Relational Conflict
Research on interpersonal conflict has a long history. Research areas range from emotion and conflict (Guerrero, 1994; Jones, 2000), jealousy (Guerrero & Afifi, 1999), conflict frames (Pinkley, 1990), conflict tactics (Canary, Cunningham, & Cody, 1988), and message production ( Sillars, Canary, & Tafoya, 2004), to mediation (Donahue, 1991; Moore, 1996).
An area of interpersonal conflict that has received tremendous attention is conflict in dating and marriages (for reviews, see Caughlin & Vangelisti, 1999, 2006; Gottman & Levenson, 2000; Gottman, Markman, & Notarius, 1977; Heavey, Christensen, & Malamuth, 1995; Kluwer, Heesink, & Van De Vliert, 1997; Vangelisti, 1994). This body of research has analyzed how the environment, the individuals involved, and the relational processes all influence conflict in romantic relationships. Along with examining how men and women differ in relational conflicts, scholars are exploring how factors such as ethnicity (Oggins, Veroff, & Leber, 1993; Raffaelli & Ontai, 2001) and sexual orientation (Patterson, 2000; Peplau & Beals, 2004) potentially influence such conflicts.Caughlin and Vangelisti (2006) maintain that little research has addressed the role of culture in conflicts between romantic partners. Increasingly, however, scholars have shown interest in the role of religion in relational conflicts. Hughes (2004) demonstrates correlations between religiousness/religiosity and interfaith partners’ conflict tactics. In the study, an intrinsic religious orientation (or religiosity) was positively correlated with mutual constructive communication and negatively with demand-withdrawal communication. Furthermore, interfaith partners who were proreligious (high intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness) were found to have more productive conflicts and happier marriages.
People with high intrinsic religiousness are strongly committed to their faith, as it shapes their identity. Individuals with high extrinsic religiousness see religion as a means to an end. For these individuals, religion builds social relationships, comfort, and security. Individuals with extrinsic religiousness are less likely to attend religious services regularly (Allport & Ross, 1967).In a similar study, Lambert and Dollahite (2006) assert that religiosity affects marital conflict, as couples believe that religion helps them prevent conflict escalation, resolve conflicts, and reconcile relationships. The authors created a conceptual model based on these results. Before a conflict, the couples stated that they had a shared purpose and relational virtues steeped in religion. During the conflict, their religious practices, based on their shared purpose and virtues, guided the conflict resolution. After the conflict, the willingness to forgive and commitment to permanence (key religious principles) made it easier for them to reconcile their differences. Respondents also commented on the power of prayer in conflict resolution.
Prayer as a tool to minimize relational conflict has received little attention, but its effects can be profound (Butler, Gardner, & Bird, 1998; Butler, Stout, & Gardner, 2002; Richards & Bergin, 1997). Couples who pray together during a conflict generally report softening, healing, increased partner perspective (understanding), and perception of a change in responsibility (Butler et al., 2002). The results of these studies are partially attributed to prayer bringing religious couples together and increasing the quantity and quality of communication. Furthermore, the authors assert, prayer leads couples to have more empathy for each other and to be more willing to claim and share responsibility in conflicts.