Category: guilt

Categories
anger conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence encouraging caring free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults interpersonal conflicts intrapersonal conflicts negative criticism social intelligence stress wisdom

DEALING WITH CRITICISM BY DIGGING DEEPER

picture 2“I’ve been reading your blog posts, Dr. Rubin,” Judy says sounding annoyed. “You are making everything sound way too complicated.”

“I’m pleased that you’ve been checking it out,” I reply.  “I’d love to hear more about your reactions.”

“Well, yesterday I went over to pick up my friend, Sue, to go to a party.  She was wearing an outfit that was almost identical to mine. So I told Sue I didn’t like what she was going to wear.  If we went to the party in the same outfits we’d look like the Bobbsey twins. We’d look ridiculous.  Sue quickly saw that I was right and changed her clothes. Then we decided that in the future, whenever we plan to go to a party together, we’ll check with each other before we pick out what we’ll wear. So, you see, without going through all of your stupid ‘DIG,’ desire, interference, guilt, nonsense, I provided negative criticism to Sue, and we worked it out just fine.”

“I like the way you dealt with it, Judy, especially how you made plans to prevent the same problem from recurring.  Checking with each other before choosing your outfits makes a good deal of sense.  Well done!”

A glorious smile graces Judy’s face.

“Judy, I also agree with you to a large extent about using the DIG Conflict Model to deal with criticism.  In many situations, perhaps even most situations, there is no good reason to go through the steps I’ve been describing in my blog posts.  As long as the issues are simple enough to understand easily and if whatever approach you are in the habit of using leads you to a comfortable resolution, then, by all means, you don’t have to bother using the DIG Conflict Model.”

“There are times that I do get defensive or confused,” Judy allows.  “I know there are times I get defensive, and I’ve said some things even recently that I now regret.”

“I want to hear about those regrets, Judy.  At the same time, it takes a special kind of learning to handle defensive feelings.  I think it would be helpful if we first rehearsed a plan that can increase the respect you will feel for yourself.  It has to be well rehearsed because when people get defensive, they oftentimes have trouble thinking as clearly as when they calm down and have some time to think things over.  It’s also helpful to learn to get comfortable with this new way of thinking by discussing someone else’s conflicts, rather than discussing events that directly happened to you. This will allow you to look at this new approach more objectively.  Once you get the ideas down so that you can smoothly work with them, then it will be far easier to apply them to events that are occurring in your own life.  So, if it’s okay with you, Judy, let’s return to my Charlie Brown comic that I used in my last blog post.”

“Well, I do want to get you back on my recent regret, but I love the Peanuts characters, especially Lucy.  Go ahead, Dr. Rubin, let’s hear one of your lessons.”

FIRST, LET’S REVIEW THE OLD LESSONS

“Okay!  First, please read again the Peanuts comic we looked at in our last lesson:

Charlie1

Judy, after reading it, smiles, and says, “Okay, now what?”

“Let’s review some key points, Judy.  From the ideas we have been discussing over the last few months, what do you think Charlie Brown can do in this type of situation that will be helpful?”

“He can tell himself that it is good that he has begun to criticize himself in this situation.  Criticism, if handled skillfully, is the path toward wisdom.” (see blog post titled, Is Criticism Bad?)

“Excellent!  What else might be helpful for him to do?”

“Think about how he is likely to criticize himself, and rate that style using the skills in my post Providing Negative Criticism: Five Levels of Maturity.  If Charlie Brown already started to criticize himself before he did this, it would help him to look at the style he has begun to use, and then rate that.  After rating the style, it would help him to see if he could come up with a more mature style that would match either a 4 or 5 level.  To help him do this, he might work a little on summarizing his problem using the word, “DIG.”  That will help him to dig for his desire, what is interfering with his desire, and what he feels guilty about.” (see Dig For The Conflict)

“Very impressive, Judy.  You’re a fine student.  If Charlie Brown asked you to summarize his conflict, what would you say?”

“Charlie Brown, you seem to desire that you not yell at your baby sister, but the fact that you did has led you to perceive that, interfering with your desire, you are likely to continue yelling at her.  You appear to feel guilty for your actions by saying you hate yourself.”

NOW, THE NEW MATERIAL

“Well, Judy, I can see that you’re now ready to move on to some new material.  After you get skilled at summarizing the most obvious conflict in a difficult situation, it’s then helpful to use the word “DIG” to remind you to dig a little deeper to find other desires that may be important to consider.  What other desire do you think Charlie Brown might have that is important to consider in this situation?”

After some thought, Judy replies, “He desires to play with his puzzle, but his sister interfered by messing it up.”

“Yes, Judy, very good.  Do you think Charlie Brown thinks his sister is guilty of doing something wrong for messing up the puzzle?”

“Probably not.  He seems to recognize that she is only a baby, so he’s not blaming her for what she did.”

“I think you are right, Judy.  Now, when we are using the DIG Conflict Model, to have a full conflict we must have all three conditions of a conflict, the desire, the interference, and the guilt.  In the problem you just described, we only have the desire and the interference, but no guilt.  Even though this is not a full conflict, it may still be very important to consider in this situation.  We will be calling this type of problem a DESIRE-INTERFERENCE PROBLEM.  And so, when we think about all of the possible problems that might be involved in a difficult situation, we write down a summary of all of the possible conflicts and all of the possible DESIRE-INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS.

“To help us to dig a little deeper to find any of the other important problems in a difficult situation, today I am giving you two types of tools to dig, two types of shovels to dig, if you will. The first shovel is look for the desire to be liked or loved. The other tool is look for the desire to be free to make one’s own decision.  I discussed both of these tools (looking for the desire to be loved and looking for the desire to avoid interference with freedom) more thoroughly in my blog post titled, Why is Criticism So Hard To Bear?

