Sunteți pe pagina 1din 61

The concept of introversion and


extroversion and introversion terms introduced into psychology

by Carl Jung to identify opposite psychological types. Jung saw the
activity of the extrovert directed toward the external world and
that of the introvert inward upon himself or herself. This general
activity or drive of the individual was called the libido by Jung,
who removed from the term the sexual character ascribed to it by
Sigmund Freud . The extrovert is characteristically the active
person who is most content when surrounded by people; carried
to the neurotic extreme such behavior appears to constitute an
irrational flight into society, where the extrovert's feelings are
acted out. The introvert, on the other hand, is normally a
contemplative individual who enjoys solitude and the inner life of
ideas and the imagination. The extreme introvert's fantasies give
him or her libidinal satisfactions and tend to become more
meaningful to him than objective reality. Severe introversion is
characteristic of autism and some forms of schizophrenia . Jung
did not suggest strict classification of individuals as extroverted or
introverted, since each person has tendencies in both directions,
although one direction generally predominates. Influenced by
Jung, Hans Eysenck conducted research on large samples of
individuals, creating more objective classifications for
extroversion and introversion.

Concept of introversion
Introversion is "the state of or tendency toward being wholly or
predominantly concerned with and interested in one's own mental
life”. introverts are people whose energy tends to expand through
reflection and dwindle during interaction.

Contrary to what most people think, an introvert is not simply a

person who is shy. In fact, being shy has little to do with being an
introvert! Shyness has an element of apprehension, nervousness
and anxiety, and while an introvert may also be shy, introversion
itself is not shyness. Basically, an introvert is a person who is
energized by being alone and whose energy is drained by being
around other people. Introverts are more concerned with the
inner world of the mind. They enjoy thinking, exploring their
thoughts and feelings. They often avoid social situations because
being around people drains their energy. This is true even if they
have good social skills. After being with people for any length of
time, such as at a party, they need time alone to "recharge."

When introverts want to be alone, it is not, by itself, a sign of

depression. It means that they either need to regain their energy
from being around people or that they simply want the time to be
with their own thoughts. Being with people, even people they like
and are comfortable with, can prevent them from their desire to
be quietly introspective.

Being introspective, though, does not mean that an introvert

never has conversations. However, those conversations are
generally about ideas and concepts, not about what they consider
the trivial matters of social small talk.

Introverts make up about 60% of the gifted population but only

about 25-40% of the general population.

Concept of extroversion
Extroversion is "the act, state, or habit of being predominantly
concerned with and obtaining gratification from what is outside
the self”. Extroverts tend to enjoy human interactions and are
generally enthusiastic, talkative, assertive, and gregarious in
social situations.

They take pleasure in activities that involve large social

gatherings such as: parties, community activities, public
demonstrations, business, and political groups. Politics, teaching,
sales, managing and brokering are fields that favor extroversion.
An extroverted person enjoys and becomes energized by larger
groups of people while time alone is less enjoyable and boring to
them. Extroverts aren't necessarily unintelligent or uncaring but
tend to speak or act before putting much thought into what they
do; not entirely realizing the lasting effects of their decisions.

Richard Depue and Paul Collins, professors of psychology

at Cornell University and University of Oregon, define
extroversion as having two central characteristics: interpersonal
engagement and impulsivity Interpersonal engagement
includes the characteristics of affiliation and agency. Affiliation
means enjoying and being receptive to the company of others
and agency means seeking social dominance and leadership
roles, and being motivated to achieve goals They also closely link
extroversion to "positive affect" which includes general positive
feelings and motivation . Extroverts, they claim are more
sensitive to reward than punishment whereas introverts are more
sensitive to punishment than reward . According to Depue,
"When our dopamine system is activated, we are more positive,
excited, and eager to go after goals or rewards, such as food, sex,
money, education, or professional achievements", that is, when
our dopamine system is activated, we are more extroverted, or
exhibit more "positive emotionality"
Jung's psychological types

Psychological Types

Carl Jung describes four psychological functions that are capable

of becoming conscious, but to differing degrees in specific

Sensation - all perceptions by means of the sense organs.

Intuition - perception by way of the unconscious, or perception

of unconscious events.

Thinking (in socionics, logic) - interpretation of information based

on whether it is correct or incorrect.

Feeling (in socionics, ethics) - interpretation of information based

on its ethical aspects.

For example, Jung's model for 2 types: extraverted intuitive-

thinking (ILE) and introverted feeling-sensory (ESI)


dominant function

auxiliary function

tertiary function

inferior function


extraverted intuition

introverted thinking

introverted feeling
introverted sensation


introverted feeling

extraverted sensation

extraverted intuition

extraverted thinking

Eysenck's three-factor model

Eysenck's theory

The two personality dimensions, Extraversion and Neuroticism,

were described in his 1947 book Dimensions of Personality. It is
common practice in personality psychology to refer to the
dimensions by the first letters, E and N.

E and N provided a 2-dimensional space to describe individual

differences in behaviour. An analogy can be made to how latitude
and longitude describe a point on the face of the earth. Also,
Eysenck noted how these two dimensions were similar to the four
personality types first proposed by the Greek physician

High N and High E = Choleric type

High N and Low E = Melancholic type

Low N and High E = Sanguine type

Low N and Low E = Phlegmatic type

The third dimension, psychoticism, was added to the model in the
late 1970s, based upon collaborations between Eysenck and his
wife, Sybil B. G. Eysenck, who is the current editor of Personality
and Individual Differences.

The major strength of Eysenck's model was to provide detailed

theory of the causes of personality. For example, Eysenck
proposed that extraversion was caused by variability in cortical
arousal: "introverts are characterized by higher levels of activity
than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused
than extraverts".While it seems counterintuitive to suppose that
introverts are more aroused than extraverts, the putative effect
this has on behaviour is such that the introvert seeks lower levels
of stimulation. Conversely, the extravert seeks to heighten his or
her arousal to a more favorable level (as predicted by the
Yerkes-Dodson Law) by increased activity, social engagement
and other stimulation-seeking behaviors.

