Psychosocial Predictors of Relationship Conflict Styles as Mediated by Emotional Intelligence: A Study of Botswana Adults

7Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of age, gender, and emotional intelligence (EI) on conflict management styles among dating age adults in Botswana. A mixed survey and quasi-experimental design was used to assess the relationship between age and gender and the mediating influence of EI on participants’ preferred conflict management strategies (avoidance, competition, compromise, accommodation, and collaboration) in response to violent and nonviolent relationship conflict. One hundred fifty-two participants were surveyed before (with the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale) and after (with the Conflict Style Questionnaire) watching video clips of nonviolent and violent relationship conflict. Correlations, t tests, and regression analyses were conducted. Findings revealed that women were more likely than men to report use of collaboration conflict strategies in response to the nonviolent video, and men were more likely than women to report accommodation strategies in response to the violent video. In the regression analysis, gender was a significant predictor of accommodation conflict style in response to the violent video, and EI had a significant independent and partial mediating relationship with compromise in response to the violent situation and collaboration in response to both violent and nonviolent conflict situations. Findings highlight the important role of EI in the use of higher-level relationship conflict strategies. Implications in the way of communication and conflict management for dating age adults and couples are discussed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Monteiro, N. M., & Balogun, S. K. (2015). Psychosocial Predictors of Relationship Conflict Styles as Mediated by Emotional Intelligence: A Study of Botswana Adults. SAGE Open, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015587558

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free