“Oh, now I remember that one,” says Judy, as if a light suddenly went on in her head.  “You talked about how people, when criticized, might feel that people won’t like them, and why it’s important to consider this when we try to come up with a long term solution to problems.”

“Yes. I also mentioned that when we are criticized we often think that the criticizer wants us to make some change. This criticism might be provided not simply as a suggestion, but the criticizer soon begins to put pressure on us to change even against our will.  We may, therefore, become defensive as we begin to desire to make our own life decisions without outside pressure.  When we dig deeply into a difficult situation we would be wise if we look at how the “desire to be liked and loved” is involved in the situation and how the desire to “remain free to make our own decisions” is involved in the situation.  It helps to write down a summary sentence or two for each of the conflicts that you can see in the difficult situation, each of the desire-interference problems, and then dig deeper using the two shovels, that is, the liking/loving  shovel and the protecting freedom shovel.  In this way, you will get a list of the problems that all have to be addressed if you wish to create wise and lasting ways to deal with difficult situations.

“Sometimes, when we look at a difficult situation, it all seems to be so complicated, that we just get lost on how to move forward in a helpful way.  By using the approach I just described, the big difficult situation is broken down into easier-to-understand problems.  Oftentimes, working on making some improvements to deal with each of these easier-to-understand problems, one by one, the larger difficult situation begins to improve.

“In coming weeks, I’ll present examples of how this approach can be very helpful.  As we go through them, you’ll become so familiar with this approach that you will find that you can use it even in the most trying situations.”

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger comic strip conflict resolution criticism dig for the conflict emotional intelligence encouraging caring free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum grieving guilt guilting Hope insults interpersonal conflicts intrapersonal conflicts Name calling negative criticism psychological maturity ruminations social intelligence stress teasing types of criticism wisdom

INTRAPERSONAL CONFLICTS AND CHARLIE BROWN: ADVANCE LESSON

A few weeks ago I published a post titled CONFLICTS WITH OURSELVES: LESSONS FROM CHARLIE BROWN.  Today, let’s quickly review the ideas presented there, and then move on to discuss a few more.

Review

When one person has a conflict with another person, we call this an interpersonal conflict.  An intrapersonal conflict occurs when a person has a conflict with himself or herself.

When we describe a conflict using the DIG Conflict Model, the letters of the word, “DIG,” helps to remind us to first dig to find the DESIRE, then something that INTERFERES with the desire, and finally, the GUILT.  Earlier, we looked at the following example of an intrapersonal conflict:

Charlie13

When we looked earlier at this example, I provided the following tentative description of Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal conflict:

Charlie Brown seems to desire that he not yell at his baby sister, but the fact that he did has led him to perceive that, interfering with his desire, he is likely to continue his yelling at his sister.  He appears to feel guilty for his actions by saying he feels terrible and hates himself.

It would be simpler to describe this conflict by saying:

Charlie Brown desired that he not yell at his baby sister, but he interfered with his desire by yelling at her.  He felt guilty about it.

In this simpler description, we still have all of the three conditions for a conflict–that is, the desire, the interfering act and the guilt.  But they all took place in the past.  To become an expert at dealing with conflicts, we must learn to describe an existing conflict as something relevant to the future.  This skill will help us to prevent similar conflicts from recurring over and over again.

Okay, so there’s our summary in what was presented the last time we discussed intrapersonal conflicts.  Let’s now move on to some more advanced ideas.

Advanced Lesson

Whenever we have a conflict with ourselves, we oftentimes present to ourselves some negative criticism.  In the above three panels of the Charlie Brown comic, Charlie Brown indicates he has evaluated how he treated his sister and he makes it clear that he doesn’t like what he did.  When we evaluate something and state we don’t like what we evaluated, we have provided negative criticism.

In an earlier blog, we looked at providing negative criticism during interpersonal conflicts.  We saw that according to the DIG Conflict Model, there are five levels of maturity when it comes to providing negative criticism (see blog post titled, PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM:  FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY).  Level 1 is viewed as the most immature level, and level 2 is viewed as a bit more mature, and so on.  Readers of this blog were encouraged to familiarize themselves with the five levels, and then to use them in the following way:

First, they learn to recognize that they are getting ready to provide somebody criticism.

male criticism

Then they pause to think about how they are likely to provide the criticism.

Jack criticism 2

Then, before they provide the negative criticism, they decide what level of maturity the criticism they are likely to give is at.  If it is below level 4, they try to change the criticism so that it matches level 4, or even level 5.

In this example, the man is the employer of the woman who wrote a report.  After looking it over, he sees he is likely to provide criticism in a style that would best match level 2, which states:

2.  This level requires displaying one or both of the following:

  • The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm.
  • Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.

Now, I understand that some of you might feel that the employer deserves a higher rating because he does explain what the offending behavior is when he says the report is stupid.  But this just indicates in some vague way that he doesn’t like the report using the insulting word, “stupid.”  In my opinion, his comment is not an adequate description of what he doesn’t like about the report to warrant a more mature rating.

Seeing that this type of criticism is a bit immature, the man’s job in this example would then be to try to come up with a form of criticism that matches one of the more mature levels.  One of the more mature levels is level 4:

4.   The criticizer states the criticism without bodily attacks, damaging property, glares, insults, threats, or shouts, and with enough details so that the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance.  If the person receiving the criticism becomes defensive or angry, the criticizer empathizes without returning glares, insults, threats, or shouts.

