e ec i e and ine ec i e nego ia o s.
Pa icipan s we e asked o sol e, on-line, an o ganiza ional con lic wi h a subo dina e. The subo dina e was a con ede a-
e who was ins uc ed o escala e he con lic episode in h ee le els: i ializa ion – using a oiding beha iou s; no ms
a acks – using indi ec igh beha iou s; and pe sonal a acks – using di ec igh beha iou s. Con lic beha iou and e ec-
i eness we e assessed h ough obse a ional measu es. Sequen ial analysis showed ha i is possible o di e en ia e be -
ween e ec i e and ine ec i e pa icipan s, wi h e ec i e pa icipan s eac ing in a complemen a y way o bo h a oiding
and di ec igh beha iou s.
El p opósi o del p esen e es udio ue analiza si los negociado es e ec i os e ine ec i os di ie en en sus espues as al esca-
lamien o del con lic o. Los negociado es desa olla on un ol play, mediado po o denado , con un oponen e ic icio que
escalaba el episodio de con lic o en es ni eles: i ialización –u ilizando conduc as de e i ación –; a aques a las no mas
de la emp esa –u ilizando conduc as de lucha indi ec a– y a aques pe sonales –u ilizando conduc as de lucha di ec a–. Las
conduc as de ges ión de con lic o u ilizadas po los suje os expe imen ales y la e ec i idad diádica se analiza on median e
la obse ación de las in e acciones. Los esul s, de i ados del análisis secuencial de la in e acción, mos a on que los suje-
os e ec i os esponden de o ma complemen a ia an o a las conduc as de lucha di ec a, como a las conduc as de e i a-
ción u ilizadas po el oponen e.
BEHAVIOURAL SEQUENCES IN THE EFFECTIVENESS
OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
F ancisco J. Medina, Miguel A. Do ado, Inmaculada F.J. de Cisne os, Alicia A é alo and Lou des Mundua e
Uni e si y o Se ille
1997), and second, how hese beha iou s in luence he
e ec i eness o his p ocess (Van de Vlie , 1997). Thus,
he aim o he p esen wo k was o analyze he beha-
iou al sequences in he cou se o a dyadic in e pe sonal
con lic , and he e ec i eness o hese sequences.
EFFECTIVENESS OF CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT BEHAVIOURS
The analysis o he e ec i eness o con lic manage-
men beha iou s has adi ionally been app oached om
h ee pe spec i es: he one-bes -way pe spe i e, he con-
ingency pe spec i e and he complexi y pe spec i e
(Van de Vlie , 1997).
The one-bes -way pe spec i a is based on he no ion
ha some con lic managemen s yles a e mo e e ec i e
han o he s. Thus, p oblem-sol ing is conside ed o be
he mos cons uc i e s yle, since i allows o he wo
pa ies o uni e hei in e es s, wi h a iew o eaching an
ag eemen sa is ac o y o all hose in dispu e (Van de
Vlie , Euwema & Huismans, 1995). In con as , he
mos p ejudicial esul s a e ound when he subjec
adop s a mo e domina ing o compe i i e app oach,
which is exp essed in ac ical use o in o ma ion o an
inc ease in pe sonal a acks (Olekalns, Smi h & Walsh,
1996; Van de Vlie e al., 1995).
The con ingency pe spec i e o con lic managemen
main ains ha each ype o con lic managemen beha-
iou is app op ia e acco ding o he si ua ion (Thomas,
1992). A ele an di icul y wi h he con ingency pe spec-
i e esides in i s lack o conside a ion ha con lic mana-
gemen occu s o e he cou se o a p ocess o in e ac ion,
du ing which he pa ies equen ly change om one
beha iou o ano he in a single con lic episode
(Mundua e, Ganaza, Pei ó & Euwema, 1999; Nico e a,
1994; P ui & Ca ne ale, 1993). No does his app oach
ake in o accoun ha e ec i eness may be de e mined by
he demands o he momen o o he sequence in which a
gi en s a egy is used (Olekalns, Smi h & Walsh, 1996).
The e o e, some au ho s ha e p oposed a new line o
s udy o e ec i eness, called he complexi y pe spec i e.
In he analysis o he complexi y pe spec i e, esea ch
on he e ec i eness o con lic managemen beha iou s
has de eloped in h ee dimensions: (a) he i s o hese
a emp s o analyze simul aneous complexi y, assuming
ha in e dependen modes o beha iou may p edic he
e ec i eness o con lic managemen (e.g., Mundua e e
al., 1999; Van de Vlie e al., 1995); (b) he second
analyzes empo al complexi y, ocusing on he phases
h ough which he pa icipan ’s beha iou passes, and
assuming ha knowledge o e ec i eness equi es s ud-
ying he momen a which each beha iou is employed
(e.g., Olekalns e al., 1996); and (c) he hi d dimension
deals wi h sequen ial complexi y, on he assump ion ha
dyadic e ec i eness depends no only on he combina-
ion o modes o beha iou , bu also on how hese occu
du ing he in e ac ion (e.g., Van de Vlie , Nau a,
Giebels & Janssen, 1999; Weinga , Thompson,
Baze man & Ca oll, 1990). The p esen wo k concen-
a es on some o he aspec s in ol ed in he hi d o he
dimensions de i ed om he complexi y pe spec i e, ha
o sequen ial complexi y.
