Have you ever wondered why certain disagreements leave you exhausted and with a bad taste in your mouth while others, surprisingly, make you reflect and grow? From an argument over an everyday detail with your partner to a major clash at work or even emotional ambivalence when making vital decisions, there are different types of conflicts, but they are all part of the “package” of being human.
Whether in a romantic relationship, between friends, in a team at work or even within yourself, conflicts are inevitable. However, not all conflicts are the same. And knowing how to differentiate them is key to resolving them.
What exactly is a conflict?
The meaning commonly attributed to the word conflict is that of a clash between people or groups, cultures, ideologies or interests. Invested with a negative halo, we think that conflict always ends up having a winner and a loser. However, that is not the only meaning or the inevitable result of all confrontation. In fact, some types of conflict open the way to solutions that lead to growth.
The word conflict comes directly from the Latin conflictus and the verb confligere , which would be the convergence of blows or affections. However, both Lucretius and Cicero used this verb to refer to the possibility of meeting, comparing and coming closer.
Over time, the meaning of conflict changed and became synonymous with fighting, contending or clashing in a hostile manner. Therefore, in its origins and from an etymological point of view, conflict was nothing more than a generative encounter between different realities.
In psychological terms, the concept of conflict refers to the emergence of antagonistic or opposing forces that influence certain events, behaviors, desires, attitudes and emotions. Kurt Lewin defined it as a struggle between opposing forces, whether internal (within the person) or external (between individuals or groups). He believed that conflict was the result of tensions in a “field of psychological forces” where objectives or desires clash.
However, the existence of opposing interests does not necessarily have to be negative. In fact, qualitative leaps can emerge from such confrontation, leading to a major paradigm shift or even an improvement in relations.
How does a conflict arise? The causes behind the disagreement
When conflict occurs in interpersonal relationships, it is a reflection of a disagreement, discord or friction between the actions, beliefs or desires of the parties. When it occurs in a person, it reflects an internal struggle between aspects such as pleasure or duty and impulses or reason.
However, the fact that a conflictive situation exists does not necessarily mean that a conflict is evident. For a conflict to arise, it is necessary for the parties – or oneself – to become aware of this discordant situation and to perceive and experience it as conflictive.
In this process, conflict is really shaped. Ultimately, we must not forget that we all interpret events through the prism of our beliefs, expectations, values and desires. Therefore, conflict does not depend solely on an objective discrepancy, but on how we perceive and manage it.
Obviously, emotions play a leading role: frustration, fear or anger can intensify conflicts, while empathy or tolerance mitigate them. If we tend to look for scapegoats, we are likely to increase tension by focusing on differences and end up escalating the conflict.
Likewise, if we are not able to shed light on our values or priorities, we can fuel internal discord and turn it into a latent conflict that will remain in our subconscious, generating discomfort and blocking decision-making.
Conflict is therefore not an automatic reaction to differences, but a dynamic construction influenced by numerous factors. In this regard, research conducted at California State University revealed that even cultural factors influence the intensity of conflict and our willingness to resolve it.
In Western culture, for example, conflicts are more intense and long-lasting, while in Asian culture there is a tendency to avoid them and try to resolve them quickly by trying to put oneself in the other’s shoes. Recognizing this complex root is the first step to address conflicts, not as threats, but as opportunities for understanding and change.
What types of conflicts exist?
Depending on the path that this awareness follows, different types of conflict will appear, either on the intrapsychological or interpersonal level. To understand them, we can start from a relatively simple situation:
A couple has just moved in together and in the middle of winter they discover they have a problem: he prefers to keep the heating on low to save money, but she wants to turn it up because she is cold and doesn’t mind paying more.
The conflict situation arises from the existence of a common situation (they live in the same house), but each party has different needs (one wants to save and the other wants comfort). The tension arises because both depend on the same system (heating), but they have opposite needs and priorities. Depending on how these differences are interpreted, one or another type of conflict will develop, as can be seen in the graph below.
1. Authentic conflict
It implies the existence of an objective conflict situation that both parties perceive as such in a precise and homogeneous manner, without significant distortions. In the case of a couple, both parties recognize the other person’s desire as legitimate, but understand that they are going in opposite directions, so they are mutually exclusive.
Genuine conflict is therefore the result of similar interests that are perceived as conflicting. The parties are fully aware of each other’s positions, interests or needs, and recognise their legitimacy, even if they are incompatible.
This type of conflict usually arises in balanced and mature relationships, where each partner respects the other. They arise from incompatible goals, but not necessarily from hostile intentions. That is, although the needs and objectives are divergent, there is no intention to harm or impose oneself on the other.
2. Misattribution conflict
In this case, each or one of the parties attributes a different interpretation to the conflict situation. For example, she may think that she is not important enough for her partner – which probably denotes an underlying emotional insecurity – or he may believe that she does it only with the intention of upsetting him – which implies the attribution of negative intentions. However, these assumptions are usually based more on individual perceptions than on reality.