In this example, by pausing and thinking about level 4, the man asks himself to describe his criticism in a clearer, more precise way than shouting “The report is stupid!”  To help him to clarify his thoughts, he uses the word “DIG.”  Thus, he says to himself that “I desire that in the future this woman who wrote this report will follow the directions that I give her and interfering with this desire is the fact that in this report she did not do so.  I think she is guilty of ignoring my directions.”

Having slowed down so he can think about this, the man now decides that the best way to provide the criticism to the woman is to wait until he has managed to calm himself down enough so he can speak to her using a respectful tone of voice and without any insulting words.  Then he will go over the first direction he had given to her and ask her to describe how she might have written the report so that he would have seen that the report writer is following his direction.  If she is not sure how to respond, he could then explain more thoroughly what he wants when she attempts to follow this direction.  After clarifying the first direction, he could go over in a similar way his second direction, and so forth.

Now, I don’t mean to suggest that this is the only resolution to this employer’s conflict.  For example, he could instead assign the best report writer in his company to mentor this employer.  The mentor would review each of her reports before she hands them in, show her copies of high quality reports, and so on.   The point is that this employer can improve the quality of his criticism by pausing before providing the criticism, thinking about how he is preparing to provide the criticism, comparing it to the five levels of providing negative criticism, and then seeking a way to change the criticism to something that matches a more mature level.

With intrapersonal conflicts we carry out a similar plan as we do with interpersonal conflicts.

Let’s return to our Charlie Brown example:

Charlie13

Here we see that even before first recognizing he is about to provide himself negative criticism, he has already done so.  That’s not the end of the world.  Many old habits are not easy to change quickly, and if you find yourself slipping into past styles of dealing with conflicts, you need not beat yourself up over this.  There are better ways to helpfully carry on.

In our Charlie Brown example, even after having already provided negative criticism, he can still go through the steps we discussed for dealing with interpersonal conflicts.  That is, he can first look at how he did criticize himself and then compare it to the five levels of providing criticism.  Then, he can pick out which of the five levels best matches his response.

In my judgement, Charlie Brown’s response falls somewhere between level 2 and level 3.

Level 2 states:

2.  This level requires displaying one or both of the following:

  • The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm.
  • Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.

Charlie Brown, in this example does state what the offending behavior is.  That is, he says, “I shouldn’t have yelled at her, she is only a baby.”  But to match level 3 his response would have to look like this:

3.  The criticizer clearly states the criticism with enough detail so the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance, but couples it with glares, insults, shouts, or threats that are not about bodily harm.

Charlie Brown’s criticism of himself, in my opinion, is not quite clear enough to fully match level three.  The fact that he repeatedly says he hates himself seems to be an example of insulting himself so that part of his criticism matches both level 2 and 3.

Once Charlie Brown figures out about what level his response had been, he could then see if he could come up with a response that better matches a more mature response, perhaps level 4, or even level 5.

Attempting to describe interpersonal conflicts using the letters in the word “DIG” can be helpful for coming up with a more mature response.  Similarly, attempting to describe intrapersonal conflicts using the letters in the word “DIG” can be helpful for coming up with a more mature response.  What would that look like?  Here’s one way Charlie Brown can do this:

He tells himself,

I desire that I not yell at my baby sister, but the fact that I did has led me to guess that, interfering with my desire, I’m likely to continue yelling at her.  I feel guilty for my actions.

Notice that there are no insults in this statement.  This statement is an important step toward coming up with negative criticism that matches a level 4 or 5 response.  Charlie Brown still must go on from here to come up with a plan that can help him to become less likely to yell at his baby sister.  Next week we will begin to look at some plans to help him do just that.

Practice

For those of you who truly want to become a master at dealing with intrapersonal conflicts, I recommend that you now take the time to either print out the five levels of providing negative criticism (see PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM:  FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY) or if you don’t have a printer, write them out in any way you can.  Then, tape them to your refrigerator door.  This week, each time you see them, try to recall some time that you provided negative criticism to yourself.  Try to recall just what you said to yourself.  Then, try to see what level best matched what you said to yourself, and if it is less than a 4 or 5 level, try to create a response that would match a higher level response.  With this type of practice, you will soon see some real progress in your skills to deal effectively with intrapersonal conflicts.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
conflict resolution dig for the conflict emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults interpersonal conflicts intrapersonal conflicts Name calling negative criticism social intelligence wisdom

CONFLICTS WITH OURSELVES: LESSONS FROM CHARLIE BROWN

Lately, we have been focusing largely on conflicts that deal with one person having a conflict with another person.  We call these interpersonal conflicts.

Today we begin to turn our attention to intrapersonal conflicts.  This type of conflict occurs when a person has a conflict with himself or herself.

We can see both of these types of conflicts occurring in the following Peanuts comic.  If you will, see if you can identify them.

Charlie1

USING THE LETTERS IN THE WORD “DIG” TO DESCRIBE A CONFLICT

charlie nowThe intrapersonal conflict is within Charlie Brown.  We can describe his conflict using the DIG Conflict Model that we have been discussing in earlier posts.

The letters of the word, “DIG,” helps to remind us that when we want to describe a conflict in some situation, it is helpful to first dig to find the DESIRE, then something that INTERFERES with the desire, and, finally, the GUILT.  Using this approach, we can describe Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal conflict as follows:

Charlie Brown seems to desire that he not yell at his baby sister, but the fact that he did has led him to perceive that, interfering with his desire, he is likely to continue his yelling at his sister in the future.  He appears to feel guilty for his actions by saying he feels terrible and hates himself.

In addition to the intrapersonal conflict in the above comic, there appears to be also a fairly clear example of an interpersonal conflict in the above comic.  It involves Lucy and Linus.