Thus, and ollowing Van de Vlie e al. (1999), we
conside dyadic e ec i eness o de i e no only om he
combina ion o ce ain con lic managemen beha iou s,
bu also om hei sequence in he cou se o he in e ac-
ion. In his con ex , Weinga e al. (1990) dis inguish
wo ypes o sequen ial pa e n: ecip oci y, unde s ood
as he esponse o he o he pa y wi h he same beha-
iou as hey used in he p e ious u n; and complemen-
a i y, unde s ood as he eac ion o he ad e sa y’s
ac ion using opposing beha iou s. Many beha iou s
end o be ecip ocal wi hin a con lic episode, such as
commen s on ma e s o p ocedu e, he communica ion
o a ec i e s a es o ce ain a oiding beha iou s (e.g.,
Weinga e al., 1990). O he beha iou s end o be com-
plemen a y, such as de ensi e esponses o an a ack, o
ice e sa (e.g., Pu nam & Jones, 1982).
In his sameline o wo k, B e , Shapi o and Ly le
(1998) analyzed whe he he ecip oci y o he con on-
a ion beha iou s modi ies he cou se o he nego ia ion.
These au ho s ound e idence ha , in a con on a ion
si ua ion, he e is a gene al endency o ecip oci y, ha
is, o using agg essi e o dominance beha iou s in he
ace o a acks ecei ed om he ad e sa y. This esul
is also ound in p e ious wo k (Nau a, Van de Vlie &
Sie o, 1995; Weinga e al., 1990). A second line o
esea ch in he s udy o sequen ial complexi y conce ns
he analysis o he e ec i eness o he sequen ial pa -
e ns employed in a con lic episode. In his ega d, B e
e al. (1998) ound ha ecip oci y in esponse o domi-
na ion beha iou s p oduces esul s ha a e highly un a-
ou able o he pa ies in dispu e, as i ends o igge
a si ua ion o impasse o s agna ion. On he o he hand,
complemen a y beha iou s in hos ile si ua ions appea
o be highly posi i e in mi iga ing he con lic , since
hey educe i s in ensi y and pe mi open communica ion
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN
40
be ween he pa ies (Janssen & Van de Vlie , 1996).
Ne e heless, he majo i y o s udies ha ha e analyzed
ecip oci y o complemen a i y in esponse o con on a-
ion beha iou s ha e op ed o si ua ions in which such
con on a ion appea s om he ou se o he in e ac ion.
Thus, B e e al. (1998) s ess he impo ance o s udying
ecip oci y and complemen a i y, in ela ion o con on a-
ion beha iou s, ha occu s when he in e ac ion is al e-
ady well in p og ess. Following his line, he p esen s udy
ocuses on con lic si ua ions in which he in ensi y o he
con on a ion be ween he pa ies g adually inc eases.
Wi hin his con ex o escala ion, he objec i e o his
s udy is o analyze beha iou s o ecip oci y and comple-
men a i y in he ace o he ad e sa y’s esponse, and how
hese a e ela ed o he e ec i eness o he nego ia o s.
Based on he li e a u e men ioned abo e, ou hypo he-
ses a e as ollows:
- Hypo hesis 1: Nego ia o s will use mo e pa e ns o
ecip oci y han o complemen a i y in an escala ed
con lic .
- Hypo hesis 2: E ec i e nego ia o s will use ewe
pa e ns o ecip oci y han ine ec i e nego ia o s in
an escala ed con lic .
- Hypo hesis 3: E ec i e nego ia o s will use mo e
pa e ns o complemen a i y han ine ec i e nego-
ia o s in an escala ed con lic .
METHODOLOGY
Pa icipan s
We selec ed 87 people, 33 o whom we e men (37.9%)
and 54 o whom we e women (61.1%) om doc o al
s uden s a he uni e si ies o Se ille and Valencia and
he Andalusian Council o Labou Rela ions. A high
pe cen age o he o al sample (97.7%), a he ime o he
s udy, we e ca ying ou managemen - ype wo k in hei
no mal job, wi h esponsibili y o e o he s. Age ange
was 22 o 56 yea s, wi h a mean o 29.95 and a s anda d
de ia ion o 6.96. All pa icipan s we e unawa e o he
objec i es o he s udy, which was p esen ed o hem as
a p ac ical exe cise on con lic managemen .
P ocedu e
Pa icipan s we e ecei ed by he esea che s in a oom
whe e hey we e in o med abou he phases o he exe -
cise and gi en ins uc ions o a gene al na u e abou he
ask. They we e old ha he ask consis ed in handling
a con lic wi h a subo dina e, who would no be in he
same place, so ha communica ion would be ia com-
pu e . A his in oduc ion we ook down hei sociode-
mog aphic da a (gende , age, educa ional le el), s essed
he impo ance o paying a en ion o he messages ha
would appea on he compu e sc een, and old hem o
ead ca e ully he guide o he ole hey would play in
he ole-play exe cise and o p epa e hemsel es well
be o e beginning he in e ac ions so ha hey would no
be unde ime p essu e. A e ecei ing hese ins uc-
ions, pa icipan s we e allo ed a compu e , on which
hey began he nego ia ion ask.
All pa icipan s ecei ed ins uc ions on hei moni o
sc een abou hei ole in he nego ia ion exe cise, and
we e gi en a pencil and pape so ha hey could, i hey
wished, p epa e a cou se o ac ion o guide he in e ac-
ion. No ime limi s we e se o p epa ing he nego ia-
ion. As indica ed abo e, he pa icipan ’s ask was o
esol e a con lic , on-line, wi h a subo dina e. The con-
lic was ela ed o a se ious p oblem ha had ecen ly
occu ed be ween he subo dina e – a salesman om he
company – and he o ganiza ion’s mos impo an clien .
This subo dina e was always a con ede a e o he ese-
a che s, so ha his/he esponses we e s anda dized and
p e iously designed by hem wi h he aim o escala ing
he con lic on h ee le els. These h ee le els consis ed
in a i s phase o i ializa ion, in which he inciden
was ela i ized by means o a oiding beha iou s, using
ph ases such as: ‘in eali y no hing has happened – M .
