Conflict Dialogue: Working with Layers of Meaning for Productive Relationships


Peter M. Kellett

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Part I: Conflict Stories, Dialogue, and Negotiation: Concepts and Techniques

    Part II: Conflict Stories and the Negotiation of Relationship Dynamics

    Part III: Stories and the Psychodynamics of Conflict

    Part IV: Using Story Dynamics to Understand and Negotiate Conflict

  • Dedication

    This book is dedicated to my Mum and Dad, and to my brothers Paul, David, and Timothy.


    View Copyright Page


    My special thanks must go to all of the people who have shared their personal conflict stories with me, both in and out of the classroom. In particular, I thank those who have given me permission to include their stories in this book. Their generosity and openness make this work both possible and worthwhile for me.

    I am also grateful to the following reviewers: Pat Arneson, Duquesne University; Angela Laird Brenton, University of Arkansas at Little Rock; Roberta A. Davilla, University of Northern Iowa; Larry A. Erbert, University of Texas at El Paso; Claudia L. Hale, Ohio University; and Christopher O. Lynch, Kean University.


    The following is a true story that, in some ways, reads like the start of many roommate conflict stories—in fact it almost sounds like a roommate story archetype: Things started out so well … now we all hate each other and communicate by nasty sticky notes! In between these two states is a conflict over something that seems quite trivial as we are looking back on it. We are all probably familiar with such typical story lines. As you will see, this conflict is about a specific dispute—who gets what room—although intimately tied to the specific decision is the obvious deeper meaning of who has more prestige and privilege in the house and who becomes marginalized into the small space. A deeper read reveals additional layers of meaning attached to the subsequent tangible actions of the roommates as they live out their conflict together.

    Three young, Native American women—Carmen, Beth, and Kathryn—are starting college and decide to move in together to share an apartment; Carmen and Beth are cousins. The three are excited about their new place and the adventures they would share living together. However, the three bedrooms are unequal in size, and the master bedroom has its own bathroom. Besides the large master bedroom, there is a medium-sized one and a small one. The young women are faced with the difficult task of deciding who gets which room. They draw straws, and Carmen gets the master bedroom, Kathryn the medium-sized room, and Beth the small one. Then the real conflicts begin….

    Beth was furious that she got the small room; she expected at least to get the medium-sized room. She tried to “guilt trip” Carmen into giving up the master room, but Carmen stood her ground and, as she says in her story, “However I acted in this situation would set the precedent for me in the future. It did …” Sarcastic comments and put-downs from Beth began to characterize their roommate communication. Apparently, for example, Beth's mother told Beth to be understanding of Carmen's desire for the room since her room at home was so small—clearly a put-down on the relative financial status of Carmen's family. Put-downs evolved into revenge and sabotage. Beth would be rude, put Carmen down in front of others, and purposely forget important information. Revenge evolved into betrayal. Carmen had begun dating a much older man, something that her parents would not approve of, and something that would become fast-traveling gossip in their tightly knit Native American community in eastern North Carolina. Carmen entrusted Beth with the private information and later found out she had let the news out, and the whole community was buzzing with the gossip. Carmen also found out that Beth had been saying behind her back that she was trying to act “white”—a slap in the face and a slur for her as a Native American. Carmen put all her feelings into a letter and left it for Beth. She seemed to ignore it, so Carmen taped it to Beth's computer. Beth continued to ignore it although it turns out she had read it the first day it was left for her. Apparently she ignored Carmen's letter to get back at her. All the relationships deteriorated, and soon Beth and Kathryn were not speaking. Carmen and Kathryn are worriedly expecting a grand finale as Beth moves out. What will she do as her final act of revenge and payback?