Charlie1

Lucy seems to have a desire that Linus leave her things alone but the fact that he was reading her comic book suggests to her that, interfering with her desire, he will continue to use her things.  The fact that Lucy is yelling at Linus and threatening to chase him out of the country suggests that she sees him as guilty of doing something wrong.

As a first step to enact a plan to wisely deal with interpersonal conflicts, on this blog we have spent some time learning to describe them in a familiar manner, using the word “DIG” as a reminder to look for the desire, then the interfering act, and then the guilt.  As we can see in the above example, we can use the word “DIG” in a similar way for intrapersonal conflicts.

In this next comic, again Charlie Brown has an intrapersonal conflict.  See if you can describe it in terms of his desire, something interfering with his desire, and his guilt of doing something wrong.

charlie10.png.jpg

There are several good ways to describe Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal conflict.  Here’s one–Charlie Brown seems to desire to go home and do his school work, but interfering with this, he is going to the movies.  He appears to be feeling guilty about going to the movies.

Let’s try one more.  Again, see if you can describe Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal conflict with the help of the letters in the word “DIG.”

charlie9.png

This is a tricky one because it is not clear if Charlie Brown feels guilty. One reasonable description of Charlie Brown’s intrapersonal situation follows.

Charlie Brown seems to have a desire to become a big-league player, but interfering with his desire is his observation of how he has been playing.  It is clear he feels terrible about how he has been playing but, as I said, it’s not clear if he feels guilty about how he has been playing. In this situation, using the DIG Conflict model we say Charlie Brown has a desire interference problem.

Thanks for playing along.  By now, you have had some practice using the first step to enact a plan to wisely deal with intrapersonal conflicts and desire interference problems, that is, to describe certain situations using the letters in the word “DIG” as an aid to remind you to dig for the desire, the interfering act and the perceived guilt.

A CONFLICT, TO EXIST, MUST REFER TO AN EVENT THAT WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE

When we use the DIG Conflict Model to describe a conflict, it is advantageous to phrase the conflicts as something relevant to the future. Consider the first intrapersonal conflict we discussed today:

Charlie13

Let’s take another look at how I described it:

Charlie Brown seems to desire that he not yell at his baby sister, but the fact that he did has led him to perceive that, interfering with his desire, he is likely to continue his yelling at his sister in the future. My guess is that he feel guilty for his actions by saying he feels terrible and hates himself.

Now one simpler way to say this might be:

Charlie Brown desired that he not yell at his baby sister, but he interfered with his desire by yelling at her.  He felt guilty about it.

In this description, we still have all of the three conditions for a conflict–that is, the desire, the interfering act and the guilt.  But they all took place in the past. To become an expert at dealing with conflicts, we must learn to describe an existing conflict as something relevant to the future.

Try not to misunderstand me here.  People oftentimes think about and discuss conflicts that occurred in the past.

charlie11.png.jpg

charlie10.png.jpg

According to the DIG Conflict model, a conflict, if it currently exists, must have, in part, the following two conditions:

  1. A person has a desire that an act will occur. 
  2.  A person must perceive that someone is likely to act in a manner that is incompatible with the desire.

Framing a conflict as connected in some way to the future is forward looking.  It helps us to focus in on what we can do to make a change that can alter the future for the better.

If we could ask Charlie Brown some questions about what led him to feel so blue, we would discover that he does probably perceive that what happened is connected to something relevant to his future.  For example, imagine how Charlie would respond if I asked him, “Why are you sad that you made your sister cry?  That happened already and there is nothing you can do about it now.”

He might answer, “Maybe feeling sad will prod me into figuring out what to do in the future so it won’t happen again.” Or, he might say, “I don’t know, I just am.”  If he answers in the first way, he will be thinking more like a person with a mature idea of what it means to have a conflict. It is this level of maturity that I am trying to encourage. It will take some time for many of you to come to fully understand the value of this, but if you stick with this blog, you are likely to find it can become a very comfortable way to think about this stuff and very helpful.

Consider the case in which Charlie Brown, instead of insulting himself or attempting to ignore and forget the whole episode, says, “I understand why I feel uncomfortable with what I did—it was wrong. I like myself for feeling uncomfortable when I treat my sister wrong. This feeling is a tool that prods me to come up with a better way to treat my sister in the future.”

After some more thought and perhaps discussing the problem with some people he respects, let’s say that he reaches a point at which he says to himself,

“Next time my baby sister messes up a puzzle I’m working on, I’ll walk away, take some deep breaths, and remind myself that she is just a baby.  And maybe I can do some things to prevent this situation from ever coming about.  Hmm, let me see here.  Oh, I know what I can do.  Whenever I work on a puzzle, instead of doing it on the floor, I could do it high up in a place that my sister can’t reach.”

This would be a better point to arrive at. As Charlie Brown reaches for this level of understanding, he will be more hopeful that he will be able to work out his conflict, and therefore be less depressed.  If you continue to follow this blog, you will learn to master the set of skills necessary for resolving conflicts in this mature way.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
conflict resolution dig for the conflict emotional intelligence free social intelligence and emotional intelligence curriculum guilt insults negative criticism psychological maturity Romeo and Juliet social intelligence threats wisdom

CONFLICTS: LESSONS FROM ROMEO AND JULIET

If you have been following this blog, you will have noticed that for the past few weeks I have relied heavily on humor to teach some of the main principles of conflicts (see for examples, ANGER: A COMIC STRIP LOVER’S GUIDE and INSULTS: A COMIC STRIP LOVER’S GUIDE.