Comparison with other theories

The major alternative to Eysenck's three-factor model of

personality is a model that makes use of five broad traits, often
called the Big Five model (Costa & McCrae, 1985). The traits in
the Big Five are as follows:

1. Openness to experience

2. Conscientiousness

3. Extraversion

4. Agreeableness

5. Neuroticism

Extraversion and Neuroticism in the Big Five are similar to

Eysenck's traits of the same name. However, what Eysenck calls
the trait of Psychoticism corresponds to two traits in the Big Five
model: Conscientiousness and Agreeableness. Eysenck's
personality system did not address Openness to experience. He
argued that his approach was a better description of personality
(Eysenck, 1992a; 1992b).

Another important model of personality is that of Jeffrey Alan

Gray, a former student of his.

The Big Five personality traits

The initial model was advanced by Ernest Tupes and Raymond
Cristal in 1961, but failed to reach an academic audience until
the 1980s. In 1990, J.M. Digman advanced his five factor
model of personality, which Goldberg extended to the highest
level of organization (Goldberg, 1993). These five over-arching
domains have been found to contain and subsume most known
personality traits and are assumed to represent the basic
structure behind all personality traits. These five factors provide a
rich conceptual framework for integrating all the research findings
and theory in personality psychology. The Big Five traits are also
referred to as the "Five Factor Model" or FFM (Costa & McCrae,
1992), and as the Global Factors of personality (Russell & Karol,

The Big Five factors and their constituent traits can be

summarized as follows:

Openness – (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious).

Appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity,
and variety of experience.

Conscientiousness – (efficient/organized vs. easy-

going/careless). A tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully,
and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous
Extraversion – (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved).
Energy, positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency to seek
stimulation in the company of others.

Agreeableness – (friendly/compassionate vs. cold/unkind). A

tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than
suspicious and antagonistic towards others.

Neuroticism – (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). A

tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as
anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability.

Four Temperaments
Four Temperaments is a theory of psychology that stems from the
ancient medical concept of humorism.

The four temperament types

Each of the four types of humours corresponded to a different

personality type.


The Sanguine temperament personality is fairly extroverted.

People of a sanguine temperament tend to enjoy social
gatherings, making new friends and tend to be quite loud. They
are usually quite creative and often daydream. However, some
alone time is crucial for those of this temperament. Sanguine can
also mean very sensitive, compassionate and thoughtful.
Sanguine personalities generally struggle with following tasks all
the way through, are chronically late, and tend to be forgetful and
sometimes a little sarcastic. Often, when pursuing a new hobby,
interest is lost quickly when it ceases to be engaging or fun. They
are very much people persons. They are talkative and not shy. For
some people, these are the ones you want to be friends with and
usually they become life long friends. Sanguine can be sometimes


A person who is choleric is a do-er. They have a lot of ambition,

energy, and passion, and try to instil it in others. They can
dominate people of other temperaments, especially phlegmatic
types. Many great charismatic military and political figures were
cholerics. They like to be leaders and in charge of everything.


A person who is a thoughtful ponderer has a melancholic

disposition. Often very considerate and get rather worried when
they could not be on time for events, melancholics can be highly
creative in activities such as poetry and art - and can become
occupied with the tragedy and cruelty in the world. A melancholic
is also often a perfectionist. They are often self-reliant and
independent; one negative part of being a melancholic is
sometimes they can get so involved in what they are doing they
forget to think of others.


Phlegmatics tend to be self-content and kind. They can be very

accepting and affectionate. They may be very receptive and shy
and often prefer stability to uncertainty and change. They are
very consistent, relaxed, rational, curious, and observant, making
them good administrators. However they can also be very passive
and aggressive.

Cattell's 16 personality factors

The 16 Personality Factors, measured by the 16PF Questionnaire,
were multivariately-derived by psychologist Raymond Cattell

Primary Factors- warmth, reasoning, emotional stability,

dominance , Liveliness, rule consciousness, social
nsion,openness to change, self-reliance, perfectionism, tension.

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is one of
the most frequently used personality tests in mental health. The
test is used by trained professionals to assist in identifying
personality structure and psychopathology.

The first major revision of the MMPI was the MMPI-2, which was
standardized on a new national sample of adults in the United
States and released in 1989.[2] It is appropriate for use with
adults 18 and over.


A version of the test designed for adolescents, the MMPI-A, was

released in 1992. The MMPI-A has 478 items, with a short form of
350 items.


A new and psychometrically improved version of the MMPI-2 has

recently been developed employing rigorous statistical methods
that were used to develop the RC Scales in 2003. The new MMPI-2
Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) has now been released by
Pearson Assessments.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment is a
psychometric questionnaire designed to measure psychological
preferences in how people perceive the world and make

Four dichotomies
Attitudes: Extroversion (E)/Introversion (I)

Myers-Briggs literature uses the terms extroversion and

introversion as Jung first used them, and preserves the original
spelling of extroversion. Extroversion means "outward-turning"
and introversion means "inward-turning." These specific
definitions vary somewhat from the popular usage of the words.

Functions: Sensing (S)/Intuition (N) and Thinking

(T)/Feeling (F)

Jung identified two pairs of psychological functions:

• The two perceiving functions, sensing and intuition.

• The two judging functions, thinking and feeling.

Dominant function
According to Myers and Briggs, people use all four cognitive
functions. However, one function is generally used in a more
conscious and confident way. This dominant function is supported
by the secondary (auxiliary) function, and to a lesser degree the
tertiary function. The fourth and least conscious function is always
the opposite of the dominant function. Myers called this inferior
function the shadow.
Lifestyle: Judgment (J)/Perception (P)
Myers and Briggs added another dimension to Jung's typological
model by identifying that people also have a preference for using
either the judging
function (thinking or feeling) or their perceiving function (sensing
or intuition) when relating to the outside world (extraversion).

The concept of conflict

Conflict can be a disagreement, the presence of tension, or some

other difficulty between two or more parties. It may occur
between individuals or between groups. Conflict is often related in
interference or opposition between the parties involved. The
parties in conflict usually see each other as frustrating or about to
frustrate, their needs or goals. Conflict can be public or private,
formal or informal, or be approached rationally or irrationally.