Sage and I know each o he qui e well, and his is he
esul o no hing mo e han ha amilia i y’; a second
phase o a acks on company no ms, in which he o ga-
niza ion’s comme cial policy was ques ioned h ough
beha iou s o indi ec igh , wi h ph ases such as: ‘I
unde s and you conce n abou wha happened wi h M .
Sage, bu i would be mo e use ul o all o us o con-
cen a e on he o igin o he p oblem, which is in he
company’s policy’; and a hi d phase o pe sonal a acks,
in which he ad e sa y’s beha iou and in en ions we e
ques ioned, using beha iou s o indi ec igh , and ph a-
ses such as: ‘wha ac ually goes on in he eal wo ld is
qui e di e en om wha you see in you o ice’.
S anda diza ion o he con ede a e’s esponses was a
p io i y, in an a emp o ensu e ha all pa icipan s
ollowed he same p ocess o s imula ion o he con lic ,
and his s anda diza ion was alida ed in a p e ious
s udy ca ied ou wi h en s uden s. T ansc ip ions o all
he in e ac ions we e eco ded o subsequen coding
and analysis.
Once he expe imen al ask was o e , pa icipan s we e
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 41
deb ie ed abou i s aims, and we e asked whe he hey
hough hey had beha ed in a simila way o how hey
would ha e beha ed in a eal si ua ion. They we e also
asked whe he hey had de ec ed any a i iciali y in he
esponses o hei ad e sa y. We hanked hem o hei
pa icipa ion and eques ed hem no o discuss he
objec i es o con en o he expe imen wi h hei colle-
agues. None o he pa icipan s conside ed he esponses
o his/he ad e sa y o escala ing he con lic o ha e
seemed a i icial, and all o hem claimed hey would ac
in a simila way in a eal si ua ion.
Assessmen o he a iables
Two a iables we e analyzed in he p esen s udy: a) con-
lic managemen beha iou s, and b) dyadic e ec i e-
ness. Con lic managemen beha iou s we e ope a iona-
lized h ough obse a ional analysis o he in e ac ions,
using a specially-designed sys em o ca ego ies based on
he beha iou al ypology o Van de Vlie and Euwema
(1994). Six judges ained o such coding ca ied ou he
analysis o he con lic managemen beha iou s. In e -
judge eliabili y was measu ed by means o Cohen’s K.
Mean K index was 0.90 ( ange 0.87-0.93). A summa y o
his ypology can be seen in Table 1.
Analysis o nego ia ing e ec i eness was ca ied ou
by means o obse a ional analysis o he in e ac ions,
using he a ing scale de eloped on he basis o he indi-
ca o s p oposed by Van de Vlie and colleagues (e.g.,
Van de Vlie e al., 1995). Thus, we used eigh a ing
scales wi h i e esponse op ions: (a) impo ance o he
issues in ol ed in he con lic ; (b) p oximi y o he solu-
ion; (c) quali y o a possible ag eed solu ion; (d) possi-
bili y o a new con lic be ween he pa ies; (e) amilia-
i y be ween he pa ies; ( ) mu ual unde s anding; (g)
clima e be ween he pa ies, and (h) pe sonal ela ions-
hips. Two ained obse e s coded nego ia ing e ec i e-
ness, and co ela ions be ween hem we e e y high,
wi h a mean o 0.79, a minimum o 0.66 and a maximum
o 0.88. On he basis o pa icipan s’ sco es in nego ia-
ing e ec i eness, wo g oups we e o med: e ec i e
g oup, wi h sco es abo e pe cen ile 50, and ine ec i e
g oup, wi h sco es below pe cen ile 50.
Resul s
In o de o analyze he sequences o con lic manage-
men beha iou s we ca ied ou a lag sequen ial analysis
(Sacke , Holm, C owley & Henkins, 1979). In his
analysis, each ac ion o beha iou , in his case each spe-
ech u n ( he on-line messages), is conside ed as an
obse a ion. Lag sequen ial analysis ecognizes beha-
iou al pa e ns o nego ia ion on iden i ying s a is i-
cally signi ican di e ences be ween obse ed equen-
cies and expec ed equencies o he hypo he ical
sequences o con lic managemen . These sequences a e
made up o an an eceden and a subsequen beha iou
sepa a ed by a lag. A lag is de ined as he numbe o
beha iou s ha occu be ween he an eceden beha iou
and he subsequen beha iou (Bakeman & Go man,
1989). In his case he s anda dized messages o he
ad e sa y ( he esea che s’ con ede a e) a e always he
an eceden beha iou s, and he immedia e esponses o
he pa icipan s ( hose making up he sample) a e he
subsequen beha iou s. The e is he e o e a lag 1, since
he wo elemen s in he sequence a e consecu i e.
In o de o ca y ou he sequen ial analysis o he da a
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN
42
Table 1
Con lic managemen beha iou s. Model o Van de
Vlie and Euwema (1994)
A oidance – T i ializing.
– Asking i ele an ques ions wi h he aim o pu ing an end o
he dialogue.
– T ying o pos pone he p oblem in o de o e lec .
Example: ‘Why don’ we shel e he p oblem un il we’ e spoken
o he clien ?’
Accommoda ion – Accep ing he o he ’s sugges ions.
– Ac ing as he ad e sa y wished.
– Making concessions o he o he pa y.
Example: ‘I hink you’ e igh and i would be good o do wha
you say’.
Comp omise – T ying o ind middle ways o p og ess owa ds a solu ion o
he con lic .
– – P oposing solu ions ha sa is y bo h pa ies.
