Conflict Resolution Project | Case Study

Conflict Resolution Project Case turn overLynette RenbergConflict is a department of completely our kindreds and friendship we endure. It is important to consider the background and nature of strife in order to preserve our relationships. The mail service is Pat and Chris control been saving for their annual trip. For this vacation, Pat fates to go to the bring and relax by the water, Chris insufficiencys to go hiking and camping in the mountains. They attain radiation patternly been able to buy the farm out their differences, only if Chris feels potently this social class since stand firm year they went with Pats choice. Pat brings in a laster(prenominal) income and contri providedes much than Chris to the trip each year. I bequeath be victorious on the role of Pat in resolve this strife with Chris.The humor that seems to be stamping is a negative hotshot. Chris isnt regarding the facts that Pat does contribute more to the trip and isnt considering her c hoice of w present to go. as well Pat isnt regarding where Chris wants to go for the trip and she still avoids the fact that Chris isnt putting as lucifer amount of m stary into the trip as she does. The climate could continue to be negative if their converse stays disconfirming. Disconfirming communication is when those show inadequacy of regard to the competitiveness and the opposite person involved.In the Knapps deterrent example of Stages in a Relationship, this relationship is at the differentiating stage. Both Pat and Chris be exhibiting differences that atomic number 18 causing difference of opinion. This internet site appears to be a symmetrical fight style in which some(prenominal) partners use the same behavior. Both partners provided up coin to go on a trip to lighther every year and they some(prenominal) decide together where to go with astute each other has differences in where to go.My character Pat has more office than Chris. Pat makes more money an d puts more money into the trip than Chris does. Chris give the gate confront Pat intimately how he feels some where to go for their trip, but Pat has more right and power to decide where they go until Chris pays mediocre as equal amount for the trip to be fair. Pat wants to go someplace with a down to relax by the water and shouldnt turn out to pay more for the trip because it should be equally irrupt between the twain.Using the Satir Model, one looks or analyzes their feelings, their partners feelings, context or place, and topic is the issue of conflict. There be volt stages of this model. assuage basis lead to avoidance for one reduces or doesnt make out their feelings. Pouncing or Blaming is when one ignores or doesnt acknowledge their partners feelings by putting the blame on their partner and the outgrowth field a win-lose. Computing is when me, you, and context argon backsidecelled out. The topic of conflict becomes the main focus. Distracting is a lose-l ose style because no ones feelings be creation acknowledged, there is no place to confront the situation, and the situation is world completely avoided. social Style is when all elements ar considered in which rump lead to a win-win takings. Everyones feelings atomic number 18 organism voiced at an appropriate time and place and the situation is being communicate in order to be resolved.For this particular situation, it would be ideal to use the Interpersonal Style stage. That way Chris fecal matter let out his feelings on how he strongly feels that he should decide where to go this year. Then Pat can express her feelings on how she contributes more money to the trip and how she would like to go somewhere with a border and relax. As long as a reasoned time and place is chosen the situation can be addressed less justificatoryly and hostile. Both Chris and Pat can dialogue things finished with(predicate) by addressing each others feelings, wherefore there is a situat ion, and chassis out together how resolve the issue so everyone is happy. other mode to increase perception of the topic is by using the roost Method. There are likewise five positions in the pillow method to rationally approach a win-win outcome. By using the position five and acknowledging there is truth in all perspectives can leave agree and consensus to achieve a win-win outcome to this conflict.Here is a win-win situation that can occur if assumeed right. Identify the problem and unmet needs is Chris feels he should get to spot where to go and what to do this annual trip since Pat chose last year and it is acknowledged successfully. Then Pat can address her feelings on why she wants to go to the shore and the money situation of her contributing more. Chris confronts Pat and asks when a good time to talk about the trip would be. So they both plume a date to talk. During the time and place decided to talk about the trip, Chris can describe to Pat how strongly he feels a bout going camping and hiking this year. Pat can because beg off to Chris that she understands where he is coming from and she can explain how she is still contributing a plenitude to their annual trip and that she unfeignedly wants to be near a shore to relax. Chris and Pat can then negotiate trip locations where it has camping, hiking, and a shore. Also maybe Chris can contribute a little more to this trip. erst they settle on a location then they can follow through on their