5 Stages of Conflict process

Stage 1: Potential opposition or incompatibility: The first

step in the conflict process is the presence on conditions that
create opportunities for conflict to rise. These cause or create
opportunities for conflict to rise. These causes or sources of
conflict have been condenses into three general categories -
(1)Communications (2) Structure (3) Personal Variables.
(1)Communications: Different words connotations, jargon
insufficient exchange of information and noise in communication
channel are all antecedent conditions to conflict. Too much
communication as well as too little communication can rely
foundation for conflict.
(2)Structure: The term structure is used, in this context to
include variables such as size, degree of specialization in the
tasks assigned to group members, jurisdictional clarity, members/
goal compatibility, leadership styles, reward systems and the
degree of dependence between groups.
The size and specialization act as forces to stimulate conflict. The
larger the group and the more specialized its activities, the
greater the likelihood of conflict. Tenure and conflict have been
found to be inversely related,. The potential for conflicts tends to
be greatest when group members are younger and when turnover
is high. The greater the ambiguity in defining where responsibility
for action lies, the greater the potential for conflict to emerge.
Such Jurisdictional ambiguity increases inter group fighting for
control or resources and territory.
(3)Personal Variables: Certain personality types- for example
individuals who are highly authoritarian and dogmatic- lead to
potential conflict. Another reason for conflict is difference in value
systems. Value differences are the best explanations of diverse
issues such as prejudice disagreements over one’s contribution to
the group and rewards one deserves.
Stage 2: Cognition and personalization: conflict must be
perceived by the parties to it whether or not conflict exists is a
perception issue. If no one is aware of a conflict, then it is
generally agreed that no conflict exists. Because conflict is
perceives does not mean that is personalized. For e.g. ” A may be
aware that B and A are in serious disagreements but it may not
make A tense or nations and it may have no effect whatsoever on
A’s affection towards B” It is the felt level , when individuals
become emotionally involved that parties experience anxiety ,
tension or hostility. Stage2 is the place in the process where the
parties decide what the conflict is about and emotions plays a
major role in shaping perception.
Stage 3: Intentions: Intentions are decisions to act in a given
way intentions intervene between people’s perception and
emotions and their overt behavior.
Using two dimensions cooperativeness (the degree to which one
party attempts to satisfy the other party’s concerns)and
assertiveness (the degree to which one party attempts to satisfy
his or her own concerns)- five conflict handling intentions can be
1) Competing: when one person seeks to satisfy his or her own
interests regardless of the impact on the other parties to the
conflict, he is competing.
2) Collaborating: A situation in which the parties to a conflict
each desire to satisfy fully the concerns of all the parties. In
collaborating, the intention o the partiesare to solve the problem
by clarifying differences rather than by accommodating various
points of view.
3) Avoiding: a person may recognize that a conflict exists and
want to withdraw from it or suppress it. Avoiding included trying
to just ignore a conflict and avoiding others with whom you
4) Accommodating: The willingness of one partying a conflict
top lace the opponent’s interest above his or her own.
5) Compromising: A situation in which each party to a conflict is
wiling to give up something.
Intentions provide general guidelines for parties in a
conflict situation. They define each party’s purpose. Yet people
intention is not fixed. During the course of conflict, they might
change because of reconceptualization or because of an
emotional reaction to the behavior of other party.
Stage 4: Behavior: This is a stage where conflict becomes
visible. The behavior stage includes the statements, actions and
reactions made by the conflicting parties. These conflict behaviors
are usually overt attempt to implement each party’s intentions.
Stage 5 Outcomes: The action reaction interplay between the
conflicting parties result in consequences. These outcomes may
be functional in that the conflict results in an improvement in the
group’s performance, or dysfunctional in that it hinders group
Conflict is constructive when it improves the quality of decisions
simulates creativity and innovations encourages interest and
curiosity among group members provides the medium through
which problems can be aired and tensions released and fosters an
environment of self evaluation and change.
Conflict is dysfunctional when uncontrolled opposition breeds
discontent, which acts to dissolve common ties and eventually
leads to the destruction of the group. Among the more
undesirable consequences are a retarding of communication,
reductions in group cohesiveness and subordination of group
goals to the primacy of infighting between members.

Views on conflict
There are different ways of looking at organizational conflict. all
of these ways is linked to a different set of assumptions about the
purpose and function of organizations.

The Bad

The dysfunctional view of organizational conflict is imbedded in

the notion that organizations are created to achieve goals by
creating structures that perfectly define job responsibilities,
authorities, and other job functions. Like a clockwork watch, each
"cog" knows where it fits, knows what it must do and knows how
it relates to other parts. This traditional view of organizations
values orderliness, stability and the repression of any conflict that
occurs. Using the timepiece analogy we can see the sense in
this. What would happen to time-telling if the gears in our
traditional watches decided to become less traditional, and re-
define their roles in the system?
To the "traditional" organizational thinker, conflict implies that the
organization is not designed or structured correctly or
adequately. Common remedies would be to further elaborate job
descriptions, authorities and responsibilities, increase the use of
central power (discipline), separate conflicting members, etc.

This view of organizations and conflict causes problems.

Unfortunately, most of us, consciously or unconsciously, value
some of the characteristics of this "orderly" environment.
roblems arise when we do not realize that this way of looking at
organizations and conflict only fits organizations that work in
routine ways where innovation and change are virtually
eliminated. Virtually all government organizations work within a
very disorderly context -- one characterized by constant change
and a need for constant adaptation. Trying to "structure away"
conflict and disagreement in a dynamic environment requires
tremendous amounts of energy, and will also suppress any
positive outcomes that may come from disagreement, such as
improved decision-making and innovation.

The Good

The functional view of organizational conflict sees conflict as a

productive force, one that can stimulate members of the
organization to increase their knowledge and skills, and their
contribution to organizational innovation and productivity. Unlike
the position mentioned above, this more modern approach
considers that the keys to organization success lie not in
structure, clarity and orderliness, but in creativity, responsiveness
and adaptability. The successful organization, then, NEEDS
conflict so that diverging views can be put on the table, and new
ways of doing things can be created.

The functional view of conflict also suggests that conflict provides

people with feedback about how things are going. Even
"personality conflicts" carry information to the manager about
what is not working in an organization, affording the opportunity
to improve.
If you subscribe to a flexible vision of effective organizations, and
recognize that each conflict situation provides opportunity to
improve, you then shift your view of conflict. Rather than trying
to eliminate conflict, or suppress its symptoms, your task
becomes managing conflict so that it enhances people and
organizations, rather than destroying people and organizations.

