Family Types and Conflict Communication

In an early study of FCP and conflict, Koerner and Fitzpatrick (1997) investigated the influence of conversation orientation and conformity orientation and the four resulting family types on conflict.

With regard to family types, Koerner and Fitzpatrick (1997) found that consensual fam­ilies were characterized by high incidents of their venting of negative feelings and their inclination to solicit social support, which are the result of their high conformity orienta­tion and their high conversation orientation, respectively. That these families often vent their negative feelings seems counterintuitive, because of the potentially harmful conse­quences for their interpersonal relationships. The venting of negative feelings does not fit our perception of the generally supportive and open communication of consensual families. The reason that venting of negative feelings occurs but does not endanger the closeness of consensual families could be that these fami­lies are also high in seeking social support. Generally, the ability to obtain social support is associated with the ability to deal positively with the negative aspects of conflict, such as being insulted or angry.

This possibility is also consistent with the observation that consensual families are in the midrange with regard to conflict avoid­ance. Consensual families score high on both conformity orientation and conversation ori­entation and find themselves in the some­what peculiar situation that they encourage open expressions of conflict, while, at the same time, they consider conflict to be dis­ruptive.

Overall, consensual families perceive con­flict as an inevitable part of family life that needs to be managed in a way that leads to problem solving and maintains the relation­ships among family members. Their style might be described as symmetrically collab­orative and integrative. Open communica­tion is emphasized as an important means of managing conflict, as is the willingness of family members to listen to each other, to be persuaded by good arguments, and to go along with family decisions. Parents have dis­proportionate influence on family decisions, but the influence is exerted primarily through persuasion, not coercion.

Pluralistic families are characterized by their low conflict avoidance, which is the result of both their high conversation orienta­tion and low conformity orientation. Similar to consensual families in their inclination to seek social support, they are different from consensual families in their low expression of negative feelings. This is surprising because pluralistic families should be less constrained in expressing their negative feelings to one another than consensual families because they do not experience the same desire for har­monic relationships as consensual families. An explanation for this apparent contradiction is that pluralistic families experience much less negative feelings and hostility among family members because they do not avoid address­ing conflicts and, therefore, do not have many unresolved conflicts. As a result, these fami­lies experience more positive relationships than other families, which are more likely to avoid conflict.

Overall, pluralistic families perceive conflict as an important part of family life that should not be avoided. They engage in conflict com­munication that is primarily expressive and concerned with problem solving and places less emphasis on relationships.

Protective families have one of the most interesting patterns of conflict. These families are characterized by conflict avoidance, com­pliance with parental authority, and high inci­dents of verbal hostility. This pattern is much less surprising when one considers that these families are also low in seeking social support. These families lack the mechanisms to produc­tively deal with conflict, either by discussing and resolving conflict with their families or by obtaining social support from outsiders. As a consequence, there are many unmet goals within their families, and members of these families experience hostility and negative feel­ings toward other family members as a result. These negative emotions are expressed in short, emotional outbursts. Because these out­bursts are typically responded to either with forceful repression if they are directed at an authority figure or with silence if directed at a family member of lower status, they do not lead to negatively charged exchanges.

Overall, protective families perceive con­flict as a disruption of family life and go to great lengths to avoid it. If they engage in conflict communication, it is primarily to affirm family or social rules, and emphasis is placed on compliance with authority figures. Their style might be described as complemen­tary, assertive, or submissive based on family members’ place in the family hierarchy. Open communication is avoided. Rules and norms are evoked as guidelines for behavior or as reason for compliance with parents. Parents are often unwilling to listen to the children but expect them to go along with family deci­sions, even if they disagree with them.

Laissez-faire families are characterized by the relative low frequency and intensity of their conflict episodes. These families tend to avoid rather than to engage in conflict and experience few incidents of venting of nega­tive feelings. At the same time, they are low in seeking social support. This pattern is con­sistent with persons with low investment in their family relationships who often are emo­tionally divorced from one another. Although these families do not actively avoid conflict because they perceive it not to be threatening to their families, due to the greater indepen­dence of family members, they experience less goal blockage from one another and therefore less overall conflict with one another. At the same time, because their family relationships are less important, unresolved conflicts are not particularly taxing to them and, therefore, do not create the hostility experienced and expressed in other families.

Overall, laissez-faire families perceive con­flict as less important to their family life and as something that is better avoided than engaged in. When they do engage in conflict communication, it is primarily concerned with problem solving, and there is little emphasis on relationship maintenance. Their style might be described as symmetrically disengaged and acquiescent. Communication is not perceived as an important means to solve conflict. While family members are willing to listen to each other, they do not feel the need to be persuaded by good arguments but tend to go along with family decisions they disagree with. Neither parents nor children have dispropor­tionate influence on family decisions, primar­ily because all family members perceive family interests secondary to personal interests.

Although family communication pattern theory with its decidedly cognitive focus is very much grounded in a Western view of psy­chology and family, it has been successfully used in the study of non-Western families. These studies have produced surprisingly similar results, suggesting that the underlying cognitive processes are universal rather than culture specific. For example, for Chinese families, Zhang (2008) found that FCP and children’s assertiveness and responsiveness correlate in the same way as in U.S. families. Specifically, with regard to conflict styles of Chinese families, Zhang (2007) found that conversation orientation was associated with a collaborative style, whereas conformity ori­entation was associated with a competitive conflict style, again mirroring U.S. families. Research using FCP in Iran (Koroshnia & Latifian, 2008), Malaysia (Omar, Mustaffa, & Nordin, 2007), and Japan (Shearman & Dumlao, 2008) produced similar results, suggesting the broad applicability of FCP theory.