– – Yielding on some poin s in exchange o o he s.
Example: ‘I you we e o apologize o he clien , I could alk o
managemen abou wha you sugges ’
P oblem-sol ing – Seeking in o ma ion ha pe mi s a ho ough app oach
o he p oblem.
– Analyzing he si ua ion wi h he ad e sa y oge he .
– In eg a ing one’s own ideas and hose o he o he pa y o
each a join decision.
Example: ‘And how would you eel i I spoke o he clien and
ied o so his p oblem ou ?’
Di ec igh – Discussing openly he issues o he con lic , i s causes and
he a i ude adop ed du ing i .
Example: ‘I’m as onished and ang y a you a i ude. I don’
unde s and how you could do such an inapp op ia e hing’.
– Ac ing di ec ly, o ien ing one’s ac ions owa ds he achie e-
men o he objec i es, igno ing he needs and expec a ions o
he o he pa y.
Examples: h ea s, accusa ions, p essu e, abusi e language,
e bal a acks, unpleasan o hu ul commen s.
Indi ec igh – Raising objec ions o he o he pa y’s plans.
– Delibe a ely wis ing he issue o he con lic .
– Tangling hings up in p ocedu al ma e s.
Example: ‘We should alk abou he ules, abou he p ocedu e
o assigning clien s, no abou such conc e e issues as hose
you p opose’.
we used he s a is ical p og am Gene alized Sequen ial
Que ie (GSEQ), de eloped by Bakeman and Que a
(1996). This p og am eads, desc ibes and analyzes
sequen ial da a ha ollow he SDIS (Sequen ial Da a
In e change S anda d) no m. The p og am pe mi s
analysis o a ious ypes o da a; hose analyzed in he
p esen s udy a e o he ESD (E en Sequen ial Da a)
ype, cha ac e ized by con aining in o ma ion on he
o de in which e en s occu .
Table 2 shows he obse ed and expec ed equencies
o he con lic managemen beha iou s deployed by he
pa icipan s in esponse o he messages o he ad e sa y
( he con ede a e). Beha iou s o di ec igh , p oblem-
sol ing and indi ec igh a e he mos equen , ollo-
wed by hose o accommoda ion and a oidance. As can
be seen om he esul s in Table 2, he pa e n o eci-
p oci y only appea s in esponse o beha iou s o indi-
ec igh . Tha is, when pa icipan s ecei e a beha iou
o indi ec igh om hei ad e sa y hey espond wi h
a simila message. On he o he hand, we do no ind
ecip ocal pa e ns when he ad e sa y a oids con lic o
p esen s di ec igh beha iou . Thus, he e is no con i -
ma ion o Hypo hesis 1 o he p esen s udy, which p e-
dic ed g ea e use o ecip oci y in he ace o he ad e -
sa y’s con on a ion beha iou . I is in e es ing o no e
ha pa icipan s espond in a complemen a y way o
a oiding beha iou s by he ad e sa y, employing di ec
igh signi ican ly mo e han expec ed. In u n, pa ici-
pan s also espond in a complemen a y way o di ec
igh beha iou s by he o he pa y, employing mo e
a oiding and accommoda ion beha iou s han expec ed.
Tha is, i we obse e in conjunc ion he eac ions o
a oiding beha iou s and o di ec igh beha iou s, we
ind complemen a y pa e ns: pa icipan s eac wi h
di ec igh beha iou s o a oidance, and wi h a oiding
beha iou s o di ec igh .
Table 3 shows he obse ed and expec ed equencies
o he beha iou s used by e ec i e and ine ec i e pa -
icipan s. When he esea che s’ con ede a e uses a oi-
ding beha iou s he e ec i e pa icipan s make mo e
use han expec ed o di ec igh beha iou s, and less use
o accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing messages.
Ine ec i e pa icipan s, on he o he hand, use ewe
ecip ocal a oiding beha iou s and accommoda ion
beha iou s. When he con ede a e emi s messages o
indi ec igh , he mos e ec i e pa icipan s mo e e-
quen ly use ecip ocal beha iou s o indi ec igh , and
p esen less use o di ec igh beha iou s. In ine ec i e
pa icipan s we also ound he pa e n o ecip oci y o
indi ec igh beha iou s om he ad e sa y. Finally, in
esponse o di ec igh messages, e ec i e pa icipan s
made g ea e use o p oblem-sol ing, accommoda ion
and a oiding beha iou s. These pa icipan s also used
ewe di ec igh beha iou s. As a as ine ec i e pa i-
cipan s a e conce ned, i was ound ha in esponse o
he o he ’s di ec igh beha iou s, hey made signi i-
can ly mo e use han expec ed o a oiding beha iou s.