So, the task is to manage conflict, and avoid what we call "the
ugly"....where conflict is allowed to eat away at team
cohesiveness and productivity.

The Ugly

We have the good (conflict is positive), the bad (conflict is to be

avoided), and now we need to address the ugly. Ugly occurs
where the manager (and perhaps employees) attempt to
eliminate or suppress conflict in situations where it is impossible
to do so. You know you have ugly in your organization when:

• many conflicts run for years

• people have given up on resolving and addressing conflict
• there is a good deal of private bitching and complaining but
little attempt to fix the problem
• staff show little interest in working to common goals, but
spend more time and energy on protecting themselves

When we get "ugly" occurring in organizations, there is a

tendency to look to the manager or formal leader as being
responsible for the mess. In fact, that is how most employees
would look at the situation. It is true that managers and
supervisors play critical roles in determining how conflict is
handled in the organization, but it is also true that the avoidance
of ugliness must be a shared responsibility. Management and
employees must work together in a cooperative way to reduce
the ugliness, and increase the likelihood that conflict can be
channeled into an effective force for change.

Ugly Strategies
In future articles we will look at what you can do to proactively
manage conflict to increase the probability that positive outcomes
occur. Right now, let's look at some common strategies that
result in the increase of ugly conflict.

Most of the ugly strategies used by managers, employees, and

organizations as a whole are based on the repression of conflict in
one way or another. We need to point that, in general, you want
to avoid these approaches like the plague.

Ugly #1: Nonaction

The most common repressive management strategy is nonaction

-- doing nothing. Now, sometimes, doing nothing is a smart thing
to o, provided the decision to do nothing is well thought out and
based on an analysis of the situation. Most of the time, people
"do nothing" about conflict situations for other reasons, such as
fear of bringing conflict into view, or discomfort with anger.

Unfortunately, doing nothing generally results in conflict

escalating, and sets a tone for the organization..."we don't have
conflict here". Everyone knows you have conflict, and if you seem
oblivious, you also seem dense and out of touch.

Ugly #2: Administrative Orbiting

Administrative orbiting means keeping appeals for change or

redress always "under consideration". While nonaction suggests
obliviousness since it doesn't even acknowledge the problem,
orbiting acknowledges the problem, but avoids dealing with it.
The manager who uses orbiting will say things like "We are
dealing with the problem", but the problem never gets
addressed. Common stalls include: collecting more data,
documenting performance, cancelling meetings, etc.

Ugly #3: Secrecy

A common means of avoiding conflict (or repressing it) is to be

secretive. This can be done by employees and managers. The
notion is that if nobody knows what you are doing, there can be
little conflict. If you think about this for a moment, you will realize
its absurdity. By being secretive you may delay conflict and
confrontation, but when it does surface it will have far more
negative emotions attached to it than would have been the case if
things were more open.

Ugly #4: Law and Order

The final "ugly strategy". Normally this strategy is used by

managers who mistakenly think that they can order people to not
be in conflict. Using regulations, and power, the person using the
approach "leans on" people to repress the outward manifestations
of conflict.

Of course, this doesn't make conflict go away, it just sends it

scuttling to the underground, where it will grow and increase its
destructive power.


The notion that conflict should be avoided is one of the major

contributors to the growth of destructive conflict in the
workplace. The "bad" view of conflict is associated with a vision
of organizational effectiveness that is no longer valid (and
perhaps never was). Conflict can be directed and managed so
that it causes both people and organizations to grow, innovate
and improve. However, this requires that conflict not be
repressed, since attempts to repress are more likely to generate
very ugly situations. Common repression strategies to be avoided
are: nonaction, administrative orbiting, secrecy and law and

Inter group conflict

Webster's Dictionary defines a group as "a number of persons
near, placed, or classified together." Others define a group as a
"social unit that consists of a number of individuals (1) who, at a
given time, have role and status relationships with one another,
stabilized in some degree and (2) who possess a set of values or
norms regulating the attitude and behavior of individual
members, at least in matters of consequence to them."

Intergroup relations between two or more groups and their

respective members are often necessary to complete the work
required to operate a business. Many times, groups inter-relate to
accomplish the organization's goals and objectives, and conflict
can occur. Some conflict, called functional conflict, is considered
positive, because it enhances performance and identifies
weaknesses. Dysfunctional conflict, however, is confrontation or
interaction between groups that harms the organization or
hinders attainment of goals or objectives.

Causes of Intergroup Conflict

One of the most prominent reasons for intergroup conflict is

simply the nature of the group. Other reasons may be work
interdependence, goal variances, differences in perceptions, and
the increased demand for specialists. Also, individual members of
a group often play a role in the initiation of group conflict. Any
given group embodies various qualities, values, or unique traits
that are created, followed, and even defended. These clans can
then distinguish "us" from "them." Members who violate
important aspects of the group, and especially outsiders, who
offend these ideals in some way, normally receive some type of
corrective or defensive response. Relationships between groups
often reflect the opinions they hold of each other's characteristics.
When groups share some interests and their directions seem
parallel, each group may view the other positively; however, if the
activities and goals of groups differ, they may view each other in
a negative manner. When trying to prevent or correct intergroup
conflict, it is important to consider the history of relations
between the groups in conflict. History will repeat itself if left to
its own devices.

Limited resources and reward structures can foster intergroup

conflict by making the differences in group goals more apparent.
Differences in perceptions among groups regarding time and
status, when coupled with different group goals, can also create
conflict. Reorganization of the workplace and integration of
services and facilities can be stressful to some and create
negative conflict. Some individuals within the group have inherent
traits or social histories that impact intergroup conflict, but
problems within intergroup relations are not usually caused by
the deviate behavior of a few individuals.

Consequences of Intergroup Conflict

Intergroup conflict causes changes to occur, both within the

groups in conflict and between them. Within the groups, members
will usually overlook individual differences in an effort to unite
against the other side, and with this concerted effort the focus is
on the task. The group can become more efficient and effective at
what they do, and members can become more loyal, closely
following group norms. Problems can occur, however, when the
group loses focus of the organization's goals and becomes closed
off from other groups. Haughtiness and isolation quickly lead to
decreased communication. Communication is the key between
groups in reciprocal interdependence, and these have the highest
negative consequences for lack of effective communication.
Miscommunication can be the death knell of any organization.