solution and both enjoy a marvellous vacation together being happy with getting what they both want. During this process, if one party didnt agree or successfully pass a stage, then they would have to start over to the appropriate stage until both agree and successfully continue through the stages.One part that result be difficult in my plan of action is both parties move non to be defensive and stay sensitive to each others feeling and unmet needs. The reason this can be difficult is because since o ne party (Pat) contributes more money for the trip they may become defensive and say since they make more money it doesnt seem fair that they would go with Chris plans for camping and hiking. That could make Chris feel bad and put him on guard as well. Chris may feel that his feelings and unmet needs are non being acknowledged. Or another scenario is Pat could acknowledge Chris feelings and via media to let him choose where to go on their trip in which would outcome to a lose-win situation.With there being difficulty in the plan for a win-win outcome, here are some consequences of using a win-lose, lose-win, lose-lose, and compromise method. A win-lose outcome is competing where this approach to conflict involves high annoyance for self and low concern for others. If Pat pursued this outcome, then she would use her power of how she makes more money and pays more for the trip to get her way to going to a beach or where ever she wanted to go disregarding Chris feelings and wants. A lose-win outcome is accommodating where one allows the other to have their way rather than assert you own point of view. Pat could disregard her own feelings and wants by remittal to go where ever Chris would like to go this year. Lose-lose outcome is avoiding where people non-assertively ignore or stay away from conflict. Pat and Chris could avoid the matter all together and just pick a place to go without resolving their problems they both are feeling. This down the road could lead into a larger conflict. Compromising which is a partial lose-lose outcome is when both parties at to the lowest degree give some of what they want, although both sacrifice part of their goals. Pat and Chris could compromise on where to go and how much each volition pay, but this delays and setbacks the conflict in which both parties dont get what they really want to be resolved.A personal feature where I could have apply a win-win conflict style approach is with my ex-boyfriend. The situation was my ex-boyfriend started a new(a) job prevailing out of town at least tercet weeks every month and we hardly were spending time with each other. I was feeling neglected and didnt feel important to him. The outcome off into a lose-win. I should have gathered my feelings and unmet needs better and set a date to talk to him about how I was feeling. Instead I had emotional outbursts because I bottled my emotions up and it all came out at really bad times. If we made a date to talk, then we both could have described the problem and our needs so we could be more reasonableness of each other. By acknowledging each others feelings and points of view then we could have negotiated what we wanted to do or how to better our relationship. Once we count on out what would make each other happy and strengthen our relationship then we could follow through in our solution. However, with having so much conflict that was unsuccessfully resolved we ended up parting ways so we wouldnt hurt each other or continue being unhappy. My ex-boyfriend broke up with me while I still wanted to figure out a way to make our relationship work. It became a lose-win situation because the outcome went in the way my ex-boyfriend wanted and it wasnt an outcome I wanted.Conflict resolution has many stages and outcomes in all different kinds of situations. I have learned through this course on how to better my communication and resolve conflict for a win-win outcome in my relationships. Pat and Chris will resolve their conflict while keeping their relationship intact and have a wonderful vacation doing the things they anticipated doing. By following the conflict resolution model, can strength relationships and help resolve conflict by addressing the problem, being sensitive and open minded to each others point of views, and negotiating to reach a solution that makes both parties happy.Situation waggery Analysis of chirp destineSituation Comedy Analysis of Peep take the standCarroll discusses th e face of characters which the audience aim most attractive in situation japerysMuch mode is undeniably at the expense of characters who are in particular stupid, vain, greedy, cruel, ruthless, dirty, lubricious, and deficient in other respects (2005, p.345).I intend to check the ways in which Carrolls statement can be supported through the depiction of characters in contemporary situation comedy, focusing on the British sitcom Peep Show and American sitcom Community. Peep Show (Clarke, 2003) follows the lives of two friends scotch Corrigan and Jeremy (Jez) Usbourne who live together in a flat base in Croydon, London. determine has a pessimistic outlook while Jeremy is wasted and childish, with unrealistic goals about his future. American sitcom Community (Harmon, 2009) focuses on the lives of an corps de ballet cast of characters, Jeff Winger, Britta Perry, Abed Nadir, Shirley Bennett, Annie Edison, Troy Barnes and Pierce Hawthorne, who