Focusing on he pa e ns o ecip oci y and comple-
men a i y in he e ec i e and ine ec i e nego ia o s, i
should be s essed, in ela ion o ecip oci y, ha in es-
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 43
Table 2
F equencies o he pa icipan s’ con lic managemen beha iou s
Messages om con ede a e
Pa icipan ’s esponses A oidance Indi ec igh Di ec igh
A oidance 4/12 ++ 9/10 17/8 **
Indi ec igh 43/45 52/39 ** 23/33 +
Di ec igh 249/213 ** 162/183 ++ 142/157
Accommoda ion 3/11 ++ 13/10 13/8 *
Comp omise 2/7 + 9/6 6/5
P oblem-sol ing 158/171 149/147 136/125
No e: P obabili ies o obse ed equencies lowe han expec ed equencies + p<.05 ++ p<.01
P obabili ies o obse ed equencies highe han expec ed equencies * p<.05 ** p<.01
Table 3
F equencies o he pa icipan s’ con lic managemen beha iou s and e ec i eness
Messages om con ede a e
A oidance Indi ec igh Di ec igh
Pa icipan ’s esponses E ec i e Ine ec i e E ec i e Ine ec i e E ec i e Ine ec i e
A oidance 1/3 3/8 + 3/3 6/7 5/3 * 12/6 **
Indi ec igh 14/17 29/29 22/15 * 30/23 * 9/13 14/20
Di ec igh 102/72 ** 147/144 54/66 + 108/115 38/56 ++ 104/100
Accommoda ion 3/8 + 0/2 + 9/8 4/2 11/7 * 2/2
Comp omise 1/4 1/3 5/3 4/2 4/3 2/2
P oblem-sol ing 102/119 ++ 56/49 113/110 36/39 107/93 * 29/34
No e: P obabili ies o obse ed equencies lowe han expec ed equencies + p<.05 ++ p<.01
P obabili ies o obse ed equencies highe han expec ed equencies * p<.05 ** p<.01

ponse o di ec igh beha iou s, e ec i e nego ia o s use
ewe beha iou s o ecip oci y. These da a pa ially sup-
po Hypo hesis 2 o he p esen wo k: i is con i med
ha he e is less use o ecip oci y beha iou s by he
e ec i e nego ia o s in he ace o di ec igh beha-
iou s, bu his lesse use is no con i med in he case o
indi ec igh beha iou s. As ega ds complemen a i y
beha iou s, e ec i e nego ia o s use hese in esponse o
beha iou s o a oidance and indi ec igh – ha is, aced
wi h a oidance hey employ mo e di ec igh beha-
iou s, and aced wi h di ec igh hey use mo e a oi-
ding, accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing beha iou s.
I is obse ed, in his ega d, ha he e ec i e pa ici-
pan s espond in a complemen a y way o a acks ecei-
ed om he ad e sa y. Howe e , ine ec i e nego ia o s
only use complemen a i y h ough esponses o a oidan-
ce when aced wi h di ec igh . These da a con i m
Hypo hesis 3, which p edic ed g ea e use o comple-
men a i y beha iou s on he pa o e ec i e nego ia o s.
DISCUSSION
The goal o he p esen s udy was, i s o all, o analyze
he pa e ns o ecip oci y and complemen a i y be ween
nego ia o s in an escala ed con lic ; a second aim was o
ela e hese pa e ns o he e ec i eness and ine ec i e-
ness o hese nego ia o s. The s udy’s mos ele an in-
ding ela es o he capaci y shown by e ec i e nego ia-
o s o b eak he cou se o ac ion es ablished by he o he
pa y o escala ing he con lic , using o his pu pose
beha iou s complemen a y o hose o hei ad e sa y.
We shall discuss he mos ele an indings in acco -
dance wi h wo s ages: in he i s o hese, we shall dis-
cuss he pa e ns o ecip oci y and complemen a i y
ound in esponse o escala ion o he con lic ; and
secondly, we shall conside hei dyadic e ec i eness.
As ega ds he i s o hese aspec s, he mos ele an
indings we e as ollows: (a) indi ec igh beha iou s
end o be ecip ocal, (b) a oiding beha iou s elici
beha iou s o di ec igh in he o he pa y, whils hey
inhibi he use o a oiding, accommoda ion and com-
p omise beha iou s; and (c) di ec igh beha iou s p o-
duce, in he ad e sa y, g ea e use o accommoda ion
and a oiding beha iou s, and lesse use o indi ec igh
beha iou s.
Thus, i is ound ha subjec s end o ac ecip ocally in
esponse o he o he pa y’s indi ec igh beha iou s,
sugges ing ha when one o he pa ies in con lic
a emp s o eo ien he discou se owa ds colla e al
issues – con olling he p ocess o showing esis ance o
open discussion – he e is a gene al endency on he pa
o he o he o y and p e en his occu ing, eo ien ing
he discussion once mo e owa ds he cen al issue o he
con lic . This pa e n o beha iou al ecip oci y in es-
ponse o p ocedu al s a egies has been desc ibed p e-
iously by o he au ho s (e.g., De D eu e al., 1999).
Mo eo e , we obse ed a endency in pa icipan s o
espond in a complemen a y way o di ec igh beha-
iou s wi h a oiding beha iou s, and ice e sa. Thus,
when he pa icipan wishes o a oid o pos pone con-
lic , he ad e sa y ends o espond h ough accusa ions,
ep oaches o di ec o de s; in con as , when he pa i-
cipan ecei es pe sonal a acks, he e is a endency on
he pa o he o he o a oid con lic . This esul can be
in e p e ed in wo di e en ways. On he one hand, i is
possible ha subjec s espond spon aneously, h ough
di ec igh beha iou s agains hei ad e sa y, when he
la e ies o pos pone he con lic o no con on i
openly. In his ega d, some au ho s conside ha
naming beha iou is a highly s able beha iou ha
depends o a g ea e ex en on he subjec ’s mo i a ional
o ien a ion han on he in e en ions o he ad e sa y
(Rhoades & Ca ne ale, 1999); hus, his beha iou may
o m pa o he na u al epe oi e o esponse when he
subjec aces a con lic g owing in in ensi y. In a simila
line, some au ho s assume, in any con lic episode, wo
clea ly dis inguishable s ages: an ini ial one o di e en-
ia ion, in which each pa y de ends his/he own in e-
es s, and an in eg a ion s age, in which he pa ies
de end common in e es s (Van de Vlie e al., 1999).