Conflict reaction styles

People deal with conflict in different ways. Some have an initial
tendency to escape, and others are more prone to get involved .
once involved, people also vary in how they face the conflict.
These styles of conflict behavior are discussed below.

The Conflict Resolution Model

In his book, Overcoming the Five Dysfunctions of a
Team, Patrick Lencioni presents another conflict resolution
model. Lencioni’s model is a series of concentric circles
centered around a point of conflict .
This model proposes four different types of obstacles
that prevent issues from being resolved. According to
Lencioni, the obstacles closest to the center of the model—
i.e., the issue—are the easiest barriers to overcome, with
obstacles becoming increasingly more difficult to overcome
as one moves outward from the center of the model. These
barriers include:

· Informational obstacles (circle closest to the issue or

conflict)—the easiest issues for most people to discuss;
individuals must exchange information, facts, opinions, and
perspectives if they want to move toward resolution.

· Environmental obstacles (the next circle out)—the

atmosphere in which the conflict is taking place; the physical
space, office politics, individual moods, and company culture
can all have an effect on the resolution process.

· Relationship obstacles (the next circle out)—issues

between the people involved in the conflict; prior unresolved
legacies or events among the parties, their reputation, or
even position in the organization may affect how people work
through conflict.

· Individual obstacles (the outermost circle)—issues that are

specific to each person in the conflict; individual experiences,
IQ, EQ, knowledge, self-esteem, and even values and motives
all play a part in causing and eventually resolving conflict
(Lencioni 125).

Lencioni explains that the key to this model is to

understand that these obstacles exist during discussions.
When a conflict arises because of a particular obstacle, the
group should consider the model to decide whether to
address the issue. Lencioni contends that if parties choose
not to address and resolve an issue, they should agree not to
let it affect their ability to resolve the larger conflict.
Lencioni also states that obstacles at the outside of the
circle are more difficult to resolve, largely because they
involve personalities and other issues that are not easy to
change. In this way, this conflict resolution model resembles
Furlong’s Circle of Conflict model as they both reveal hot-
button issues managers should avoid when attempting to
resolve conflict. Certainly, the issues toward the outside of
the circle in Lencioni’s model and those in the top half of
Furlong’s model are the most challenging. Parties that are
able to talk about these types of issues must trust each other
because doing so involves some type of personal risk
(Lencioni 127).

Clearly, the methods available to resolve conflicts are

numerous. There is certainly no right or wrong way to solve a
problem. What is right for one conflict may be wrong for
another; it all depends on the situation and variables

The two conflict resolution models presented here

illustrate that conflict most often happens when the emphasis
is on differences between people. In their book Dealing With
People You Can’t Stand, authors Dr. Rick Brinkman and Dr.
Rick Kirschner cleverly describe it this way, “United we stand,
divided we can’t stand each other” . In short, when people
concentrate on what they have in common with one another
instead of their differences, relationships run smoothly and
conflict is significantly minimized.

A model of Conflict resolution styles

Five different styles of reacting to conflict that are drawn from
these theories are:

Avoiding, accommodating, competition, compromising, and

collaborating. These five styles are set in a two dimensional
The horizontal dimension reflects the degree to which a person
has concern for the party’s needs and goals. High concern
towards the other party’s reflects cooperativeness and a desire to
maintain a relationship. People who are low on this dimension are
not interested in the other party’s concerns, nor do they care
much about preserving the relationship, they have uncooperative

The vertical dimension refers to how concerned a party is for

his own needs and goals. A low concern reflects unassertiveness
and a willingness to sacrifice one’s own needs. People who are
high on this dimension are assertive, and their main desire is to
achieve their own goals.

• Competing
Competing is assertive and uncooperative -- an individual pursues
his own concerns at the other person's expense. This is a power-
oriented mode in which you use whatever power seems
appropriate to win your own position -- your ability to argue, your
rank, or economic sanctions. Competing means "standing up for
your rights," defending a position which you believe is correct, or
simply trying to win.

• Accommodating

Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative -- the complete

opposite of competing. When , the individual neglects his own
concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; there is an
element of self-sacrifice in this mode. might take the form of
selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person's order
when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another's point of

• Avoiding

Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative -- the person neither

pursues his own concerns nor those of the other individual. Thus
he does not deal with the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of
diplomatically sidestepping an issue,postponing an issue until a
better time, or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation.

• Collaborating
Collaborating is both assertive and cooperative -- the complete
opposite of avoiding. Collaborating involves an attempt to work
with others to find some solution that fully satisfies their
concerns. It means digging into an issue to pinpoint the
underlying needs and wants of the two individuals. Collaborating
between two persons might take the form of exploring a
disagreement to learn from each other's insights or trying to find
a creative solution to an interpersonal problem.

• Compromising

Compromising is moderate in both assertiveness and

cooperativeness. The objective is to find some expedient,
mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. It
falls intermediate between competing and collaborating.
Compromising gives up more than competing but less than .
Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than avoiding, but
does not explore it in as much depth as collaborating. In some
situations, compromising might mean splitting the difference
between the two positions, exchanging concessions, or seeking a
quick middle-ground solution.

Concept of

Motivation is the driving force which causes us to achieve goals.

Motivation is said to be intrinsic or extrinsic. The term is generally
used for humans but, theoretically, it can also be used to describe
the causes for animal behavior as well. According to various
theories, motivation may be rooted in a basic need to minimize
physical pain and maximize pleasure, or it may include specific
needs such as eating and resting, or a desired object, goal, state
of being, ideal, or it may be attributed to less-apparent reasons
such as altruism, selfishness, morality, or avoiding mortality.
Conceptually, motivation should not be confused with either
volition or optimism. Motivation is related to, but distinct from,

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

Intrinsic motivation
Intrinsic motivation refers to motivation that is driven by an
interest or enjoyment in the task itself, and exists within the
individual rather than relying on any external pressure. Intrinsic
motivation has been studied by social and educational
psychologists since the early 1970s. Research has found that it is
usually associated with high educational achievement and
enjoyment by students. Explanations of intrinsic motivation have
been given in the context of Fritz Heider's attribution theory,
Bandura's work on self-efficacy,and Deci and Ryan's cognitive
evaluation theory.