    You probably have several questions that you would like to ask to dig deeper into this story, and that's probably a sign of a good story: Good stories generate good questions. Perhaps the two main questions are, first, why was the room ineffectively negotiated? Second, why was the deeper relational conflict not effectively managed? Besides these, there are lots of questions that pop to my mind to get at the meaning and conflict dynamics of the story. These include, Why would Beth be so resentful? What did the room symbolize beyond merely prestige and status within the home? Is there some deeper power struggle or competitiveness between the cousins that is being displaced from their family relationships or community status and brought to life in this context? Is Beth projecting her own dark desires and motives for power and status in the house onto Carmen? How can a seemingly fair and agreed-upon way of making a decision lead to betrayal? How is the letter an important element in the story? How are the betrayal and the “white” slur connected to Beth's assumption that Carmen had betrayed her by taking the big room? What do we not know that might make this make sense? What would you love to know that would help you understand their conflict? These are some of the questions that came to mind for me. This process of digging by using smart questions is at the heart of the interpretive technique you will learn in this book.

    We often never know the full story, but smart interpretive guesswork can often lead to some keen insights into the various layers and dimensions of a given conflict. In understanding these layers and their interrelationships lies the wisdom to know why the conflict takes the form that it does and possibly insight into how to manage it more effectively based on that wisdom. I hope that you find this approach to conflict as fascinating and as rewarding as I do as you learn to go from smart questions to making recommendations for changing conflict behavior.

    As part of my ongoing fascination with how people manage and negotiate their relationships with others, I have listened to probably thousands of conflict stories over the years, many just like the one involving Carmen, Beth, and Kathryn. One of the lessons or morals in the vast majority of stories is that people would negotiate resolutions to their conflicts much more effectively if they understood the meaning of the conflict for each other and negotiated through the conflict based on that meaning. This lesson suggests that we (1) ought to examine our stories for opportunities to negotiate more effectively; (2) ought to, where possible, approach negotiations dialogically, that is, as opportunities to search for mutually beneficial solutions; (3) ought to become more aware of how to use narrative or story dynamics to enhance our negotiation and dialogue techniques; and (4) ought to examine our conflicts with a focus on how to understand the meaning of the conflict in terms of why it exists, why it takes the form that it does in our relationships, why it has the outcomes that it does, and what prevents the participants from choosing more dialogic negotiation. Imagine how these “oughts” might have made a difference to the conflict of Carmen and her friends if they could go back to a productive point in the conflict before it became divisive.

    These core concepts form the basis of the chapters of this book, and each chapter is an invitation from me to you, to engage these core concepts as ways of understanding conflict. In this book you will be invited to interpret conflict stories as a way to imagine more creative ways to engage in conflict effectively. You will be asked to apply concepts and techniques from the field of conflict management to the experiences of yourself and others in your real worlds. You will learn to critically question how we approach conflict and to hopefully learn valuable lessons from the process of engagement between concept, other people's stories, and your own experiences.

    Carmen may have lost the friendship with Beth forever, and the conflict dynamics and result may have been inevitable given the deeper dynamics of their relationships and the symbolic meaning of the conflict. But if she and her roommates were to carefully consider the concepts and techniques that we will be exploring, the result may have been quite different. If not, she could at least understand why the conflict took the form that it did, learn how to not repeat the same conflict again, and perhaps know how to create the conflict experiences that are more productive for all involved. This book comes out of the simple observation that we can improve our conflict communication and that such improvements will, in many cases, result in more productive and peaceful relationships.

    The invitation to engagement with these concepts in this book is done through the use of personal narratives that I have express and written permission to use. (Note: The collector of each story is indicated in parentheses beside its title, and story characters’ names have been changed for the usual reasons.) You will engage with the conflicts of others through the stories that they have told me. I could only include a small fraction of the stories I have been told, and I could only include a few main concepts in each of the parts of the book, but hopefully both the stories and the concepts covered will be representative enough and engaging enough to pull you into the complex and fascinating world of how people engage in, and how they might rethink, their conflicts. You will also learn to use these stories shared by other people as a way in to examining and questioning your own conflict practices and the stories you tell about your conflicts. Along with learning how to collect good stories, you will learn to ask good theoretically grounded questions—lots of questions, in fact. These questions will help you to engage with the stories and learn as much as possible from them about how we all do conflict. Ultimately, the concepts, stories, and questions will hopefully inform the technique of how you analyze and manage conflict effectively.