But a blog such as this, if it is to be a source of wisdom, must keep the reader aware that although there is much humor in conflicts, there is tragedy as well.  Comics typically emphasize the humor.  To avoid completely losing our balance, we must, from time to time, directly take on serious themes.  At such times, in the words from Shakespeare’s Henry the VIII’s prologue—

“I come no more to make you laugh; things now,

That bear a weighty and serious brow,

Sad, high, and working, full of state and woe…”

In the deepest heart of all of us there is a corner in which life just happens to work sadly.  Any discussion of conflict cannot completely ignore this.  Nevertheless, I will attempt to keep our forays into the profounder bass-notes of life fairly brief, and use humor as our main educational tool.

Assisting People to Deal with Conflicts

From time to time you will be asked to assist people with conflicts.  A situation involving friends may erupt.  Problems at school or work will naturally pop up on regular occasions.

You will find that as you begin to engage the parties involved in the conflict, some in the midst of it will angrily start to tell you what has been happening by going on and on until it begins to strain the patience of everyone listening.  Others will speak of the conflict in such vague generalities that listeners are left scratching their heads.

In this blog post you will practice using a model to assist you in coming up with a description of a conflict in a few sentences that not only will prove helpful, but will also enhance your reputation.

Consider the following three pictures created by Lois Hubertz:

    

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  In the tragic comic above there are three pictures.  Need I provide three thousand words to verbally describe them?  What if I wanted to describe briefly the conflict they portray?   To do so, I would be wise to first discuss with each of the parties what they view as causing the strife, and then after hearing them out, combine what I had learned with what I observe in the pictures.

Suppose that in my discussions I find out that the story of the two lovers in the first box and the two lovers in Shakespeare’s magnificent play, Romeo and Juliet are similar.  As in the Shakespeare play, the lovers in the tragic comic are called Romeo and Juliet, and their families are terribly bitter with one another because of angry memories of previous conflicts.

After my information gathering, what if I attempted to briefly describe the conflict from Juliet’s point of view as follows:

Juliet desires to marry Romeo, but interfering with this, her father has made it clear to her that he does not want to give her the legally required permission.  Although she recognizes that her father, if he were to consent, would be in hot water with the rest of their family, Juliet feels that he is guilty of being wrong because for her sake he should have the guts to stand up to them. 

Are these sentences sufficient?

Obviously, compared to a Shakespeare play, my two-sentence summary, just like any two-sentence summary, must ignore the subtleties and related conflicts that are revealed by a fully crafted play.  But there are many times when we can sufficiently grasp a situation without using a style of language that many find hard to grasp or by sitting down for hours to study an insightful narrative.  Using an easy to learn pattern of constructing two sentences from each party’s perspective may very well serve to set the stage for the creation of a plan that will resolve the conflict at hand to the satisfaction of all the involved parties.

A Definition of Conflict

When we attempt to come up with a brief description of a conflict, it helps to have a good definition of the word “conflict” at hand.  On this blog we will be using a definition derived from what I refer to as the DIG Conflict Model.

A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:

  1. Party A desires an act will occur.
  2. Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire. 
  3. Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

Notice that each of the three conditions has a key word italicized—desire for the first condition, interference for the second, and guilt for the third.  If we take the first letter of each of these key words and put them together, they spell DIG; hence the DIG Conflict Model’s name.

Party A, in the above definition, indicates the individual who is theoretically engaged in a conflict and from whose perspective the conflict will first be described.

The Pattern for Describing Conflicts

In earlier blog posts, I’ve described how to use the word DIG to help craft a brief summary of a conflict and we have practiced this method a few times as well (see, for example, DIG FOR THE CONFLICT).  To get to be an expert at this method, it helps to review some of the ideas from time to time.

The conflict statement I used to describe the conflict Juliet is having with her father is in a form that doesn’t assure that a conflict exists; rather, it provides us a standard pattern that allows us to briefly describe the situation as best we can with each of the three conditions of a conflict in a familiar place–first the desire, then the interfering act, and then the guilt.

When there are only two parties involved in a conflict, the pattern can be described as follows:

First select an individual who appears to be one of the parties to the conflict and make him or her Party A.  Then create a sentence that identifies who Party A is, Party A’s desire, the other party involved, and the act that is interfering with the desire.  Then fashion a sentence that puts forth the theory that Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.

The first two sentences are composed, as best you can, from Party A’s point of view.

Why do we Bother to Break up the Concept of a Conflict?

So far, we have seen that the DIG Conflict Model breaks up the concept of a conflict into its three conflict conditions (desire, interference and guilt).  In future blog posts we will find this helpful because some conflicts are confusing to understand all at once.

Very simple conflicts can be looked at as a single unit with little difficulty. However, more complicated conflicts will leave us scratching our heads.  The skill to break up the conflict into its three conditions allows us to familiarize ourselves with smaller, more easily understandable parts.  Then, when we join the parts together, the whole becomes easier to grasp.

Moreover, sometimes we can come up with an idea to make a change in just one of the easier to understand parts that then leads to the rest of the conflict becoming easier to manage.  That is, one strategy to resolve a conflict we are struggling with is the following:

1. Look at each easier to understand part, either just the desire, or the interfering act or the guilt.

2. Think about making some change that will affect just that part.

3. Then think about how that change will impact the whole conflict.

By doing this, we frequently find a resolution that we would have otherwise missed if we kept wrestling with the entire conflict as one huge unit.  In future blog posts we will see many examples of this.

Using the DIG Conflict Model in Real Conflicts

In a real conflict, after you do your best to summarize the conflict, it is important to check with the different people involved to see if they agree with you.  As you discuss this with them, you will find that this often leads to those who are involved clarifying what the issues are. As you assist them in going through this process, there is an excellent chance that they will find this helpful.  In time, people will come to respect you for this.