Extrinsic motivation
Extrinsic motivation comes from outside of the individual.
Common extrinsic motivations are rewards like money and
grades, coercion and threat of punishment. Competition is in
general extrinsic because it encourages the performer to win and
beat others, not to enjoy the intrinsic rewards of the activity. A
crowd cheering on the individual and trophies are also extrinsic

Social psychological research has indicated that extrinsic

rewards can lead to over justification and a subsequent reduction
in intrinsic motivation. In one study demonstrating this effect,
children who expected to be (and were) rewarded with a ribbon
and a gold star for drawing pictures spent less time playing with
the drawing materials in subsequent observations than children
who were assigned to an unexpected reward condition and to
children who received no extrinsic reward.

Motivational theories

Incentive theory
A reward, tangible or intangible, is presented after the occurrence
of an action (i.e. behavior) with the intent to cause the behavior
to occur again. This is done by associating positive meaning to
the behavior. Studies show that if the person receives the reward
immediately, the effect would be greater, and decreases as
duration lengthens. Repetitive action-reward combination can
cause the action to become habit. Motivation comes from two
sources: oneself, and other people. These two sources are called
intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, respectively.

Applying proper motivational techniques can be much harder

than it seems. Steven Kerr notes that when creating a reward
system, it can be easy to reward A, while hoping for B, and in the
process, reap harmful effects that can jeopardize your goals.
A reinforcer is different from reward, in that reinforcement is
intended to create a measured increase in the rate of a desirable
behavior following the addition of something to the environment.

Drive theory
There are a number of drive theories. The Drive Reduction Theory
grows out of the concept that we have certain biological drives,
such as hunger. As time passes the strength of the drive
increases if it is not satisfied (in this case by eating). Upon
satisfying a drive the drive's strength is reduced. The theory is
based on diverse ideas from the theories of Freud to the ideas of
feedback control systems, such as a thermostat.

Drive theory has some intuitive or folk validity. For instance when
preparing food, the drive model appears to be compatible with
sensations of rising hunger as the food is prepared, and, after the
food has been consumed, a decrease in subjective hunger. There
are several problems, however, that leave the validity of drive
reduction open for debate. The first problem is that it does not
explain how secondary reinforcers reduce drive. For example,
money satisfies no biological or psychological needs, but a pay
check appears to reduce drive through second-order conditioning.
Secondly, a drive, such as hunger, is viewed as having a "desire"
to eat, making the drive a homuncular being—a feature criticized
as simply moving the fundamental problem behind this "small
man" and his desires.

Cognitive dissonance theory

Cognitive dissonance Suggested by Leon Festinger, this occurs
when an individual experiences some degree of discomfort
resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions. For
example, a consumer may seek to reassure himself regarding a
purchase, feeling, in retrospect, that another decision may have
been preferable.

Another example of cognitive dissonance is when a belief and a

behavior are in conflict. A person may wish to be healthy, believes
smoking is bad for one's health, and yet continues to smoke.

Need theories

Need hierarchy theory

Abraham Maslow's theory is one of the most widely discussed

theories of motivation.

The theory can be summarized as follows:

Human beings have wants and desires which influence their

behavior. Only unsatisfied needs influence behavior, satisfied
needs do not.Since needs are many, they are arranged in order of
importance, from the basic to the complex.

The person advances to the next level of needs only after the
lower level need is at least minimally satisfied.The further the
progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and
psychological health a person will show.

The needs, listed from basic (lowest-earliest) to most complex

(highest-latest) are as follows:

• Physiology (hunger, thirst, sleep, etc.)

• Safety/Security/Shelter/Health

• Belongingness/Love/Friendship

• Self-esteem/Recognition/Achievement

• Self actualization

Herzberg's two-factor theory

Frederick Herzberg's two-factor theory, a.k.a. intrinsic/extrinsic
motivation, concludes that certain factors in the workplace result
in job satisfaction, but if absent, they don't lead to dissatisfaction
but no satisfaction.[7]

The factors that motivate people can change over their lifetime,
but "respect for me as a person" is one of the top motivating
factors at any stage of life.

He distinguished between:Motivators; (e.g. challenging work,

recognition, responsibility) which give positive satisfaction,
andHygiene factors; (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe
benefits) that do not motivate if present, but, if absent, result in

The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the

presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause
health deterioration.

The theory is sometimes called the "Motivator-Hygiene Theory"

and/or "The Dual Structure Theory."Herzberg's theory has found
application in such occupational fields as information systems and
in studies of user satisfaction (see Computer user satisfaction).

Alderfer's ERG theory

Alderfer, expanding on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, created the
ERG theory. This theory posits that there are three groups of core
needs — existence, relatedness, and growth, hence the label:
ERG theory. The existence group is concerned with providing our
basic material existence requirements. They include the items
that Maslow considered to be physiological and safety needs. The
second group of needs are those of relatedness- the desire we
have for maintaining important interpersonal relationships. These
social and status desires require interaction with others if they are
to be satisfied, and they align with Maslow's social need and the
external component of Maslow's esteem classification. Finally,
Alderfer isolates growth needs' an intrinsic desire for personal
development. These include

the intrinsic component from Maslow's esteem category and the

characteristics included under self-actualization.

Self-determination theory

Self-determination theory, developed by Edward Deci and Richard

Ryan, focuses on the importance of intrinsic motivation in driving
human behavior. Like Maslow's hierarchical theory and others
that built on it, SDT posits a natural tendency toward growth and
development. Unlike these other theories, however, SDT does not
include any sort of "autopilot" for achievement, but instead
requires active encouragement from the environment. The
primary factors that encourage motivation and development are
autonomy, competence feedback, and relatedness.

Broad theories
The latest approach in developing a broad, integrative theory of
motivation is Temporal Motivation Theory, developed by Piers
Steel and Cornelius Konig. Introduced in their 2007 Academy of
Management Review article, it synthesizes into a single
formulation the primary aspects of all other major motivational
theories, including Incentive Theory, Drive Theory, Need Theory,
Self-Efficacy and Goal Setting. Notably, it simplifies the field of
motivation considerably and allows findings from one theory to be
translated into terms of another.