Thus, i may be ha subjec s end o di e en ia e hei
posi ions in he ea ly s ages o he con lic , so ha di ec
igh beha iou s will end o o m pa o he beha iou-
al epe oi e a he beginning o he in e ac ion. A
second in e p e a ion in ol es he possibili y ha he
subjec uses di ec igh because he/she pe cei es a ce -
ain weakness in he ad e sa y, on obse ing ha he la -
e is employing a oiding beha iou s (P ui &
Ca ne ale, 1993). As ega ds he complemen a i y o
di ec igh beha iou s, h ough esponses o a oidance
and accommoda ion, i is ele an o poin ou ha hese
beha iou s o m pa , in o he ypologies (e.g., Pu nam
& Wilson, 1982), o he non-con on a ional s yle. This
desi e o non-con on a ion, which appea s a a s age in
which he con lic is o high in ensi y, may be unde s o-
od by he ad e sa y as a de ensi e esponse o an a ack
ecei ed, and conside ed as a o m o pe mi ing ela-
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN
44
ions o be main ained in he u u e (Ohbuchi &
Takahashi, 1994).
These esul s do no wholly con i m he i s o he
hypo heses, ha is, he use o ecip oci y in esponse o
an escala ed con lic . Ne e heless, i we analyze he
beha iou s used by he pa icipan s on he basis o con-
ce n heo y, which unde pins bidimensional models o
con lic managemen s yles – see, o example, he ypo-
logy o con lic managemen s yles by Rahim and
Bonoma (1979) –, we can ind an explana ion o his
aspec . Thus, we ind ha he beha iou s used in he
escala ion o con lic in he p esen s udy – a oiding,
indi ec igh and di ec igh – and he esponses wi h
highe equency han expec ed o m pa o he same
dimension: he ul ilmen o pe sonal in e es s. This sug-
ges s ha , in a si ua ion o con lic escala ion, subjec s
will espond ecip ocally o he mo i a ion o he o he ’s
beha iou – ha is, he sa is ac ion o sel -in e es . The
esul s o o he s udies on ecip oci y in ela ion o dis-
ibu i e beha iou s (e.g., Weinga e al., 1999) may
ha e he same explana ion, since he dis ibu i e beha-
iou s conside ed by hese au ho s (e.g., s anding i m,
o a guing one’s own posi ion insis en ly and pe suasi-
ely) a e also aimed a maximizing pe sonal in e es s, o
he de imen o hose o he ad e sa y.
As ega ds he analysis o he dyadic e ec i eness o
he beha iou al sequences used by pa icipan s in es-
ponse o escala ion o he con lic , he mos ele an in-
ding o he p esen s udy conce ns he ac ha e ec i e
nego ia o s espond in a complemen a y way o hei
ad e sa y’s in e en ions o escala ing he con lic .
E ec i e subjec s use di ec igh beha iou s when
hei ad e sa y i ializes he inciden . As some au ho s
ha e poin ed ou (Rubin, P ui & Kim, 1994), his beha-
iou al esponse pa e n in which pa icipan s use di ec
igh in he ace o a emp s a i ializa ion o a oidan-
ce is e ec i e o he ollowing easons: (a) i pe mi s
di e en ia ion be ween he di e se posi ions p esen in
he con lic episode; and (b) i minimizes he p obabili y
o he con lic being pos poned o s agna ing. The beha-
iou al pa e n o di e en ia ion-in eg a ion, men ioned
abo e, has shown i s e ec i eness in he managemen o
an escala ed con lic (Van de Vlie e al., 1999).
Acco ding o his idea, he e ec i e esolu ion o an
escala ed con lic should begin wi h a i s s age in
which he subjec s di e en ia e hei posi ions, o mo e
on o a second s age in which hey y o in eg a e hei
unde lying needs in he inal solu ion o he con lic . The
use o di ec igh beha iou s pe mi s di e en ia ion be -
ween he ini ial posi ions o he wo pa icipan s, so ha ,
once his di e en ia ion has been es ablished, he
a emp s a in eg a ion can be mo e easily accep ed by
he ad e sa y, as hey a e pe cei ed as cons uc i e
beha iou s aimed a he achie emen o an ag eemen
bene icial o bo h pa ies (Van de Vlie e al., 1999).
Ano he in e es ing esul o he p esen s udy is ha
he mos e ec i e pa icipan s end o espond o di ec
igh in a complemen a y ashion, using beha iou s o
accommoda ion and p oblem-sol ing. As a as accom-
moda ion is conce ned, his esul sugges s ha on ce -
ain occasions unila e al yielding may be an e ec i e
beha iou o mi iga ing he de imen al e ec s o con-
lic escala ion. The use o accommoda ion is a qui e
simple o m o esol ing con lic s, and which may be
alid in ce ain con ex ual ci cums ances (e.g., Thomas,
1992). While i is ue ha unila e al yielding, whe eby
he yielding pa y’s p oblems emain un esol ed and
his/he needs unsa is ied, is a a om op imum o c ea-
i e solu ion (F iedman, Tidd, Cu all & Tsai, 2000;
Spi zbe g, Cana y & Cupach, 1994), some componen s
o de e en beha iou may indeed be p oduc i e o
managing an escala ed con lic . Such beha iou may be
pe cei ed by he ad e sa y as a sign o willingness o
each an ag eemen , mo e han a sign o weakness (Van
de Vlie , 1997), and can acili a e posi i e a ec be we-
en he wo pa ies, as well as mu ual posi i e app ecia-
ion (Wayne, Liden, G a & Fe is, 1997).