I know some of these ideas are new and you may feel confused about some of the issues I have been discussing.  If you keep following this blog, you will get more and more comfortable with these ideas.  In time, you’ll see more clearly how helpful they can be.

——————————-

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.

Categories
anger Bullied conflict resolution criticism encouraging caring guilt guilting negative criticism psychological maturity wisdom

GUILTING VERSUS ENCOURAGING CARING: AN ADVANCE LESSON

Last week’s post is titled, AN INTRODUCTION TO “GUILTING.”  There we compared “GUILTING” to “ENCOURAGING CARING.”  Both are different styles of making a request and reacting if someone refuses to help.

GUILTING 

People using guilting express sadness at the current state of affairs and then ask for assistance.  Upon having a request turned down, the person who employs guilting responds in anger while seeking to lower the refuser’s self-esteem and making the refuser feel deserving of punishment.  People using guilting typically shout out phrases such as, “You’re selfish,” “You don’t care about anyone but yourself,” and “How can you do this to me?” Here’s an example of guilting:

ENCOURAGING CARING

People using encouraging caring make their requests very much like those who use guilting.  As they ask others to help, they express sadness at the current state of affairs.  However, unlike those who use guilting, those who use encouraging caring seek a mutually satisfying solution.  If their request is turned down, they don’t view the refuser as evil and deserving of punishment.  To seek to humiliate those who turn down their requests is avoided, while showing empathy and support are essential. Here’s an example of someone using encouraging caring:

Defending Encouraging Caring

To those of you who simply intuit that encouraging caring is a more powerful plan when making requests than guilting, you require no additional arguments to put it to good use.  To the skeptics out there, and to those who enjoy employing principles of science to assist in verifying your belief, the following study provides some relevant information.

Data from a University Study

In the autumn of 1981, I hired four student actors at the University of Minnesota, two guys and two gals.  We met at a well-equipped film studio on campus.

First, I had one of the actors, Pete, enact a guilting scenario.  Two scenes were used.  The first shows the viewer that the character Pete is portraying typically uses guilting whenever someone turns down his request.  In that scene, upon hearing his request being turned down Pete replies angrily:

The second scene, which depicts Pete making a new request, is very similar to the “calculus test help” situation we looked at earlier. The subjects in the study who observed this first videotape saw a scene showing how Pete typically responds to someone who turns down his requests.  They then observed the second scene in which Pete makes a new request.  The subjects in the study were to imagine that Pete is a guy whom they knew typically uses guilting and is now making this new request directly to them.  The subjects’ job was to enact the role of a friend of Pete and to imagine how they would respond to this new request. After completing this two-scene guilting videotape, we got to work on a second two-scene videotape.  This one has Pete enacting an encouraging caring scenario.  It begins by showing the viewer that the character Pete is portraying typically uses encouraging caring whenever someone turns down his request.  In that scene, upon hearing his request being turned down, Pete replies sadly:

Once this scene was created, I used the exact “new request” scene as I used on the first videotape that depicts Pete requesting help for the calculus test situation.  Thus, this second videotape has a different first scene than the first videotape, but the exact same second scene that shows Pete requesting help of the viewer who was to enact the role of Pete’s friend. The third videotape that we created is designed to depict another guilting scenario, one that uses the request for a timelier car ride situation that we discussed earlier. The fourth videotape we worked on is designed to depict an encouraging caring scenario using the same request for a timelier car ride situation. Once this set of four videotapes was made, I then had the three other actors make the same set of four videotapes as Pete did, so in the end I had four actors portraying the four different scenarios. Once I had the videotapes made, I arranged for University of Minnesota students, 139 men and 109 women, to come to a viewing theater.  Each student saw just one of the sixteen videotapes, randomly chosen. Because the actor making the request in the video had pretended as if the camera is the person for whom the request is made, he or she appears to be addressing the student viewing the videotape.  As I already mentioned, the job of each student observing the videotape was to enact the role of the friend to whom the request is being made. Immediately after observing the request, students individually answered five questions.  The results of the study indicated that those students who saw the encouraging caring videotapes answered all five questions more favorably than students who saw the guilting videotapes and these differences were statistically significant. Thus, students indicated that they would be more likely to comply and less likely to become covertly and overtly angry with those who tend to use encouraging caring than those who tend to use guilting.  Moreover, guilters were less liked and were viewed as less respected for how they handle conflict than those who used encouraging caring.

Encouraging Caring: A Secret Source of Power

I’ve just provided some information about why I think encouraging caring can often be more effective than guilting.  We now take up the question of why I think encouraging caring is a secret. When teaching conflict resolution, I frequently employ the following technique:  The class is given a typical conflict and asked to generate plans that might help to resolve the conflict.  I have found that although guilting is regularly suggested, encouraging caring almost never is.  When I have suggested it as a possibility, students have often looked puzzled, and sometimes asked, “Isn’t that the same thing as guilting?” During counseling sessions, I’ve also found that the availability of encouraging caring to deal with conflicts seems to be a secret to many people.  Here’s an example:

Patricia (not her real name), a 21-year old university student, came to the counseling center expressing a concern about her relationship with her mother with whom she lived.  Patricia desired to make her own decisions, but whenever she tried to do this, her mother fervently interfered.

“Patricia,” I said, “what do you think would be the best way to respond to your mother the next time she begins to insist on pushing you in a particular direction?”

“My friends tell me to learn to be assertive.  I read a book on it, and I’ve tried some of the ideas.  In some situations it’s helped but not with me and my mom.  Lately, my friends are coaching me to practice saying in a strong voice, ‘Mom, I’m going to make up my own mind!  I don’t want any advice from you unless I ask for it!’”

