Типы совладающего поведения в ситуации межличностного конфликта
Coping behaviour plays a great role in solving an interpersonal conflict. Time perspective, hardiness, self-efficacy, achievement motivation, affiliation motivation, and locus of control can be considered personality coping-resources. The combination of them and the degree of their intensity can be connected with the choice of specific coping strategies. Therefore, the goal of the research was investigating personality types of coping behaviour in an interpersonal conflict. The results of the empirical research (331 respondents) are given in this article. Classification of personality types showing various features of coping behaviour in a situation of an interpersonal conflict was the result of the research. Four personality types were differentiated - dependent, steady, unsteady and diffuse. The research allows us to suggest that the hardiness level has become the main factor in the choice of coping strategies. When it is not high, a person chooses emotional strategies, and strongly pronounced hardiness determines the choice of cognitive strategies.
Collection of articles and materials on the problems of working with conflict in the social sphere, including labor, political, ethnic and other conflicts. We also consider the methods of diagnosis and management kofnliktami. Teaching the kofnliktologii.
Cataclysms of the twentieth century enabled to speak about the cultural paradigm shift: the New Middle Ages began to crystallize. In this paper the rethinking process (mainly in economic but also philosophical discourse) of the meaning of labour is sketched. The importance of noneconomic sense of labour (which can be understood as Service) has been realized even in some branches of political economy. Self-centred homo economicus is regarded as secondary to unselfish homo faber. Different reasons of standing for this ideal are outlined.
The article deals with the relationship of business and government through the various aspects of the conflict interaction. The author analyses border state of relationship between business and power, factors and possible solutions of conflict situations. The author makes an assumption that development of social relations in general can lead to transformation of inefficient system of relationships between business and power.
From the beginning, sociology has tried to explain the emergence of social order, and to describe the conditions of solidarity. It has often been criticized for neglecting social conflicts, revolutions, and warfare. However, some sociologists have always been concerned with conflicts and revolutions. Warfare, indeed, has been a rare focus of sociological inquiry. It has only been during recent decades that sociologists have tentatively approached the topic, while the sociology of warfare is still a minor discipline for others. This may explain why social scholars still do not pay attention to the fact that the opposition of war and peace can be questioned. In sociology, social order before modernity is mainly understood as being imposed upon society by the police state which fulfills its legitimate monopoly on violence through specific institutions. Despite globalization, it is often assumed that the self-organization of society takes place within the secure borders of national states. We have to abandon this assumption since there are many instances of hybrid situations in the contemporary world. Examples of various undeclared wars, terror, the strengthening of secret intelligence services, overthrows of governments (coups d’etat), and revolutions challenge the traditional oppositions of the external and internal, or war and peace.
Warfare and social order have always been in an ambiguous relationship to each other. Any warfare causes disorganization and disorder, but it also causes reorganization and the beginning of a new order. Warfare is directly related to the redistribution of resources, border shifts, and the hybridization of social forms. War metaphors permeate into civil narratives. The chance of being killed may be higher in a peaceful city than at the front line. Wars can begin without a formal declaration. Peace is often made beyond legal systems, so there is always a possibility to breach peace without the fear of being accused of violations of agreements, or of being unreasonable. Warfare transgresses the border between the real and virtual worlds, since we live in the age of information-, financial-, hybrid-wars. There seems to be a new global situation which is reminiscent of the era of civil and religious wars, rather than the social order that has been a part of the foundational experience and the intellectual model for sociology at its birth. As a disturbing observation, it is also a challenge for the social sciences, which should not advocate for peaceful processes but should objectively analyze the current situation and the perspectives of social transformations.
With this special issue, we would like to go beyond conventional “sociologies of war”, which recently became a popular field of studies. We aim to radically reconsider the theoretical problem of the constitutive nature of warfare in terms of the (im)possibility of social order, i.e., when war is understood as ultima ratio but also as conditio humana.
This article reviews the modern approaches to the analysis of conflict situations in a supply chain. Four main areas of conflict analysis are identified and discussed in the paper: mathematical methods, hierarchical analysis, total cost modeling business processes.
A dramatic change in media coverage of the wars in Chechnya from sharp criticism in 1995 to almost unanimous support in 1999 has at least one consequence and several causes. Both wars were presented by TV news as a series of disconnected actions, which can be easily visualised: separate battles and cases of people’s suffering. This helped to stop the first war, but the disappearing of the visualised actions in the midwar period lead to silencing the Chechen problem. Meanwhile, politicians learned from their mistakes and formed a consistent policy towards the media (which they lacked before). Furthermore, NTV channel, the major source of alternative coverage of the first war, has found itself much more dependent on various external forces after it voluntarily supported the incumbent in the presidential elections in 1996. One of the NTV executives has formulated what can be called the major result of its struggle for independent coverage: With our own hands we have created a monstrous system that gonna eat us.
This article is devoted to studying the role of a personality's time perspective in choosing coping strategies in situations of interpersonal conflicts. The interrelation between different types of coping strategies (cognitive, emotional and behavioral) and the orientation of time perspective is considered. F.Zimbardo's technique, which defines the orientation of personality time perspective, and E.Heim's technique, directed on exploring coping strategies, are used in our research. The sample consisted of 295 participants - 156 women and 139 men, the average age - 32 years. The results obtained through our research have shown that future orientation in situations of interpersonal conflicts is directly connected with the choice of cognitive and behavioral coping strategies, while the orientation to the negative past results in emotional coping strategies. The person's orientation to the fatalistic present corresponds to non-adaptive behavioral strategies with few coping techniques, retreat and avoidance of conflict resolution.