Also, Achievement Motivation is an integrative perspective as

outlined in the "Onion-Ring-Model of Achievement Motivation" by
Heinz Schuler, George C. Thornton III, Andreas Frintrup and Rose
Mueller-Hanson. It is based on the premise that performance
motivation results from the way broad components of personality
are directed towards performance. As a result, it includes a range
of dimensions that are relevant to success at work but which are
not conventionally regarded as being part of performance
motivation. Especially it integrates formerly separated
approaches as Need for Achievement with e.g. social motives like
dominance. The Achievement Motivation Inventory (AMI) (Schuler,
Thornton, Frintrup & Mueller-Hanson, 2003) is based on this
theory and assesses three factors (17 separated scales) relevant
to vocational and professional success.

Cognitive theories

Goal-setting theory
Goal-setting theory is based on the notion that individuals
sometimes have a drive to reach a clearly defined end state.
Often, this end state is a reward in itself. A goal's efficiency is
affected by three features: proximity, difficulty and specificity. An
ideal goal should present a situation where the time between the
initiation of behavior and the end state is close. This explains why
some children are more motivated to learn how to ride a bike
than to master algebra. A goal should be moderate, not too hard
or too easy to complete. In both cases, most people are not
optimally motivated, as many want a challenge (which assumes
some kind of insecurity of success). At the same time people want
to feel that there is a substantial probability that they will
succeed. Specificity concerns the description of the goal in their
class. The goal should be objectively defined and intelligible for
the individual. A classic example of a poorly specified goal is to
get the highest possible grade. Most children have no idea how
much effort they need to reach that goal.

Concept of employees motivation

The job of a manager in the workplace is to get things done
through employees. To do this the manager should be able to
motivate employees. But that's easier said than done! Motivation
practice and theory are difficult subjects, touching on several

Motivation is the key to performance

There is an old saying you can take a horse to the water but you
cannot force it to drink; it will drink only if it's thirsty - so with
people. They will do what they want to do or otherwise motivated
to do. Whether it is to excel on the workshop floor or in the 'ivory
tower' they must be motivated or driven to it, either by
themselves or through external stimulus.

Are they born with the self-motivation or drive? Yes and no. If no,
they can be motivated, for motivation is a skill which can and
must be learnt. This is essential for any business to survive and

Performance is considered to be a function of ability and

motivation, thus:

Job performance =f(ability)(motivation)

Ability in turn depends on education, experience and training and

its improvement is a slow and long process. On the other hand
motivation can be improved quickly. There are many options and
an uninitiated manager may not even know where to start. As a
guideline, there are broadly seven strategies for motivation.

 Positive reinforcement / high expectations

 Effective discipline and punishment

 Treating people fairly

 Satisfying employees needs

 Setting work related goals

 Restructuring jobs

 Base rewards on job performance

These are the basic strategies, though the mix in the final 'recipe'
will vary from workplace situation to situation. Essentially, there is
a gap between an individuals actual state and some desired state
and the manager tries to reduce this gap.

Motivation is, in effect, a means to reduce and manipulate this

gap. It is inducing others in a specific way towards goals
specifically stated by the motivator. Naturally, these goals as also
the motivation system must conform to the corporate policy of
the organization. The motivational system must be tailored to the
situation and to the organization.

In one of the most elaborate studies on employee motivation,

involving 31,000 men and 13,000 women, the Minneapolis Gas
Company sought to determine what their potential employees
desire most from a job. This study was carried out during a 20
year period from 1945 to 1965 and was quite revealing. The
ratings for the various factors differed only slightly between men
and women, but both groups considered security as the highest
rated factor. The next three factors were;

 advancement

 type of work

 company - proud to work for

Surprisingly, factors such as pay, benefits and working conditions

were given a low rating by both groups.
Review of literature

In this section an attempt has been made to review the past

researches in the area of introversion - extroversion,
motivation and conflict resolution styles.

The review of literature helped the researcher in planning and

guiding the present study.


• University . This study investigated the

• effect of introversion/extroversion and self-esteem on a

person's tendency to hold stereotypes about others. To
measure the dependent variables, participants completed a
day in the life paragraph of a fictitious Hispanic male. To
determine whether the participant was introverted or
extroverted, the Eysenck Extroversion Scale (Appendix A)
was used; the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Appendix B)
was used to determine the self-esteem of participants. The
results did not show a significant effect of personality or self-
esteem on the participants' use of stereotypes.


OF JAPANESE STUDENTS by Deborah Busch (2001) This
study explores the relationship between the introversion-
extraversion tendencies of Japanese students and their
proficiency in English as a foreign language (EFL). It was
hypothesized that in an EFL situation, extraverted students would
attain a higher proficiency in English because they may take
advantage of the few available opportunities to receive input in
English and practice the language with native speakers. The
hypothesis that extraverts are more proficient in English was not
supported. In fact, statistical analysis revealed that extraversion
had a significant negative correlation with pronunciation, a
subcomponent of the oral interview test. In addition, introverts
tended to have higher scores on the reading and grammar
components of the standardized English test.

Even though introverts tended to score better on most of the

English proficiency measures, it was found that junior college
males who had tendencies towards extraversion had higher oral
interview scores. Extraversion also correlated positively with
length of time spent studying English at the adult school. These
findings are discussed with respect to cultural factors
predominant in Japanese society and psychological theory.


PENNSYLVANIA. Individual differences in social introversion-
extraversion were examined in a large sample of twin girls and
found to be highly heritable. Genetic factors accounted for more
than half of the within-family variance, measured by Gough's
Adjective Check List and the Fels Behavior Scales. The results for
this population support previous studies by Gottesman, Eysenck,
Vandenberg, Freedman, and others, who reported similar
heritabilities for social introversion-extraversion in other
populations, tested with other measures. Several longitudinal
studies have reported consistent individual differences in
sociability, which may be explained by the large genetic
contribution to the dimension. Both longitudinal and twin data
suggest that social introversion-extraversion is a basic way of
responding to the environment, produced by polygenic
inheritance and environmental interaction.

Extraversion: The Unloved Variable in Applied Linguistic

Research by Jean-Marc Dewaele, Adrian Furnham (2002)
The relatively small number of linguistic studies in which
extraversion is focussed on as an independent variable suggests
that applied linguists believe it unrelated to speech production or
language learning. Argue was that this suspicion is based on a
misunderstanding originating in the 1970s. Reappraisal of the
literature suggests that extraversion may not be a predictor of
success in second language learning but does affect both L1 and
L2 speech production. An analysis of the psychological literature
on extraversion allowed to formulate a number of hypotheses
about the causes of linguistic variation in the speech of introverts
and extraverts.