live in the sham town of Greendal e, Colorado and attend Greendale Community College.The purpose of humour is to dispute social norms and morals inwardly society. Humour is a part of mundane life, and and so it should be relatable to the audience humour can be culturally specific, or worldwide, focusing on issues such as gender, family or work life, religion, politics, wealth, class, or race and ethnicityA standard definition of sitcom is concentrating on the recurring set-up and characters, the happy ending and the fact that individual episodes rarely parent to events in previous ones (Sander, 2012).The three theories of humour, are superiority, incongruity and absolve/ quietus possibility. Plato and Aristotle held a negative view towards humour, as Plato perceived humour to be a beady-eyed act while Quintilian, Aristotle and Cicero established that it is a form of behaviour from which civilized man should shrink (Chapman and Foot, 1995 cited in Perks, 2012). transcendency opening is the idea that humour is give in laughing at those deemed inferior. theorizer Thomas Hobbes talks about the sudden glory felt by spectator pumps when they can identify their superiority over othersThe idea of jest is self-applause can nevertheless be haveed by pointing out that, even though somebody elses john occasions my laugh, what I am laughing at, what produces my joy, readiness be that I can see the point and thus take account my superiority (Ewin, 2001).It can be argued that Robert Webbs Peep Show character Jeremy triggers this type of response. Jeremys immaturity is highilluminationed throughout the show and is often the reason behind his fight in regrettable situations. Jeremy lives in a fantasy world, he thinks extremely of himself with illusory ideas about his future career in music. The audience are aware of Jeremys delusions, and this encourages a humorous element as we laugh at Jeremys expense. The witness takes comfort in the knowledge that Jeremy is an example of who we aim not to be like furthering the idea of supremacy and therefore, his character is highly entertain and singular. This contrasts with give chase (David Mitchell) who is a rational and sensible character. It is limpid that Mark is onerous to succeed, curiously in his work life. The audience may feel charitable towards Mark and the superiority notion may not be as dominant in his case, as he has more relatable and reachable goals.Superiority theory applies to Community. In the Introduction to Film episode, Britta (Gillian Jacobs) persuades Abed (Danny Pudi) to begin studying film. Abed enjoys the class, as he is seen later using a television camera to create a documentary. Abeds renders appears at Greendale college furious that Abed is studying film. Abeds friends defend his choice to take the class, explaining he can make his own decisions. His father states that Abed is no longer his concern and now his friends responsibility. Although this incident is comical due to the anger of A beds father and the awkwardness of the groups response, there is an underlying sand of sorrow regarding Abeds relationship with his father. He is shown as controlling and forceful, and this may explain the reason for Abeds introverted character. Abed is often the laughing stock of the group, which is withal funny to the viewer. We laugh at Abed due to the fatuousness of his starts and how he deals with situations, as his actions are not conventional. However, the audience may or may not realise that Abed has had a difficult upbringing (especially evident with his domineering father) and although this can be interpreted as humorous on one level, it may be deeply distressing to Abed on another. We are laughing at Abeds problems and the areas in which he is lacking. Due to his fathers ungenerousness, Britta and Jeff (Joel McHale) are now cast in the roles of Abeds parents. This is amusing as their struggle of seek to provide for Abed is highlighted, however we are again laughing at the characters hardships, feeling thankful that we are not part of the situation presented. The viewer may also feel they could perform better in parenting Abed, and thus a feeling of superiority may arise in this way. Plato describes laughterPlato believed that the laughter that attends humour is directed at the vice of self-unawareness. That is, we laugh at people who fail to realize the Socrates adage- Know thyself and who instead deceive themselves, imagining that they are wiser than they are (Carroll, 2005 cited in Levinson, 2003).Incongruity theory relates to the idea of comedy being absurd and irrational/illogical. Shifting away from what is accepted to be normal behaviour and societys values, often using exaggeration and rebelling against societys rules of protocol. Philosopher Immanuel Kant talks about incongruity theoryIt is remarkable that in all such cases the jest essential contain something that is capable of deceiving for a moment. Hence, when the illusion is diss ipated, the mind turns back to emphasize it once again, and thus through a rapidly alternating tensity and informality it is jerked back and put into a state of oscillationto this sudden transposition of the mind, now to one now to another standpoint in order to contemplate its object, may correspond an alternating tension and relaxation of the elastic portions of our intestines which communicates itself to the diaphragm (like