According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2012), the term “conflict” has Latin roots. Dating back to the early 15th century, conflictus, the past participle of configigere, means to strike (“fligere”) together (“com”) or be in conflict. The psychological sense of incompatible urges in one person dates back to the 19th century.
Most scholars adopt some variation of Mortensen’s (1974) definition of conflict: “conflict is an expressed struggle over incompatible interests in the distribution of limited resources” (p. 93). Across definitions of conflict, there seems to be “agreement between early and recent scholars… particularly in scope, nature of action, and the relationship among parties” (Putnam, 2006, p. 5). Communication scholars tend to include some form of interaction when defining conflict. For example, Folger, Poole, and Stutman (1997) defined conflict as occurring “when interdependent people perceive incompatible goals and interference form each other in achieving those goals” (p. 4). This type of definition puts communication at the center of conflict.
Canary, Cupach, and Messman (1995) examined how social scientists conceptualize and measure conflict in parent-child, friendship, and romantic relationships. In doing so, the authors argued that many researchers specify communicative behaviors in definitions of conflict, whereas others define conflict as an episode involving hostility. Therefore, differentiating conflict from related concepts, such as hostility, disagreement, and misunderstanding is important to defining conflict (Keltner, 1994). Specifically, Roloff, Putnam, and Anastasiou (2003) worked to establish conflict as unique from other communicative processes such as persuasion, argumentation, and compliance gaining. Overall, these different definitions of conflict allow communication scholars to focus on several types of social interaction and to study the many facets of conflictual communication (Putnam, 2006).

Historical Overview

Putnam (2006) provided a rich overview of the history of conflict research within communication scholarships. In short, she explained that initial studies of conflict that include communication as a variable measured it very simplistically. For example, initial studies of the Prisoner’s Dilemma game measured communication in terms of allowed to talk/not allowed to talk. Within the field of communication, rhetorical scholarship initially focused on crisis rhetoric (e.g. Burgess, 1973) and public conflicts (e.g. Bowers, 1974). Small group scholars began studying conflict in terms of bargaining (e.g. Johnson, McCarty, & Allen, 1976) and conflict in small groups (e.g. Baird, 1974). Research on communication and conflict in the 1970s led to the rapid acceleration of conflict studies in family and interpersonal communication (e.g. Sillars, 1980), organizational conflict styles (e.g. Putnam & Wilson, 1982) and intercultural conflict (e.g. Gudykunst, 1985).