Interpersonal Conflict-Handling Behavior as Reflections of

Jungian Personality Dimensions by Ralph H. Kilmann and
Kenneth W. Thomas (1980) This study has sought to
investigate the Jungian psychological correlates of an individual's
choice of different interpersonal conflict-handling modes:
competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and
accommodating. These five modes were defined according to the
two basic behavioral dimensions of assertiveness and
cooperativeness and were also related to integrative and
distributive dimensions. The results suggest that the Jungian
functions related to judging (thinking vs. feeling) and the type of
enactment (introverted vs. extraverted) are significantly related
to an individual's conflict-handling behavior. The study concludes
with a schematic illustration of these Jungian functions plotted
upon the basic behavioral dimensions which define and
characterize the five conflict-handling modes.

Introversion-extraversion and Event-Related Potential

(ERP): A test of J.A. Gray's theory by Dieter Bartussek,
Oliver Diedrich , Ewald Naumann and Wilfried Collet(1992)
Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Germany

Following Gray's theory of introversion-extroversion, extraverts

should demonstrate stronger reactions to stimuli of reward than
to stimuli of punishment, while introverts should be more
susceptible to stimuli of punishment than to stimuli of reward. In
the present study reward and punishment were operationalized
by winning and losing different amounts of money in a gambling
situation while measuring Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) to the
stimuli signaling winnings and losses and to the presentation of
the amount to win or lose. The components P2, N2, and P3e of the
ERPs to the feedback of winning and losing which are known to be
influenced by stimulus meaning demonstrated the predicted
interaction between extraversion and winning/losing. This
interaction was found also for the late time region of the ERPs to
the display of the amounts, according to winning or losing in the
preceding trial. The results suggest that—on the background of an
explicit theory—the ERP is a sensitive index for interindividual

Conflict resolution styles

Personality and conflict management styles: synergy of

nomothetic and idiomatic approach by Karolin Osuch &
Michal Lewandowski (2002) University of Warsaw, Faculty
of Psychology .

The study was focused on relationship between personality and

conflict management styles using both, person-centred and
variable-centred, models. The synergy of this points of view
allowed to understand studied problem deeper and more
complex. It was hypothesized that, using nomothetic model, Big
Five personality factors should correlate with five management
styles, developed by Afzalur Rahim in Rahim Organizational
Conflict Inventory (ROCI II). Moreover, using idiomatic model,
there should be correlation between main personality prototypes
and conflict management styles confirm and complement to
result ofnomothetic analysis. In order to verify this hypothesis
Polish version of ROCI II was prepared for this research and
correlations between five conflict styles and five personality
factors (assessed by NEO-FFI) questionnaire) were calculated.
The results indicate that each conflict style is specifically related
to Big Five personality

traits and conflict management styles create bindings distinctive

for each prototype.


by Tom Basuray, University of North Dakota Jerry J.
Gosenpud, University of North Dakota Steven A. Scherling,
University of North Dakota (1980)

An experimental design is proposed for analyzing personality

dynamics in conflict resolution. The theoretical framework of
intervention strategy and possible consequences of different
techniques has been discussed in a previous paper by the
authors. The purpose of this empirical investigation is to
determine if some of the cognitive variables of the subjects,
thrust into a learning situation which is focused substantially on
conflict resolution, would be modified by the teaching- learning
intervention. The teaching methodology was lecture-discussion.
Pre and post measurements were taken and analyzed in relation
to various personality variables. One significant pre/post change
was found along with the beginning analysis of personality
configuration and conflict resolution.

Relationship Personality, Conflict Resolution, and Marital

Satisfaction in the First 5 Years of Marriage by Klaus A.
Schneewind, Anna-Katharina Gerhard (2005). They explored
the relationship between couples' stable personality variables
associated with interpersonal competencies (referred to here as
relationship personality variables) and marital satisfaction with
conflict resolution style as the mediating factor. Eighty-three
newlywed couples participated in the study at 6 points over 5
years at 1-year intervals. The results indicate strong mediational
effects across time. In particular, conflict resolution styles appear
to form during the 1st year of marriage and are habituated
thereafter to a large extent. The relationship personality variables
correspond closely with conflict resolution styles, which in turn
influence marital satisfaction. The implications for intervention,
especially for preventive intervention in early marriage, are
Antonioni,(1998) (University of Wisconsin, Madison) The
purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between
the Big Five personality factors and five styles of handling
interpersonal conflict. The Big Five factors are extroversion,
openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and neuroticism,
and the five conflict styles are integrating, obliging, dominating,
avoiding, and compromising. A total of 351 students completed
questionnaires. As a check on generalizing the results beyond
students, 110 managers also completed the same surveys. The
main results indicate that extroversion, conscientiousness,
openness, and agreeableness have a positive relationship with
integrating style. Extroversion has a positive relationship with
dominating, while agreeableness and neuroticism have negative
relationships with dominating. Extroversion, openness, and
conscientiousness have a negative relationship with avoiding,
while agreeableness and neuroticism have a positive relationship

avoiding. Implications of the study and suggestions for future

research are discussed.

Gender, Psychological Type and Conflict Style Preference

By Paula S. Sorenson (Wichita State University) Katherine
Hawkins (Wichita State University)Ritch L. Sorenson
(Texas Tech University) (2000). Research on the effect of
gender on interpersonal conflict in organizational settings has
revealed contradictory findings. This research attempts to clarify
the issue. One hundred and thirty-five experienced first- and mid-
level managers responded to questionnaires regarding gender,
psychological type, and conflict style preference. Consistent with
previous research, results indicated that gender was related to
psychological type: male respondents were predominantly
“thinkers” and female respondents were predominantly “feelers.”
Psychological type influenced conflict management for only one of
five conflict style preferences. “Feelers” were more likely to
choose an obliging style than were “thinkers.” Similarly, gender
influenced conflict style preference for only one of five conflict
management choices. Male respondents had a higher obliging
score than did female respondents. Overall, however, results
indicated that while psychological type may be a more powerful
indicator of conflict style preference than is gender, neither factor
accounted for a substantial amount of variance in conflict style
preference. Implications of these findings are discussed.