As ega ds p oblem-sol ing beha iou s, he p esen
wo k shows ha i is mo e p oduc i e o he pa icipan
o espond o he p o oca ions o he o he pa y, and o
his/he pe sonal a ack, a emp ing o unde s and his/he
easons and seeking a c ea i e solu ion ha may sa is y
bo h. Thus, he mos e ec i e nego ia o s espond in a
complemen a y way o he dis ibu i e beha iou s o
hei ad e sa y (e.g., Weinga e al., 1990) – ha is,
e ec i e nego ia o s y o econcile join in e es s, in
esponse o he o he ’s disc imina i e and compe i i e
in en ions. I has been demons a ed, in his ega d, ha
he mos in eg a i e s yles educe he expe ience o con-
lic and s ess a wo k, while s yles o domina ion and
a oidance inc ease he pe cep ion o hese aspec s
(F iedman e al., 2000).
In sum, bo h p oblem-sol ing beha iou s and accom-
moda ion beha iou s ha e a g ea ad an age wi h es-
pec o o he con lic managemen beha iou s: hey a e
capable o educing he in ensi y o he con lic , and
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 45
consequen ly, i s escala ion. Some s udies ha e shown
ha bo h ypes o beha iou ha e mi iga ing e ec s on
con lic , mo e so han o he beha iou s, such as com-
p omise o a oidance (e.g., Janssen & Van de Vlie ,
1996; Rubin e al., 1994).
Van de Vlie (1997) p oposes an explana ion o he
mi iga ing powe o accommoda ion and p oblem-sol-
ing, based on conce n heo y, as men ioned abo e.
Thus, a change in he dimension o sel -in e es o he
dimension o he o he ’s in e es – which is wha occu s
when he subjec uses accommoda ion o p oblem-sol-
ing beha iou in esponse o di ec igh – has mi iga-
ing e ec s on he dynamic o con lic , whils a beha-
iou al change wi hin he same dimension, which is
wha occu s when he subjec changes om a oidance o
di ec igh , o example, does no p oduce changes in
he endency o escala ion o de-escala ion, bu a he
leads simply o a change in he dynamic o coope a ion
be ween he pa ies. In his sense, he esul s o he p e-
sen wo k a e in acco dance wi h he indings o Janssen
and Van de Vlie (1996), who showed, using di e se
me hodologies, ha high le els o conce n wi h he
o he ’s in e es , exp essed in beha iou s such as accom-
moda ion o p oblem-sol ing, lead o a educ ion in
in ensi y o he con lic and an imp o emen in ela ions
be ween he pa ies. The p esen s udy, hen, shows ha
e ec i e nego ia o s ake in o conside a ion, on ca ying
ou hei p oposals, he in e es s o he o he pa y in a
si ua ion o con lic escala ion, despi e he ac ha he
ad e sa y’s esponse may be o ien ed owa ds he ul il-
men o his o he pe sonal in e es s.
Ce ain limi a ions o his s udy may ha e a ec ed he
esul s ound. I is possible ha he i e e sible beha-
iou al cou se used by he esea che s’ con ede a e
mean ha he pa icipan used pa icula beha iou s in
esponse ha a e less likely o be ound in a mo e na u-
al si ua ion. Indeed, g ea e lexibili y in he con lic
escala ion p ocess may help in u u e esea ch. Thus, o
example, a oiding beha iou by he con ede a e migh
no appea exclusi ely a he beginning o he con lic
episode (whe e i coincides wi h he di e en ia ion
phase), and di ec igh beha iou migh no appea
exclusi ely a he end (whe e i coincides wi h he in e-
g a ion phase).
In spi e o such ecommenda ions o imp o emen in
u u e s udies on beha iou al sequences, i should be
s essed ha he design o he p esen wo k has made pos-
sible ele an indings wi h impo an p ac ical implica-
ions. The ac ha he e ec i e pa icipan s espond wi h
complemen a y beha iou s o he a acks ecei ed om
hei ad e sa y sugges he need o ain nego ia o s o
b eak he cou se o ac ion es ablished by he o he pa y
o escala ing he con lic . The s a egy o no eplica ing
posi ions o h ea , and o disa ming he ad e sa y
h ough beha iou s o complemen a i y, has p o ed o be
e ec i e o managing an escala ed con lic .
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This esea ch was pa ially inanced by a g an om he
Di ección Gene al de Enseñanza Supe io e
In es igación Cien í ica (DGESIC). (P oyec o PB96-
1302-CO4-01).
REFERENCES
Bakeman, R. & Go man, J.M. (1989). Obse ación de
la in e acción. In oducción al análisis secuencial.
Mad id: Mo a a.
Bakeman, R. & Que a, V. (1996). Análisis de la in e ac-
ción. Análisis secuencial con SDIS y GSEQ. Mad id:
RA-MA edi o ial.
B e , J.M., Shapi o, D.L. & Ly le, A.L. (1998).
B eaking he bond o ecip oci y in nego ia ions.
Academy o Managemen Jou nal, 41, 410-424.
De D eu, C.K.W., Ha inck, F. & Van Vianen, A.E.M.
(1999). Con lic and pe o mance in g oups and o ga-
niza ions. In C.L. Coope & I.T. Robe son (Eds).
In e na ional Re iew o Indus ial and
O ganiza ional Psychology (pp. 376-405).
Chiches e : Wiley.
F iedman, R.A., Tidd, S.T., Cu all, S.C., & Tsai, J.C.
(2000). Wha goes a ound comes a ound: The impac
o pe sonal con lic s yles on wo k con lic and s ess.
In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 11,
32-55.
Janssen, O. & Van de Vlie , E. (1996). Conce n o he
o he ’s goals: Key o (de-) escala ion o con lic .
In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic Managemen , 7, 99-
120.
Knapp, M.L., Pu nam, L.L. & Da is, L.J. (1988).