  • References

    Abramsky, M. F. (1996). Displacement: A major causal contribution to prolonged post traumatic stress disorder. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 33, 1–9.
    Agar, M. H. (1996). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography. New York: Academic Press.
    Allison, D. (1996). Two or three things I know for sure. New York: Penguin.
    Arnett, R. C., & Arneson, P. (1999). Dialogic civility in a cynical age. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Atkinson, P. (1992). Understanding ethnographic texts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Aziz, R. (1990). C. G. Jung's psychology of religion and synchronicity. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Bar-on, D. (2000). Cultural identity and demonization of the relevant other: Lessons from the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In A. Y.Shalev & R.Yehuda (Eds.), International handbook of human response to trauma (pp. 115–125). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
    Baxter, L. A. (1988). A dialectical perspective on communication strategies in relationship development. In S.Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 257–273). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
    Baxter, L. A. (2004). Dialogues of relating. In R.Anderson, L. A.Baxter, & K. N.Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 107–124). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Baxter, L. A., & Bullis, C. (1986). Turning points in developing romantic relationships. Human Communication Research, 12, 469–493.
    Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York: Guilford.
    Baxter, L. A., & Pittman, G. (2001). Communicatively remembering turning points of relationship development. Communication Reports, 14, 1–17.
    Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S. J., & Redmond, M. V. (2005). Interpersonal communication: Relating to others. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Bernardo, S. M. (1994). Recycling victims and villains inBatman Returns. Literature & Film Quarterly, 22, 16–21.
    Bilsker, R. (2002). On Jung. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Black, E. (1994). Gettysburg and silence. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 80, 21–37.
    Black, M. (1979). More about metaphor. In A.Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 19–43). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Bochner, A. P., & Eisenberg, E. (1997). It's about time: Narrative and the divided self. Qualitative Inquiry, 3, 417–439.
    Booth, A., Crouter, A. C., & Clements, M. (Eds.). (2001). Couples in conflict. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Brewi, J., & Brennan, A. (2001). The emergence of the shadow in midlife. In C.Zweig & J.Abrams (Eds.), Meeting the shadow: The hidden power of the dark side of human nature (pp. 260–261). Los Angeles: Tarcher.
    Briller, B. R. (1999). Television Quarterly, 30, 31–42.
    Brown, J. (1995). Dialogue: Capacities and stories. In S.Chawla & J.Renesch (Eds.), Learning organizations: Developing cultures for tomorrow's workplace (pp. 153–166). Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
    Burke, K. (1990). Heroes and villains in American film. International Journal of Instructional Media, 17, 63–73.
    Campbell, J. (1949). The hero with a thousand faces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Campbell, J. (1972). Myths to live by. New York: Viking.
    Campbell, J. (1988). The power of myth. New York: Doubleday
    Carey, J. S. (1987). Empathy and the expert witness. Journal of Medical Humanities and Bioethics, 8, 19–25.
    Chase, S. E. (1996). Personal vulnerability and interpretive authority in narrative research. In R.Josselson (Ed.), Ethics and process in the narrative study of lives (pp. 45–59). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Cheney, G. (1995). Democracy in the workplace: Theory and practice from the perspective of communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 23, 167–200.
    Cissna, K. N., & Anderson, R. (1998). Theorizing about dialogic moments: The Buber-Rogers position and postmodern themes. Communication Theory, 8, 63–104.
    Clarke, A. J. (1998). Defense mechanisms in the counseling process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Constantino, C. A., & Merchant, C. S. (1996). Designing conflict management systems: A guide to creating productive and healthy organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Conville, R. (1988). Relational transitions: An inquiry into their structure and functions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5, 423–437.
    Conville, R. (1991). Relational transitions: The evolution of personal relationships. New York: Praeger.