“Does your friends’ advice make sense to you?”

“In a way, it does.  The thing is, there’s no way I could ever say that to my mom.”

“Hmm.  Well, what do you think is the best way to go from here?”

“I’m feeling stuck.  I’m hoping you can help me to come up with some idea.”

“Well, I suggest we try practicing a style I call ‘encouraging caring.’  You don’t have to make any commitment to me that you’ll try this with your mother, but if you try it out with me in a role play a few times, maybe it will feel more comfortable to you than your friends’ suggestion.  Would that be okay?”

“I’m willing to give it a try.”

“Good.  I’m going to play the part of your mother.  I’ll start to give you some advice, and I’d like you to consider saying, in a sad voice, ‘Mom, I’ve been feeling sad lately.  I love you very much, I don’t want to hurt your feelings, and yet I feel that it’s best for me to make my own decisions.  Every time I try, you start to feel frustrated.’ “When you say that, Patricia, I’m going to act like I’m becoming defensive.  If this makes sense to you, I’d like you to practice replying sadly, ‘I’m not putting you down, Mom.  It’s just that I’ve been feeling so sad about this.  I really do love you.’”

“That sounds a little like guilting.  I don’t want to learn to be a guilter like my mom.”

I then explained to Patricia the difference between guilting and encouraging caring.  It was like a light went on in her head as she smiled broadly.  I gently posed a few questions for her to make sure she understood the difference, and within a few minutes she convinced me that her understanding was sound.

After a few practice role plays, Patricia expressed a high degree of confidence that she could try this with her mother. The next time I saw her, Patricia reported with a smile on her face that she was able to try encouraging caring with her mom the night of our last session.  It turned out that she and her mother ended up having a good cry together, and since then, her mother had begun to encourage her to be more independent.

We practiced a few more role plays that session, trying to anticipate what might be a response that remained consistent with the encouraging caring style in the event that her mother began to again become too pushy.  We also worked on a little note that Patricia wrote to her mother thanking her for being so understanding.  During our discussion, Patricia decided to get her mother a little gift to go with the note without my suggesting such a gesture.

——————————-
ASSIGNMENT: If you will, see if you can remember a time when you requested some assistance and was turned down. Think about how you responded? See if you can imagine replying in a way that matches the encouraging caring approach.
——————————————————————
 Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Categories
anger conflict resolution criticism emotional intelligence guilt guilting Harvard Negotiation Project negative criticism Negotiations psychological maturity types of criticism wisdom

AN INTRODUCTION TO “GUILTING”

To become a master at responding to criticism, we have to first learn to recognize the reason for the criticism. So far we have discussed five of them:

  1. Criticism designed to encourage you to improve (see HERE and HERE)
  2. Playful teasing (see HERE)
  3. The desire to form a bond with a group by putting down non-group members (see HERE)
  4. Jealousy (see HERE)
  5. The criticizer is in a bad mood (see HERE)

Today we will turn our attention to a sixth reason–“guilting.”

GUILTING

In the above comic, Blondie criticizes Dagwood for not agreeing to go to the party.  She does so by crying out, “How can you do this to me?!” and by bursting into tears.  Her technique to convince Dagwood to do what she wants despite his determination manages to work.

Blondie’s actions are an example of what we will be calling “guilting.”  It occurs when somebody who has had a request turned down seeks to change the person’s mind by tossing out certain types of insults.

You may have heard what I refer to as “guilting” as “laying a guilt trip on someone” or “imposing guilt on someone.”

As in the Blondie comic, sometimes guilting can indeed change somebody’s mind.  On the other hand, sometimes imposing guilt on someone can hurt a relationship.

The two above comics pose an  interesting dilemma.  On the one hand, under some sets of circumstances we can often increase the probability that our desire will be fulfilled by employing a plan that makes someone feel guilty.  On the other hand, using such a plan may hurt our reputation and end up costing us valued friends.

An Alternative to Guilting

Early in my career I began to wonder if I could tweak the “guilting” plan so that it would reduce the probability of negative consequences.  I had recently read a book by Joan Bondurant, Conquest of Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict.  There Ms. Bondurant tells us that many believe Mohandas Gandhi’s style of appealing for help is particularly effective.

Gandhi

Gandhi recognized that we all have desires, some selfish and some supportive of those we care about.  He also saw that there are people whose actions either interfere with our desires or help to fulfill them.  As we ask others to help, he believed it is acceptable to express sadness at the current state of affairs and to seek a mutually satisfying solution.  If our request is turned down, it is not acceptable to view the refuser as evil.  To seek to humiliate those who turn down our requests is forbidden, while showing empathy and support are essential.

To get a sense of Gandhi’s approach in action, consider an example taken from his autobiography.  One day, in an effort to bring to light some injustice that had been occurring in South Africa, Gandhi sought help from the newspaper editor of The Bangabasi. 

The editor kept me waiting for an hour.  He had evidently many interviewers, but he would not so much as look at me, even when he had disposed of the rest.  On my venturing to broach my subject after a long wait, he said: ‘Don’t you see my hands are full?  There is no end to the number of visitors like you. You better go.  I am not disposed to listen to you.’  For a moment I felt offended, but I quickly understood the editor’s position.  I had heard of the fame of The Bangabasi.  I could see that there was a regular stream of visitors there.  And they were all people acquainted with him.  His paper had no lack of topics to discuss…. However serious a grievance may be in the eyes of the man who suffers from it, he will be but one of the numerous people invading the editor’s office, each with a grievance of his own.  How is the editor to meet them all?… But I was not discouraged.  I kept on seeing editors of other newspapers.

