An examination of children's strategy responses to two types of conflict situations
Hopmeyer, Andrea
This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2142/23803
Description
Title
An examination of children's strategy responses to two types of conflict situations
Author(s)
Hopmeyer, Andrea
Issue Date
1996
Doctoral Committee Chair(s)
Asher, Steven R.
Department of Study
Psychology, Social
Psychology, Developmental
Discipline
Psychology, Social
Psychology, Developmental
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
Psychology, Social
Psychology, Developmental
Language
eng
Abstract
The present study was designed to provide a more differential assessment of children's responses to interpersonal conflict. A distinction was made between two types of peer conflict situations: equal legitimacy conflict situations and rights infraction conflict situations. Equal legitimacy conflict situations involve disputes in which two children get into a conflict because they both get to a desired resource at the same time, they both want to use the resource and only one of them can use it first. Rights infraction conflict situations involve disputes in which one child has a prior claim to a desired resource because of prior possession, or because of ownership, and another child tries to take the resource from him or her. A sample of 629 fourth- and fifth-grade children completed a rating-scale sociometric measure, a behavioral nomination measure, and three questionnaire measures designed to assess their strategy responses, goal responses, and self-efficacy beliefs in equal legitimacy conflict situations and rights infraction conflict situations. Four major questions were addressed in the present study. Question 1: Are equal legitimacy conflict situations and rights infraction conflict situations psychologically distinct to children? Results indicated that the two types of conflict situations were seen as calling for different strategy responses and goal responses. The situations also evoked different self-efficacy beliefs. Question 2: How do highly aggressive and highly submissive children respond to the two types of conflict situations? Results indicated that children identified as highly aggressive by their peers and children identified as highly submissive by their peers appropriately modified their strategy responses, goal responses, and self-efficacy beliefs across the two types of conflict situations, but in a more limited way than average children. Question 3: Are children who do not modify their strategy responses to the conflict situations or modify them in a direction opposite that of most children found to be poorly-accepted by their peers? Results indicated that within the average and submissive behavior groups there was a tendency for children who did not appropriately modify their responses to be poorly-accepted by their peers. The relationship was less strong among the aggressive children. Question 4: What is the relative contribution of children's self-efficacy beliefs and goals in predicting their strategy responses to peer conflict situations? Results indicated that both children's self-efficacy beliefs and children's social goals added incrementally in predicting their strategy responses. Overall, the findings underscore the value of examining children's responses to different types of conflict situations.
Use this login method if you
don't
have an
@illinois.edu
email address.
(Oops, I do have one)
IDEALS migrated to a new platform on June 23, 2022. If you created
your account prior to this date, you will have to reset your password
using the forgot-password link below.