    Conville, R. (1998). Telling stories: Dialectics of relational transitions. In B. M.Montgomery & L. A.Baxter (Eds.), Dialectical approaches to studying personal relationships (pp. 17–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Coser, L. (1956). The functions of social conflict. New York: Free Press.
    Cupach, W. R., & Canary, D. J. (1997). Competence in interpersonal conflict. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
    Davidson, D. (1978). What metaphors mean. Critical Inquiry, 5, 1.
    Davis, R. H. (2003). Jung, Freud, and Hillman: Three depth psychologies in context. Westport, CT: Praeger.
    Deetz, S. (2001). Transforming communication, transforming business. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
    Deetz, S., & Simpson, J. (2004). Critical organizational dialogue: Open formation and the demand of “otherness.” In R.Anderson, L. A.Baxter, & K. N.Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 141–158). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Denzin, N. K. (1997). Interpretive ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Earnest, W. R. (1992). Ideology, criticism and life-history research. In G. C.Rosenwald & R. L.Ochberg (Eds.), Storied lives: The cultural politics of self-understanding (pp. 250–264). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Ehrlich, A. S. (2001). Power, control, and the mother-in-law problem: Face off's in the American nuclear family. In L.Stone (Ed.), New directions in anthropological kinship (pp. 175–184). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
    Ellis, C. (1997, November). Narrative ethnology seminar notes. Seminar presented at the National Communication Association Annual Convention, Chicago.
    Ellis, D. G. (2001). Language and civility: The semantics of anger. In W. F.Eadie & P. E.Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 105–120). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Feeney, D. J. (2003). Creating cultural motifs against terrorism: Empowering acceptance of our uniqueness. Westport, CT: Praeger.
    Fisher, R., & Ertel, D. (1995). Getting ready to negotiate: A step-by-step guide to preparing for any negotiation. New York: Penguin.
    Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes. New York: Penguin.
    Fisher, W. R. (1987). Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
    Fjerkenstad, J. (2001). Who are the criminals? In C.Zweig & J.Abrams (Eds.), Meeting the shadow: The hidden power of the dark side of human nature (pp. 226–232). Los Angeles: Tarcher.
    Folger, J. P., Poole, M. S., & Stutman, R. K. (2005). Working through conflict: Strategies for relationships, groups, and organizations. New York: Longman.
    Frijda, N. H., Ortony, A., Sonnemans, J., & Clore, G. L. (1992). The complexity of intensity: Issues concerning the structure of emotional intensity. In M. S.Clark (Ed.), Emotion (pp. 60–89). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Gallin, R. S. (1998). The intersection of class and age: Mother-in-law/daughter-in-law relations in rural Taiwan. In J.Dickerson-Putman & J.Brown (Eds.), Women among women: An anthropological perspective on female age hierarchy (pp. 1–14). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
    Galvin, K. M., Byland, C. L., & Brommel, B. J. (1992). Family communication: Cohesion and change. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Gaylin, W., & Person, E. (Eds.). (1998). Passionate attachments: Thinking out love. New York: Free Press.
    Gemmill, G. (1990). The dynamics of scape-goating in small groups. Small Group Behavior, 20, 406–418.
    Goldhill, S. (2004). Love, sex and tragedy: How the ancient world shapes our lives. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Goodall, H. L., Jr. (1989). Casing a promised land. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
    Goodall, H. L., Jr. (1996). Divine signs: Connecting spirit to community. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
    Goodall, H. L., Jr., & Kellett, P. M. (2004). Dialectical tensions and dialogic moments as pathways to peak experiences. In R.Anderson, L. A.Baxter, & K. N.Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 159–174). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Gordon, R. (1995). Bridges: Psychic structures, function and processes. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
    Griffin, S. (2001). The chauvinist mind. In C.Zweig & J.Abrams (Eds.), Meeting the shadow: The hidden power of the dark side of human nature (pp. 207–210). Los Angeles: Tarcher.
    Guerrero, L. K., & Anderson, P. A. (1998). The dark side of jealousy and envy: Desire, delusional, desperation and destructive communication. In B.Spitzberg & W. R.Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships (pp. 33–70). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Hammersley, M. (1990). Reading ethnographic research: A critical guide. London: Longman.