Upon being turned down, Gandhi remained supportive and empathetic toward the editor.  “Experience has taught me,” Gandhi explains later in his autobiography, “that civility is the most difficult part of Satyagraha [his philosophy].  Civility does not here mean the mere outward gentleness of speech cultivated for the occasion, but an inborn gentleness and desire to do the opponent good.  These should show themselves in every act of a Satyagrahi.”

Contrast the above style, which I will hereafter refer to as encouraging caring, with guilt.  The Dictionary of Behavioral Science (Wolman, 1973) defines guilt as, “The realization that one has transgressed a moral, social or ethical principle, associated with a lowering of self esteem and a need to make retribution for the transgression” (italics mine).

In the guilt definition, the two sets of words that I put in italics represent the crucial differences between encouraging caring and a strategy that I will refer to as guilting.  If Blondie uses guilting on Dagwood because he is resisting complying, she will respond angrily while attempting to lower his self-esteem and make him feel like he is deserving of punishment for his actions.  Consistent with guilting is the use of phrases such as, “You’re selfish,” “You don’t care about anyone but yourself,” and “How can you do this to me?”

In contrast, if Blondie was to use encouraging caring, she would express sadness while seeking to enhance Dagwood’s self-esteem as he comes to feel a sense of compassion within himself, a compassion that leads to a sense of satisfaction as they strive together toward a mutually satisfying solution.  As I envision this, it looks something like this…

Illustration by Eric Sailer

Because Blondie is in an ongoing relationship with Dagwood, when she decides to use guilting on him, she doesn’t always have to say the words that indicate she is employing guilting.  After she has used it a few times with him, just the tone of her voice or even a certain look may be enough to fully indicate to Dagwood that she has decided to use guilting in the current situation.

Similarly, if Blondie happened to be the type of person who uses encouraging caring on an ongoing basis, she would not have to convey to Dagwood, in a long-winded speech, everything that makes up this supportive style each and every time she decides to use it.  An expression of sadness with a few supportive words would be sufficient.  The best time to convey the attitudes that make up the encouraging caring approach is during pleasant discussions, rather than when embroiled in a personal conflict.

To be effective and convincing, Blondie must not suddenly switch to guilting whenever she sees her encouraging caring request style is not going to work.  That is, suppose after Blondie tries to use encouraging caring for a few minutes she finds that Dagwood insists on not going to the costume party.  If Blondie suddenly cries out, “You’re a selfish jerk!” Dagwood would know from then on that when she appears to be using encouraging caring, she is just putting on an act, and her real attitude is that she views him as guilty whenever he does not comply with her request.

Now don’t misunderstand me.  Suppose Blondie consistently uses encouraging caring.  One day she asks Dagwood to go to a costume party and he turns her down.  She is very supportive, though disappointed.  Dagwood may find himself feeling guilty for refusing to go to the party.  Just because Dagwood feels guilty doesn’t mean Blondie has used guilting on him.  It is quite common for someone to have feelings of guilt upon turning down a request even when the requester consistently uses encouraging caring.  However, in such cases the refusers do not believe the requesters are seeking to make them feel guilty.  Guilters are viewed as deliberately trying to make refusers feel guilty.

Some Practice

Here’s a comic that displays a college student making a request of a friend.  See if you can identify whether the woman’s style of making a request is more consistent with guilting or encouraging caring.

Illustration by Eric Sailer

In this comic, Diane expresses sadness about coming to class late and requests that Tom pick her up on time.  When he refuses to make a commitment to do as she asks, she remains supportive.  Diane’s actions are consistent with the encouraging caring plan.

It’s crucial to point out here that even with all that Diane does in this comic, a slight change in the end could turn it into guilting.  For example, suppose that after becoming convinced that Tom will not do as she asks, she gets up to leave and yells at him, red faced, “You’re a selfish creep!”  Guilty of guilting would be my conclusion.

Encouraging Caring and Resignation

Some people make the mistake of thinking that to use encouraging caring effectively people must learn to resign themselves to doing nothing else but graciously accepting it when a person turns down their requests.   In many situations that is the wisest choice.  But there are many alternatives that can be considered that are consistent with the supportive encouraging caring plan.  For example, when Diane sees that Tom has turned down her request, she can offer something in return for compliance.    That is, after Tom turns her request down, she can say something like, “Yeah, punching a clock can be a drag, Tom.  What if I were to give you the money I spend on the morning bus ride in exchange for the ride to school?  That’s two dollars a day—ten dollars a week that can help you with the gas money.  I’d get a good looking guy to pick me up right at my door, and you’d get my great company, ten dollars a week, and the satisfaction of helping me out.  What do you say?”

Notice that Diane’s use of this new plan proposes a mutually satisfying solution.  Thus it is consistent with encouraging caring.

Negotiation is a process of communicating back and forth for the purpose of reaching an agreement (see Harvard Negotiation Project to learn more about this topic).  There are several forms of negotiation methods that are consistent with encouraging caring.  Mutual gains bargaining, principled negotiations, and negotiations on the merits are some names of methods that encourage the negotiators to avoid such behavior as blaming the other party for the problem, engaging in name-calling, or raising your voice.  As the authors (R. Fisher and W. Uri) of the classic text on this type of negotiation writes:

Blaming is an easy mode to fall into, particularly when you feel the other side is indeed responsible.  But even if blaming is justified, it is usually counterproductive.  Under attack, the other side will become defensive and will resist what you have to say. They will cease to listen, or they will strike back with an attack of their own.  (Getting to Yes, page 25)

Learning to negotiate is an important part of conflict resolution, and we will return to this topic in future blog posts.

Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.