Measu ing in e pe sonal con lic in o ganiza ions:
Whe e do we go om he e? Managemen
Communica ion Qua e ly, 1, 414-429.
Mundua e, L. (1993). La ap oximación psicosocial al
es udio del con lic o y la negociación labo al en
España: una e isión. Psico hema, 5, 261-275.
Mundua e, L., Luque, P. & Ba ón, M. (1997). S yles o
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN
46
handling in e pe sonal con lic : An obse a ional
s udy. Psico hema, 9, 145-153.
Mundua e, L., Ganaza, J., Pei ó. J.M., & Euwema, M.
(1999). Pa e ns o s yles in con lic managemen and
e ec i eness. In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic
Managemen , 10, 5-24.
Nau a, A., Van de Vlie , E. & Sie o, F. (1995). Dyadic
e ec i eness o symme ical con lic in e ac ion in
o ganiza ions. Pape p esen ed a he Annual Mee ing
o he In e na ional Associa ion o Con lic
Managemen , Elsino e, Denma k.
Nico e a, A.M. (1994). The use o mul iple app oaches
o con lic : A s udy o sequences. Human
Communica ion Resea ch, 20, 592-621.
Ohbuchi, K. & Takahashi, Y. (1994). Cul u al S yles o
Con lic Managemen in Japanese and Ame icans:
Passi i y, co e ness and e ec i eness o s a egies.
Jou nal o Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1.345-
1.366.
Olekalns, M, Smi h, P.L. & Walsh, T (1996). The p o-
cess o nego ia ing: S a egy and iming as p edic o s
o ou comes. O ganiza ional Beha io and Human
Decision P ocesses, 68, 68-77.
P ui , D.G. & Ca ne ale, P.J. (1993). Nego ia ion in
social con lic . Cali o nia: Books/Cole.
Pu nam, L.L. (1990). Re aming In eg a i e and
Dis ibu i e Ba gaining. A P ocess Pe spec i e.
Resea ch on Nego ia ion in O ganiza ion, 2, 3-30.
Pu nam, L.L. & Jones, T.S. (1982). Recip oci y in nego-
ia ions: An analysis o ba gaining in e ac ion.
Communica ion Monog aphs, 49, 171-191.
Pu nam, L.L. & Poole, M.S. (1987). Con lic and
Nego ia ion. In F.M. Jablin., L.L. Pu nam, K.H.
Robe s & L.W. Po e (Eds). Handbook o
O ganiza ional Communica ion (pp. 549-599).
Newbu y Pa k, C.A: Sage.
Rahim, M.A. & Bonoma, T.V. (1979). Managing
O ganiza ional Con lic : A Model o Diagnosis and
In e en ion. Psychological Repo s, 16,143-155.
Rhoades, J. A & Ca ne ale, P. J. (1999). The beha io al
con ex o S a egic choice in Nego ia ion: A es o
he dual conce n model. Jou nal o Applied Social
Psychology, 29, 1.777-1.802.
Rubin, J.Z., P ui . D.G & Kim, S.H. (1994). Social
Con lic Escala ion. S alema e and Se lemen . New
Yo k: McG aw-Hill.
Sacke , G.P., Holm, R., C owley, C. & Henkins, A.
(1979). A FORTRAN p og am o lag sequen ial
analysis o con ingency and cyclici y in beha iou al
in e ac ion da a. Beha io Resea ch Me hods and
Ins umen a ion, 11, 366-378.
Spi zbe g, B.H., Cana y, D.J. & Cupach, W.R. (1994). A
compe ence-based app oach o he s udy o in e pe -
sonal con lic . In D. Cahn (Ed.), Con lic in Pe sonal
Rela ionships (pp. 183-202). Hillsdale, NJ: E lbaum.
S e nbe g, R.J. & So iano, L.J. (1984). S yles o con lic
esolu ion. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology, 47, 115-126.
Thomas, K.W. (1992). Con lic and nego ia ion p oces-
ses in o ganiza ions. In M. D. Dunne e & L.M.
Hough (Eds). Handbook o indus ial and o ganiza-
ional psychology (pp. 651-717). Chicago: Rand
McNally.
Van de Vlie , E. (1997). Complex In e pe sonal
Con lic Beha iou : Theo e ical F on ie s. London:
Psychology P ess.
Van de Vlie , E. & Euwema, M.C. (1994).
Ag eeableness and Ac i eness as Componen o
Con lic Beha io s. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology. 66, 674-687.
Van de Vlie , E., Euwema, M.C. & Huismans, S.E.
(1995). Managing con lic wi h a subo dina e o a
supe io : E ec i eness o conglome a ed beha io .
Jou nal o Applied Psychology, 80, 271-281.
Van de Vlie , E., Nau a, A., Giebels, E. & Janssen, O.
(1999). Cons uc i e con lic a wo k. Jou nal o
O ganiza ional Beha io , 20, 475-491.
Wayne, S.J., Liden, R.C., G a , I.K. & Fe is, G.R.
(1997). The ole o upwa d in luence ac ics in human
esou ce decisions. Pe sonnel Psychology, 50, 979-
1.006.
Weinga , L.R., P ie ula, M.J., Hyde , E.B. & Geno ese,
G.R. (1999). Knowledge and he Sequen ial P ocesses
o Nego ia ion: A Ma ko Chain Analysis o
Response-in-Kind. Jou nal o Expe imen al Social
Psychology, 35, 366-393.
Weinga , L.R., Thompson, L.L., Baze man, M.H. &
Ca oll, J.S. (1990). Tac ical beha io and nego ia ion
ou comes. The In e na ional Jou nal o Con lic
Managemen , 1, 7-31.
VOLUME 8. NUMBER 1. 2004. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN 47