    Harris, S. K. (1996). The courtship of Olivia Langdon and Mark Twain. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Hauk, C. (2000). Jung and the postmodern: The interpretation of realities. London: Routledge.
    Hawes, L. C. (2004). Double binds as structures in dominance and of feelings: Problematics of dialogue. In R.Anderson, L. A.Baxter, & K. N.Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 175–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Holtz, R., & Miller, N. (2001). Intergroup competition, attitudinal projection and opinion certainty: Capitalizing on conflict. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 4, 61–73.
    Hook, S. (1943). The hero in history. New York: Humanities Press.
    Isenhart, M. W., & Spangle, M. (2000). Collaborative approaches to resolving conflict. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Johnson, R. A. (1993). Negotiation basics: Concepts, skills, and exercises. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Jones, T. S. (2001). Emotional communication in conflict: Essence and impact. In W. F.Eadie & P. E.Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp. 81–104). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Jones, T. S., & Remland, M. S. (1993). Non-verbal communication and conflict escalation: An attribution based model. International Journal of Conflict Management, 4, 119–138.
    Josselson, E. (1995). Imagining the real: Empathy, narrative, and the dialogic self. In R.Josselson & A.Lieblich (Eds.), The narrative study of lives (Vol. 3, pp. 27–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Karasawa, M. (2003). Projecting group liking and ethnocentrism on in group members: False consensus affect of attitude strength. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 103–116.
    Kearns, E. A. (1986). Projection and mirror: The psychology ofThe Scarlet Letter. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 57–68.
    Keen, S. (1991). The enemy maker. In C.Zweig & J.Abrams (Eds.), Meeting the shadow: The hidden power of the dark side of human nature (pp. 260–261). Los Angeles: Tarcher.
    Kellett, P. M. (1987). The functions of metaphors in discourse dynamics: A case study of metaphors in the dynamics and resolution of conflict interaction. Belfast Working Papers in Language and Linguistics, 9, 118–139.
    Kellett, P. M. (1995). Acts of power, control, and resistance: Narrative accounts of convicted rapists. In R. K.Whillock & D.Slayden (Eds.), Hate speech (pp. 142–162). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Kellett, P. M. (1996). The process of organizational sense making: A semiotic phenomenological model. In L.Thayer (Ed.), Organization—Communication: Emerging perspectives (Vol. 3, pp. 103–116). New York: Ablex.
    Kellett, P. M. (1999). Dialogue and dialectics in organizational change: The case of a mission-based transformation. Southern Communication Journal, 64, 211–231.
    Kellett, P. M., & Dalton, D. G. (2001). Managing conflict in a negotiated world: A narrative approach to achieving dialogue and change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Kellett, P. M., & Goodall, H. L., Jr. (1987). The function of metaphors in discourse dynamics: A case study of metaphor in the dynamics and resolution of conflict interaction. Belfast Working Papers in Language and Linguistics, 9, 118–139.
    Kellett, P. M., & Goodall, H. L., Jr. (1999). The death of discourse in our own (chat) room: “Sextext” skillful discussion and virtual communities. In D.Slayden & R. K.Whillock (Eds.), Soundbite culture: The death of discourse in a wired world (pp. 155–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Kimbles, S. (2000). The cultural complex and the myth of invisibility. In T.Singer (Ed.), The vision thing: Myths, politics and the psyche in the world (pp. 157–169). Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
    Klapp, O. E. (1962). Heroes, villains and fools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2005). Interpersonal communication and human relationships. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
    Koch, S., & Deetz, S. (1981). Metaphor analysis of social reality in organizations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 9(1), 143–160.
    Kohler-Riessman, C. (1992). Making sense of marital violence: One woman's narrative. In G. C.Rosenwald & R. L.Ochberg (Eds.), Storied lives: The cultural politics of self-understanding (pp. 231–249). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Kristeva, J. (1981). Women's time (A.Jardine & H.Blake, Trans.). Signs, 7, 13–15.