In fact, in the attribution conflict, the difficulty lies not so much in the situation itself, but in the attitude with which both people assume the disagreement. Those involved perceive the objective conflict situation through their emotional filters, which distort reality. Instead of focusing on the facts, the conflict becomes entangled with the assumptions, judgments or beliefs that the parties generate about the intentions or emotions of the other.
This type of conflict usually arises due to our tendency to seek explanations for the behavior of others, especially in situations of tension or disagreement, so that we assume intentions that are not always true or that are even far removed from the other person’s true desires.
One of the key features of this type of conflict is that the problem lies not in the disagreement itself, but in the way the parties interpret and approach it. In the end, attitudes and beliefs become the core of the problem, making it difficult to resolve. In other words, the original conflict situation is displaced by a battle of subjective narratives.
3. Latent conflict
As its name indicates, it is one that has not yet been expressed in a manifest behavior that clearly identifies it, but appears at the base of other conflicts and therefore makes it difficult to understand and resolve them.
In the case of a couple, for example, perhaps the inability to agree on the temperature of the heating is due to a deeper conflict between them. Behind this disagreement there could be more complex tensions, such as a sense of imbalance in the relationship (one feels that his or her opinion does not count as much as the other’s) or a lack of emotional recognition that has not been verbalized.
Latent conflict is like an undercurrent that, although not visible, influences the dynamics of the relationship or situation, aggravating discrepancies. In fact, it is common in long-standing relationships where resentments, unfulfilled expectations and unspoken words accumulate.
Although it is relatively invisible, latent conflict has a cumulative impact and feeds on deep emotional dissatisfaction, so if it is not addressed, it usually explodes in the worst way since it generates a very large emotional drain and erodes the foundations of the relationship through permanent frustration and very negative interaction patterns that sabotage the satisfactory resolution of other conflicts and problems.
4. Pseudo-conflict
In this type of conflict, there is no obvious objective conflict situation. You have to search a lot to find the real cause, and even then it is difficult to find it. However, the parties experience the situation as a real conflict.
In the case of a couple, for example, it would be easy to agree on an intermediate temperature or even install separate thermostats in each room, but even so, one of the two might find it insufficient and think that the other is exaggerating. In essence, the problem has ceased to be cold or hot and has become a subjective perception, probably because both feel misunderstood or even attacked.
Therefore, the pseudo-conflict has its origin in the way in which both parties relate to each other and perceive the situation, since in reality there is no major divergence at the base. The problem could easily be solved in a way that would be satisfactory for both if they were to approach it with an objective and open attitude.
In a way, this type of conflict is an emotional paradox: there is no objective cause that justifies the confrontation, but the parties involved feel it as something tangible and genuine. It is a feeling of conflict that floats in the air without a clear anchor, as if both were fighting against a fog, instead of facing a real problem.
In these cases, the disagreement is rooted more in emotions, expectations or internal insecurities than in concrete facts. Often the parties project into their interaction something that has no direct relation to the situation, such as accumulated frustrations, stress or personal vulnerabilities. Therefore, pseudo-conflict is like an emotional iceberg: what is visible on the surface (the concrete discussion) has no connection with the true root of the discomfort.
However, in interpersonal relationships, especially those of long standing and in which there is greater emotional involvement, it is more common for a mixture of all these types of conflicts to appear. That is, several conflict situations arise simultaneously, which are normally based on a latent conflict on which problems and discrepancies are built up over time.
Obviously, conflicts – small or large – can become a constant source of discomfort if we do not resolve them. An experiment carried out at the University of Geneva revealed that many of the emotional areas of the brain linked to love, connection and empathy with our partner “turn off” when we argue about a situation. Therefore, it is important to learn to recognize the first signs of disagreements and apply the appropriate conflict resolution techniques as soon as possible. In this way, these differences will not become insurmountable but will become an opportunity to get to know each other better and increase the degree of commitment to the relationship.
References:
Rafi, H. et. Al. (2020) Impact of couple conflict and mediation on how romantic partners are seen: An fMRI study. Cortex; 130: 302-317.
Feeney, J. A. & Karantzas, G. C. (2017) Couple conflict: insights from an attachment perspective.
Current Opinion in Psychology; 13: 60-64.
Barki, H. and Hartwick, J. (2004) Conceptualizing the construct of interpersonal conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management; 15(3): 216-244.
Fuentes Ávila, M. (2000) Mediación de conflictos. La Habana: Centro Félix Varela.
Ting-Toomey, S. et. Al. (1991) Culture, face maintenance, and styles of handling interpersonal conflicts: A study in five cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management; 2(4): 275–296.
Leave a Reply