Benefits and Challenges of Multilevel Approaches
Multilevel approaches have a number of benefits for researchers, theorists, and practitioners. First, multilevel approaches avoid reductionism to single levels (Upton & Egan, 2010).
Any research or practice that focuses on any single level will, by definition, underestimate the effects of other contexts (Klein et al., 1999; Rousseau & House, 1994; Stokols, 1996). Conflict communication research and practice tends to focus analysis on either micro- (e.g., individual or interpersonal behavior) or macroprocesses (e.g., social, economic, and political structures). Multilevel approaches focus on understanding concepts at multiple levels as well as between different levels. Second, multilevel approaches have a good fit for “naturalistic environments” (Upton & Egan, 2010, p. 335). Conflict communication does not take place in a vacuum. Our conflicts take place within interpersonal systems, organizational constraints, and societal structures. Multilevel approaches better represent our lives than single-level approaches. Third, multilevel approaches help researchers and practitioners understand the way that contexts/levels support or inhibit behavior and behavior change in individuals (McLeroy et al., 1988; Stokols, 1996). Research and practice is often interested in creating change in conflict communication to produce better outcomes. Such changes may be desired by individuals and yet not implemented because the sociocultural, political, economic, organizational, or interpersonal contexts do not support the change.However, multilevel frameworks do pose simultaneous challenges and burdens centering on research concerns and practical applications. Researchers have to carefully consider the large number of potential concepts and contexts at multiple levels of analysis. Thus, it is critical to select a theory that addresses the middle ground explanation of various conflict concepts and practices and, simultaneously, is sensitive to and inclusive of multiple-level concerns. Furthermore, there is the burden of considering how to sample and analyze multilevel data concerning the various conflict communication phenomena (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000; Upton & Egan, 2010). Practitioners also have challenges. Multiple levels require close coordination and collaboration with multiple parties. In addition, partialing, or partitioning, the relevant influence of contexts can be difficult. In trying to change conflict communication, practitioners have to weigh the relative contributions of individual attributes, interpersonal relationships, and other contextual factors. Such challenges can be difficult in the absence of concrete theory and evidence about multilevel effects. Against such challenging backdrop, there are multiple approaches in addressing the multilevel lenses.