    Labre, M. P., & Duke, L. (2004). Nothing like a brisk walk and a spot of demon slaughter to make a girl's night: The construction of the female hero in the Buffy video game. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 28, 138–157.
    Langellier, K. M. (1989). Personal narratives: Perspectives on theory and research. Text and Performance Quarterly, 9, 243–276.
    Lanigan, R. L. (1988). Phenomenology of communication: Merleau-Ponty's thematics on communicology and semiology. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.
    Leets, L., & Giles, H. (1997). Words as weapons—When do they wound? Investigations of harmful speech. Human Communication Research, 24, 260–301.
    LePoire, B. A., Hallett, J. S., & Giles, H. (1998). Codependence: The paradoxical nature of functional-afflicted relationships. In B. H.Spitzberg & W. R.Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships (pp. 153–176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Levi, I. (1986). Hard choices: Decision making under unresolved conflict. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    Li-Vollmer, M., & LaPointe, M. E. (2003). Gender transgression and villainy in animated film. Popular Communication, 1, 89–110.
    Liszka, J. J. (1989). The semiotics of myth: A critical study of the symbol. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
    Littlejohn, S. W., & Domenici, K. (2001). Engaging communication in conflict: Systemic practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Loewenberg, P. (1999). The construction of national identity. In N.Ginsberg & R.Ginsburg (Eds.), Psychoanalysis and culture at the millennium (pp. 37–63). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Main, R. (1997). Jung on synchronicity and the paranormal. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Mansfield, V. (1995). Synchronicity, science and soul making: Understanding Jungian synchronicity through physics, Buddhism and philosophy. Chicago: Open Court.
    Mauthner, M. H. (2002). Sistering: Power and change in female friendships. New York: Palgram.
    Merleau-Ponty, M. (1979). The phenomenology of perception (C.Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published in France 1962)
    Messman, S. J., & Canary, D. J. (1998). Patterns of conflict in personal relationships. In B. H.Spitzberg & W. R.Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships (pp. 121–152). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Meyer, L. H. (Ed.). (1998). Making friends: The influence of culture and development. Baltimore: Brookes.
    Meyer, M. D. E. (2003). Utilizing mythic criticism in contemporary narrative culture: Examining the “present-absence” of shadow archetypes inSpider-Man. Communication Quarterly, 51, 518–530.
    Midgley, M. (2003). The myths we live by. London: Routledge.
    Mizen, R. (2003). A contribution toward an analytic theory of violence. Journal of Analytic Psychology, 48, 285–305.
    Moore, R., & Gillette, D. (1992). The king within: Accessing the king in the male psyche. New York: William Morrow.
    Mumby, D. K. (1993). Narrative and social control. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Nagy, M. (1991). Philosophical issues in the psychology of C. G. Jung. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Nicotera, A. M. (1995). Conflict and organizations: Communicative processes. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Noesner, G. W., & Webster, M. (1997, August). Crisis intervention. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 13–19.
    Ochberg, R. L. (1992). Social insight and psychological liberation. In G. C.Rosenwald & R. L.Ochberg (Eds.), Storied lives: The cultural politics of self-understanding (pp. 214–230). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Parry-Giles, S. J. (1994). Rhetorical experimentation and the cold war 1947–1953: The development of an internationalist approach to propaganda. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 80, 448–462.
    Pearce, W. B., & Pearce, K. W. (1999). Combining passions and abilities: Toward dialogic virtuosity. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 161–175.
    Pearce, W. B., & Pearce, K. W. (2004). Taking a communication perspective on dialogue. In R.Anderson, L. A.Baxter, & K. N.Cissna (Eds.), Dialogue: Theorizing differences in communication studies (pp. 39–56). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    Pelias, R. J., & VanOosting, J. E. (1987). A paradigm for performance studies. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 73, 219–231.
    Rank, O. (1964). The myth of the birth of the hero and other writings. New York: Vintage.