In Interpersonal Communication Research

Communication scholars often turn to Social Exchange Theory (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978), Attribution Theory (Fincham, Bradbury, & Scott, 1990), Systems Theory (Huston, 2000) and the Chilling Effect Framework (Roloff & Cloven, 1990) to understand conflict. Models of conflict, such as the Process Model (Cupach & Canary, 2000), seek to help scholars better understand conflict as a process. From a relational slant, the Relational Turbulence Model (Solomon & Knobloch, 2001), the Personal-Relational Equilibrium Model (Kumashiro, Rusbult, & Finkle, 2008) and the Relational Escalation Approach (Cunningham, Shamblen, Barbee, & Ault, 2005) allow for a focus on conflict arising from relational dynamics.
Several communication scholars focus on studying conflict in a specific relational context. For example, there are sizeable bodies of research on conflict in the contexts of marital relationships (e.g. Gottman, 1982; Noller, Feeney, Bonnell, & Callan, 1994), dating relationships (e.g. Siegert & Stamp, 1994), friendships (e.g. Samter & Cupach, 1998), parent-child relationships (e.g. Sillars, Smith, & Koerner, 2010), sibling relationships (e.g. Campione-Barr & Smetana, 2010), and social networks (e.g. Roloff & Soule, 2002), to name a few.
Interpersonal communication research about conflict foregrounds how conflict is managed through communication processes. Blake and Mouton (1964) posited a framework of conflict styles that involves competing, collaborating/integrating, compromising, accommodating, and avoiding. Alternatively, depending on message directness (i.e., engagement vs. avoidance) and message valence (i.e., positive/negative vs. face-attaching/face-honoring ), van de Vliert and Euwema (1994) proposed a four-category conceptualization of conflict strategies: negotiation, nonconfrontation, direct fighting, and indirect fighting. Scholars have also stressed that communication during conflict consisted of a sequence of responses, and due to “conflict patterns” formed in a relationship over time, responses could be highly predictable (Raush, Barry, Hertel, & Swain, 1974). In particular, two conflict patterns are examined extensively by communication scholars. First, negative reciprocity refers to exchange of negativity during conflicting situations (Caughlin, Vangelisti, & Mikucki-Enyart, 2013). Second, demand/withdraw pattern occurs when one person nags, complains, demands, but the other person avoids or disengages (Caughlin et al., 2013).
In terms of communication effects, research consistently shows associations between communication during conflict and relational outcomes such as satisfaction and relational quality. For example, Gottman and Levenson (2000) found that negativity and positivity during an argument predicted relational dissolution. Further, Conflict behavior and patterns in dating and married relationships may be related to various relational outcomes, including dissatisfaction and dissolution (Caughlin & Vangelisti, 2006). Additional research indicates that people in different marital and family types manage conflict different ways. For example, Koerner and Fitzpatrick (2009) found that families that were high in conformity orientation tended to avoid conflict, whereas families that were high in conversation orientation tended to exhibit more social support in conflict situations.
Communication scholars have also tied conflict patterns to several negative health outcomes. For example, Caughlin and Malis (2004) found connections between patterns of conflict and substance use. Similarly, Shimkowski and Schrodt (2012) reported that co-parental communication mediated the link between inter-parental conflict and children’s mental well-being. Although there cannot be one-size-fits all advices for managing conflict in order to avoid negative health outcomes, scholars (e.g., Donohue & Kolt,1992) have identified several teachable conflict communication skills that are effective to facilitate positive relational outcomes.

Subject Author Replies Views Last Message
No Comments


Baird, J. E. (1974). A comparison of distributional and sequential structure in group discussions. Speech Monographs, 41, 226-232. doi: 10.1080/03637757409375840
Black, R., & Mouton, J. S. (1964). The managerial grid: Key orientations for achieving production through people. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Bowers, J. W. (1974). Communication strategies in conflicts between institutions and their clients. In G. R. Miller & H. W. Simons (Eds.), Perspectives on communication in social conflict (pp. 125-152). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Burgess, P. G. (1973). Crisis rhetoric: Coercion versus force. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 51, 61-73. doi: 10.1080/00335637309383154
Campione-Barr, N., & Smetana, J. G. (2010). “Who said you could wear my sweater?” Adolescent siblings’ conflicts and associations with relationship quality. Child Development, 81, 464-471. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01407.x
Canary, D. J., Cupach, W. R., & Messman, S. J. (1995). Relationship conflict. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Caughlin, J. P. & Malis, R. S. (2004). Demand/withdraw communication between parents and adolescents: Connections with self-esteem and substance use. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 125-148. doi: 10.1177/0265407504039843
Caughlin, J. P., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2006). Conflict in dating and marital relationships. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of conflict communication (pp. 130-158). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. doi: 10.4135/978-1-41297-617-6.n5
Caughlin, J. P., Vangelisti, A. I., & Mikucki-Enyart, S. L. (2013). Conflict in dating and marital relationships, in J. G. Oetzel, & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of conflict communication (pp. 161-186). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. doi: 10.4135/9781452281988.n7
Cunningham, M. R., Shamblen, S. R., Barbee, A. P., & Ault, L. K. (2005). Social allergies in romantic relationship: Behavioral repetition, emotional sensitization and dissatisfaction in dating couples. Personal Relationships, 12, 273-295. doi: 10.1111/j.1350-4126.2005.00115.x
Cupach, W. R., & Canary, D. J. (2000). Competence in interpersonal conflict. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
Donohue, W. A. and Kolt, R. (1992). Managing interpersonal conflict. Sage Publications, London.
Fincham, F. D., Bradbury, T. N., & Scott, C. K. (1990). Cognition in marriage. In F. D. Fincham & T. N. Bradbury (Eds.), The psychology of marriage: Basic issues and applications (pp. 118-149). New York: Guilford Press.
Folger, J. P., Poole, M. S., & Stutman, R. K. (1997). Working through conflict: Strategies for relationships, groups and organizations (3rd Edition). New York: HarperCollins.
Gottman, J. M. (1982). Emotional responsiveness in marital conversations. Journal of Communication, 32, 108-120. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1982.tb02504.x
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (2000). The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 737-745. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00737.x
Gudykunst, W. B. (1985). Normative power and conflict potential in intergroup relationships. In W. B.
Gudykunst, L. P. Stewart, & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), Communication, culture, and organizational processes (pp. 155-173). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Huston T. L. (2000). The social ecology of marriage and other intimate unions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 298–320. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00298.x
Johnson, D. W., McCarty, H., & Allen, K. (1976). Congruent and contradictory verbal and non-verbal communication of cooperativeness and competitiveness in negotiations. Communication Research, 3, 275-292. doi: 10.1177/009365027600300303
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.
Keltner, J. W. (1994). The management of struggle. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Koerner, A. F., & Fitzpatrick, M. A. (2009). Family type and conflict: The impact of conversation orientation and conformity orientation on conflict in the family. Communication Studies, 48, 59-75. doi: 10.1080/10510979709368491
Kumashiro, M., Rusbult, C. E., & Finkle, E. J. (2008). Navigating personal and relational concerns: The quest for equilibrium. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 94-110. Doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.94
Mortensen, C. D. (1974). A transactional paradigm of social conflict. In G. R. Miller & H. W. Simons (Eds.), Perspectives on communication in social conflict (pp. 90-194). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Noller, P., Feeney, J. A., Bonnell, D., & Callan, V. J. (1994). A longitudinal study of conflict in early marriage. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 233-252. doi: 10.1177/0265407594112005
Oxford English Dictionary online (2012). Retrieved from

