Associations of Taking Conflict Personally with Mental and Physical Health: An Allostatic Load Perspective

Conflict personalization: a systematic literature review and the development of an integrative definition

“…Affect was understood in similar ways across the definitions and conceptualizations, and we did not find explicit definitions or conceptualizations that opposed one another with regards to the role of affect. For example, affect was part of the following text fragments: “How people experience (the effects of) arguing emotionally” (Labrie et al , 2020, p. 255), “tension and discomfort” (Nicotera and Mahon, 2013, p. 102) and “variability in an individual’s affective reactions to (…) interpersonal conflict” (Worley and Aloia, 2019, p. 141).…”

“…Eight publications refer to the same set of negative emotions during conflict personalization introduced by Dallinger and Hample (1995) (see Supplementary Material) and state that when personalizing conflict, a person feels “threatened, anxious, damaged, devalued, and insulted” (p. 273). In addition, there was one conceptualization in which the negative affect theme was represented by three of these five emotions: threatened, anxious and devalued (Worley and Aloia, 2019). Still, the other 17 publications within the negative affect category refer to more general, rather than specific, negative affect, for instance, “stronger and more negative emotional reactions to arguments” (Hample et al , 2009, p. 77).…”

“…Firstly, conflict personalization is seen as a cognitive experience (Hample et al , 2019), cognitive appraisal (Curran and Allen, 2016) or cognitive reaction (Demir and Hample, 2019; Hample et al , 2021; Santibáñez et al , 2021). Secondly, some refer to expectations (Kim et al , 2020; Worley and Aloia, 2019) and the application of past experiences (Aloia and Worley, 2019; Hample and Cionea, 2010). Third, we found mention of pessimism about the future of the relationship (Hample and Richards, 2019; Kim et al , 2015; Xie et al , 2015).…”

“…Second, we integrate the fields of argumentation and communication with the field of workplace conflict. Most empirical work on conflict personalization has been published in journals on argumentation and communication, mainly with a focus on how differences between nationalities are associated with conflict personalization (Hample et al , 2021; Hample and Anagondahalli, 2015), conflict personalization during family conflicts (Curran and Allen, 2016; Aloia and Worley, 2019) and conflict personalization in non-specified interpersonal conflicts (Wallenfelsz and Hample, 2010; Worley and Aloia, 2019). However, to our knowledge, scholars that focus on interpersonal workplace conflict have not integrated conflict personalization in their empirical studies, even though some do refer to the concept (Bradley et al , 2012; Jehn and Mannix, 2001; Mooney et al , 2007).…”

“…Despite the widespread advice to "not take conflict personally," and the available literature on this subject in the field of argumentation and communication (Hample and Cionea, 2010;Hample and Dallinger, 1995;Worley and Aloia, 2019), the scientific field of workplace conflict management seems to be lagging behind in offering clarity on its meaning, antecedents and consequences. As the above overview suggests that the personal experience of conflict is seen as an important factor that affects conflict outcomes, we feel that it deserves more scientific attention.…”