    Richardson, L. (1995). Narrative and sociology. In J.Van Maanen (Ed.), Representations in ethnography (pp. 198–221). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Ricouer, P. (1967). The symbolism of evil (C.Kelbley, Trans.). Boston: Beacon.
    Rubin, J. B. (2004). Good life: Psychoanalytic reflections on move, ethics, creativity and spirituality. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Scanzoni, J. H. (1979). Love and negotiate: Creative conflicts in marriage. Waco, TX: World Books.
    Schmukler, A. G., & Garcia, E. E. (1990). Special symbolism in early oedipal development: fantasies of folds and spaces, protuberances and concavities. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 71, 297–300.
    Schreiber, A. K. (2002). A transgenerational psychobiography of the British royal family: From Victoria to Charles and Diana. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63B, 2994.
    Shelburne, W. A. (1998). Mythos and logos in the thoughts of Carol Jung: The theory of the collective unconscious in scientific perspectives. Albany: SUNY Press.
    Smith, K. (1989). The movement of conflict in organizations: The joint dynamics of splitting and triangulation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 1–20.
    Smith, K., & Berg, D. (1987). Paradoxes of group life: Understanding conflict, paralysis, and movement in group dynamics. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Smith, R., & Eisenberg, E. M. (1987). Conflict at Disneyland: A root metaphor analysis. Communication Monographs, 54, 367–380.
    Solomon, M. (1979). The “positive woman's” journey: A mythic analysis of the rhetoric of STOP ERA. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 262–275.
    Spangle, M. L., & Isenhart, M. W. (2003). Negotiation: Communication for diverse settings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (Eds.). (1998). The dark side of relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Stein, H. (1986). Social roles and unconscious complementarity. Journal of Psychoanalytic Anthropology, 9, 235–268.
    Stein, M. (1998). Jung's map of the soul: An introduction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Sternberg, R. J., & Barnes, M. L. (1988). The psychology of love. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    Stueve, C. A., & Gerson, K. (1977). Personal relations across the life cycle. In C. S.Fischer (Ed.), Networks and places: Social relations in the urban setting (pp. 79–98). New York: Free Press.
    Taylor, S. (2003). A place for the future? Residence and continuity in women's narratives of their lives. Narrative Inquiry, 13, 193–215.
    Thomsen, A. (1941). Psychological projection and the election: A simple class experiment. Journal of Psychology, 11, 115–117.
    Vaughan, D. (1986). Uncoupling: Turning points in intimate relationships. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Von Franz, M. (1982). An introduction to the interpretation of fairy tales. Dallas, TX: Spring.
    Von Franz, M. (1997). Archetypal dimensions of the psyche. Boston: Shambhala.
    Watt, J., & VanLear, C. A. (Eds.). (1996). Dynamic patterns in communication processes. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Welker, L. S., & Goodall, H. L., Jr. (1997). Representations, interpretations, and performance opening the text ofCasing a Promised Land. Text and Performance Quarterly, 17, 109–122.
    Whillock, R. K. (1995). The use of hate as a stratagem for achieving political and social goals. In R. K.Whillock & D.Slayden (Eds.), Hate speech (pp. 25–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Willeford, W. (1969). The fool and his scepter. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
    Winslade, J., & Monk, G. (2001). Narrative mediation: A new approach to conflict resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Zehnder, S. M., & Calvert, S. L. (2004). Between the hero and the shadow: Developmental differences in adolescents’ perceptions and understanding of mythic themes in film. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 28, 122–138.
    Zweig, C., & Abrams, J. (Eds.). (2001). Meeting the shadow: The hidden power of the dark side of human nature. Los Angeles: Tarcher.

    About the Author

    Peter M. Kellett is Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Communication Studies at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. His research, teaching, and service focus on narrative analysis and dialogic management of conflict as this helps people build healthier and more productive and peaceful relationships. His most recent publication is “Dialectical Tensions and Dialogic Moments as Pathways to Peak Experiences” (with H. L. Goodall, Jr.) in Anderson, Baxter, and Cissna's Dialogue: Theorizing Differences in Communication Studies.

    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website