Putnam, L. L. (2006). Definitions and approaches to conflict and communication. In J. G. Oetzel & S. Ting-Toomey (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of conflict communication (pp. 2-33). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. doi: 10.4135/978-1-41297-617-6.n1
Putnam L. L., & Wilson, C. E. (1982). Communicative strategies in organizational conflicts: Reliability and validity of a measurement scale. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 6 (pp. 629-652). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Raush, H. L., Barry, W. A., Hertel, R. K., & Swain, M. A. (1974). Communication, conflict, and marriage. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Roloff, M. E., & Cloven, C. H. (1990). The chilling effect in interpersonal relationships: The reluctance to speak one’s mind. In D. D. Cahn (Ed.), Intimates in conflict: A communication perspective (pp. 49-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Roloff, M. E., Putnam, L. L., & Anastasiou, L. (2003). Negotiation skills. In J. Greene & B. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of communication and social interaction skill (pp. 801-833). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Roloff, M. E., & Soule, K. P. (2002). Interpersonal conflict: A review. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication 3rd Edition (pp. 475-528). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Samter, W., & Cupach, W. R. (1998). Friendly fire: Topical variations in conflict among same- and cross- sex friends. Communication Studies, 49, 121. doi: 10.1080/10510979809368524
Shimkowski, J. R. & Schrodt, P. (2012). Coparental communication as a mediator of interparental conflict and young adult children’s mental well-being. Communication Monographs, 79, 48-71. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2011.646492
Siegert, J. R., & G. H. Stamp (1994). “Our first big fight” as a milestone in the development of close relationships. Communication Monographs, 61, 345-360. doi: 10.1080/03637759409376342
Sillars, A. L. (1980). Attributions and communication in roommate conflicts. Communication Monographs, 47, 180-200. doi: 10.1080/03637758009376031
Sillars, A., Smith, T., & Koerner, A. (2010). Misattributions contributing to empathic (in)accuracy during parent-adolescent conflict discussions. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 27, 727-747. doi: 10.1177/0265407510373261
Solomon, D. H., & Knobloch, L. K. (2001). Relationship uncertainty, partner interference, and intimacy within dating relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 804-820. doi: 10.1177/0265407501186004
van de Vliert, E., &Euwema, M. C. (1994). Agreebleness and activeness as components of conflict behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 674-687. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.66.4.674