that which ticklish people feel) (Kant, 1790 cited in Bardon, 2005).Incongruity theory is evident in Community. Throughout the series, a dreamlike setting is apparent, especially in Abeds Uncontrollable Christmas. Abed Nadir is eccentric and quirky. It is often hinted at that Abed is suffering from a mental illness or personality disorder. During this episode, Abed believes the upcoming Christmas is particularly special as he views his friends as clay stop-motion animations. The group are concerned for Abeds mental health, and encourage him to find the caus e for this delusion. The characters who come in and out of Abeds fantasy animated world do so through a curtain, and as the curtain opens, a glimpse of the normal study room is seen. This helps to connect the audience with Abeds friends, and offers a sense of reality. The animation effect is unusual and may surprise or disturb the viewer. This world is an impossibility and is irrational to the audience and to everyone else within the episode, excursus from Abed. We are led on the same journey with Abed and his friends, to filtrate and help him return to rational thought. Community consists of non-linear narratives and surrealist themes throughout, which adds to its overall success as a sitcom. The audience are encouraged to find humour in the bizarre happenings. It should be mentioned that the characters make it known that Abeds stop-motion world is peculiar, and the viewer can laugh at Abed regardless that the cause for his hallucination is connect to a more personal issue, whic h relates back to superiority theory.Peep Show portrays elements of incongruity theory. Mark and Jeremy often rebel against what is classed as normal behaviour. As a cringe-style comedy, Peep Show breaks the fourth wall and this allows for intimacy and immediateness with the audience. Incongruity theory is shown in the episode Shrooming, where Jeremy, to impress the girl he loves (genus Sus), hosts a drug party at the flat. Mark arrives home from work ill with gastric flu. Jeremy is furious that Mark has returned and this may hinder his chances with Sus and ruin the party. Jez puts sleep medication in Marks tea to begin with locking his bedroom entre. The episode is comical as the viewer can sympathise with Mark being very ill and not having ingress to a bathroom. Jeremy will do whatever it takes to fulfil his own selfish desires. In addition, Marks boss has suspicions over his condition and is timid if Mark is well enough to attend the upcoming business trip, however Mark ins ists he is fine. It is evident that Mark is desperate to impress his boss and will risk his own health in doing so. This type of behaviour is more or less strange and the viewer may question why Mark does not refuse due to his ill health its as though he feels he has something to prove.Once Mark escapes the bedroom, he rushes to the toilet, however the bathroom door has been removed from the hinges. Unfortunately, his boss has come to the flat, but finds him in the bathroom alongside Jez. The two men are appalled and disgusted at Mark, who is extremely embarrassed and uncomfortable. The social awkwardness of the situation is outstanding and the audience experience the humiliation alongside Mark. This behaviour is shocking, as it defies what is deemed socially acceptable, and is an infringement on human privacy. Jeremy and his boss continue to observe Mark instead of realising the bizarreness of the situation and leaving. Feelings of benignity towards Mark return, and Jeremy is v iewed in a negative light as he has the option to allow Mark his privacy but refuses, showing little respect.Herbert Spencer talks about musical accompaniment/release theory, and its mental effectsThat laughter is a form of muscular excitement, and so illustrates the cosmopolitan law that feeling passing a certain pitch habitually vents itself into action, scarcely needs pointing out. It perhaps needs pointing out, however, that strong feeling of around any kind produces this result. It is not a sense of the ludicrous, only, which does it nor are the non-homogeneous forms of joyous emotion the sole additional causes (Herbert, 1987 cited in Olson, 2007).Through the notice of an event or situation an initial build-up of tension is caused, and pleasure is appoint in the release of this energy. Austrian philosopher/psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud expands on Spencers theory. Freud talks about the relief that comes with laughing or finding humour in the reassessment of society and it s expectations of us. Freud goes on to explain that our sexual impulses are like our malicious ones, stating that these elements of humour are highly appealing and offer relief, as we are forced to repress these thoughts/feelings by societyThe prevention of invective or of insulting rejoinders by external circumstances is such a communal case that tendentious jokes are especially favoured to make aggressiveness or criticism possible against persons in exalted positions who claim to exercise authority. The joke then represents a rebellion against that authority, a liberation from its pressure. The determine of caricatures lies in this same factor we laugh at them even if they are unsuccessful simply because we count rebellion against authority as a merit (Freud, 1960).This illustrates that we will indulge in such thoughts, only if impregnable to do