Suchergebnisse

AbstractSuccessful conflict resolution is important in romantic relationships. With the advent of computer‐mediated communication (CMC), partners can resolve conflict using CMC. But is CMC as effective as face‐to‐face communication for conflict resolution? And does the effectiveness depend on attachment style? We asked 100 romantic couples to discuss a conflict topic and randomly assigned them to do so face‐to‐face or via CMC. Levels of distress, anger, and conflict resolution did not differ between face‐to‐face and CMC discussions. Attachment style did not moderate these findings. A more anxious and a more avoidant attachment style were associated with higher levels of distress and anger. We conclude that there is no indication that resolving conflict face‐to‐face has advantages over resolving conflict via CMC.

AbstractAn experimental design was used to examine the effects of interviewer gender and (mis)understanding on physiological stress (i.e., cortisol). A total of 103 undergraduate students wrote about a recent social conflict and then discussed that conflict with either a male or a female interviewer. During these discussions, the interviewer displayed verbal and nonverbal cues of (mis)understanding toward the participants. Participants' cortisol was assessed four times throughout the study. Results from a 2 × 2 × 4 mixed‐model analysis of variance demonstrated an interaction between the gender of the interviewer, understanding condition, and time such that cortisol decreased the most over time when the interviewer used cues of understanding that matched stereotypical expectations for the interviewers' gender (i.e., when women were understanding and men were misunderstanding).