so if there is no threat such as our reputation being judged. Relief theory can refer to humour and laughter at cruelty, obscenity, in appropriateness and nonsense. It can be argued that relief and release theory apply more so to a stand-up comedy routine where jokes are continuously told allowing for the sense of anticipation, rather than a sitcom television programme.Relief theory may apply to an episode in Community Curriculum Unavailable. During this episode, the group have been expelled from Greendale, and notice Abeds behaviour decent particularly erratic. Due to this, the group attend therapy alongside Abed. During the sessions, the group are informed that Greendale is in fact a mental health excogitation where the group were attending as patients due to nervous breakdowns, and they created the delusion that they were part of a community college. This revelation builds up tension and anticipation as the viewer begins questioning the entire series and setup of Community. Once Jeff insists this is not be true and the group discover the psychiatrist is a fraud, reliance is restored in the narrative. Relief i s experienced through this discovery, and we laugh at the ridiculousness of the joke. Nervous excitement is released through laughter at the realisation the advocator is lying to the group. Also in this episode, it appears Pierce is addicted to pain medication. He experiences hallucinations of a small man, referred to as Tiny Man. Pierce is shown to enjoy his high from the drugs and no one has yet mentioned his addiction, even though it was witnessed earlier in the study room. This may glamorise the idea of taking drugs and we laugh at Pierces pleasurable experience. Drug addictions are viewed as extremely negative within society, and hinting at the idea that taking drugs is an enjoyable or fun experience is a prejudicial notion, thus allowing suppressed feelings to arise in the viewer and laughter to occur.A Peep Show episode Seasonal Beatings, where Mark is hosting a Christmas family dinner shows relief theory. Mark describes his father as having a critical personality and he fea rs this. It becomes evident that Mark does not have a healthy relationship with his parents and feels nervous about their arrival. Marks girlfriend, Dobby, also attends the dinner however Mark insists she does not inform his parents about their relationship. This sets up anticipation, the audience begin to feel the tension of the situation. There is a build-up of disquiet concerning the arrival of Marks parents as well as ensuring his relationship with Dobby is kept secret. Once his parents arrive, Dobby begins speaking negatively about her boyfriend- this continues the accumulation of anticipation (we want his parents to discover this horrible boyfriend is Mark). Finally, Mark becomes frustrated and it is revealed to his parents that he is Dobbys boyfriend. The relief is found in the reveal that Mark is the disappointing boyfriend and his fathers reception we laugh at this, and understand that Mark is the butt of the joke.To conclude, Carrolls account continues to be manifested through characters and storylines within the contemporary situation comedy. Both Peep Show and Community are examples of these types of sitcoms, with characters such as Mark, who we often feel sympathy towards or Jeremy, who comes across as rather selfish and egotistical. Community portrays a variety of characters who differ from one another, such as Abed who is unsure of himself and eccentric or Pierce, often depicted as being discriminatory through making crude or sexual jokes regarding women. Humour is found in these types of personalities and the way the characters interact with one another. The audience enjoy characters who are willing to push the boundaries and test or challenge social norms.ReferencesBardon, D. (2005) The doctrine of Humor. Online Available http//faculty.swosu.edu/frederic.murray/philosophy%20of%20humor_1.pdf Accessed 10 March 2017.Community. (2009) Series 1, chance 3. US. TV Programme NBC. 1 October 2009, 930pmCommunity. (2009) Series 2, issue 11. US. TV Programme NBC. 9 December 2010, 8pmCommunity. (2009) Series 3, Episode 19. US. TV Programme NBC. 10 may 2012, 8pmDavies, C. and Berger, P. (1998) Redeeming Laughter, The Comic Dimension of Human Experience. The British Journal of Sociology. Online Vol.49(4), p.670. Available https//www.jstor.org/stable/1466184 Accessed 12 March 2017.Ewin, R. (2001) Hobbes on Laughter. The philosophic Quarterly. Online Vol.51(202), pp.29-40. Available https//www.jstor.org/stable/2660519 Accessed 12 March 2017.Levinson, J. (2003) The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics. 1st ed. Oxford Oxford University Press.Olson, E. (2007) The crime of Humor. Online Available https//gustavus.edu/philosophy/files/theses/horrorofhumor.doc Accessed 10 March 2017.Peep Show. (2003) Series 3, Episode 3. UK. TV Programme Channel 4. 25 November 2005Peep Show. (2003) Series 7, Episode 5. UK. TV Programme Channel 4. 24 December 2010Perks, L. (2012) The Ancient Roots of Humor Theory. Online Available http//scholarworks.merrimack. edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007context=com_facpub Accessed 10 March 2017.Sander, J. (2012) The Television Series Community and Sitcom. Online Available http//www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2558088/FULLTEXT01.pdf Accessed 5 March 2017.