What Motivates Lay Third Parties to Take Sides in a Conflict? Examining the Relationships between the Big Five Personality Traits and Side

Abstract

Taking sides is one of the reactions available to third parties in handling a dispute. From the perspective of individual differences, this study was aimed at identifying lay third parties’ motives for side taking and exploring their relations with the Big Five personality traits. We tested our assumptions using three samples: A Dutch student sample (n = 111), a Dutch employee sample (n = 101) and a Chinese student sample (n = 124). The findings revealed four types of side–taking motives: Moral, relational, reward–approaching and sanction–avoiding motives. The results also showed that individuals’ personality traits were relevant to the four types of side–taking motives: Agreeableness was associated with the relational motive for side taking, and intellectual autonomy was associated with the reward–approaching motive, the sanction–avoiding motive and the relational motive for side taking. Implications and explanations of these findings are discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords

Big Five personality traits lay third parties side-taking motives

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Black

(1993).The social structure of right and wrong.San Diego, CA:Academic Press.

Bono

J. E.

, Boles

T. L.

, Judge

T. A.

, & Lauver

K. L.

(2002).The role of personality in task and relationship conflict.Journal of Personality,70,311–344.

Conlon

D. E.

, & Meyer

C. J.

(2004).Contractual and Emergent third–party intervention. In Gelf

M. J.

, & Brett

J. M.

(Eds.),The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp.258–280).Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.

De Raad

(2000).The Big Five personality factors.Göttingen:Hogrefe & Huber.

De Raad

, Hendriks

A. A. J.

, & Hofstee

W. K. B.

(1992).Towards a refined structure of personality traits.European Journal of Personality,6,301–319.

De Raad

, Sullot

, & Barelds

(2008).Which of the Big Five Factors are in need of situational specification?European Journal of Personality,22,269–289.

Goldberg

L. R.

(1992).The development of markers for the Big–Five factor structure.Psychological Assessment,4,26–42.

Emmons

R. A.

(1989).Exploring the relations between motives and traits: The case of narcissism. In Buss

, & Cantor

(Eds.),Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp.32–44).New York:Springer–Verlag.

Gross

, Mason

W. S.

, & McEachern

A. W.

(1958).Explorations in role analysis: Studies of the school superintendency role.New York:John Wiley & Sons.

10.

Hechter

, & Kanazawa

(1997).Sociological rational choice theory.Annual Review of Sociology,23,191–214.

11.

Hendriks

A. A. J.

(1997).The construction of the Five–Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Groningen.

12.

Hendriks

A. A. J.

, Hofstee

W. K. B.

, & De Raad

(1999a).The Five–Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI).Personality and Individual Differences,27,307–325.

13.

Hendriks

A. A. J.

, Hofstee

W. K. B.

, & De Raad

(1999b).The Five–Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI): Professional manual.Lisse:Swets Test Publishers.

14.

Hendriks

A. A. J.

, Perugini

, Angleitner

, Ostendorf

, Johnson

J. A.

, & De Fruyt

, et al.(2003).The Five–Factor Personality Inventory: Cross–cultural generalizability across 13 countries.European Journal of Personality,17,347–373.

15.

Herrnstein

R. J.

(1990).Rational choice theory: Necessary but not sufficient.American Psychologist,45,356–367.

16.

Hofstra

, Van Oudenhoven

J. P.

, & Buunk

(2005).Attachment styles and majority members’ attitudes towards adaptation strategies of immigrants.International Journal of Intercultural Relations,29,601–609.

17.

Hofstee

W. K. B.

, De Raad

, & Goldberg

L. R.

(1992).Integration of the Big Five and circumplex approaches to trait structure.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,63,146–163.

18.

Hofstee

W. K. B.

, & Hendriks

A. A. J.

(1998).The use of scores anchored at the scale midpoint in reporting individuals’ traits.European Journal of Personality,12,219–228.

19.

Jensen–Campbell

L. A.

, Gleason

K. A.

, Adams

, & Malcolm

K. T.

(2003).Interpersonal conflict, agreeableness, and personality development.Journal of Personality,71,1059–1085.

20.

John

O. P.

, & Srivastava

(1999).The Big–Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement and theoretical perspectives. In Pervin

L. A.

, & John

O. P.

(Eds.),Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp.102–138).New York:Guilford.

21.

Lim

R. G.

, & Carnevale

P. J.

(1990).Contingencies in the mediation of disputes.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,58,259–272.

22.

Macintosh

, & Stevens

(2008).Personality, motives, and conflict strategies in everyday service encounters.International Journal of Conflict Management,19,112–131.

23.

Major

, Turner

, & Fletcher

(2006).Linking proactive personality and the Big Five to motivation to learn and development activity.Journal of Applied Psychology,91,927–935.

24.

Meredith

(1993).MI, factor analysis and factorial invariance.Psychometrika,58,525–543.

25.

Miller

D. C.

, & Shull

F. A.

(1962).The prediction of administrative role–conflict resolutions.Administrative Science Quarterly,7,143–160.

26.

Moberg

P. J.

(1998).Predicting conflict strategy with personality traits: Incremental validity and the five factor model.International Journal of Conflict Management,9,258–285.

27.

Pruitt

D. G.

, & Carnevale

P. J.

(1993).Negotiation in social conflict.Buckingham, UK:Open University.

28.

Pruitt

D. G.

, & Kim

S. H.

(2004).Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.)New York:McGraw Hill.

29.

Sheppard

B. H.

(1984).Third party conflict intervention: A procedural framework. In Staw

B. M.

, & Cummings

L. L.

(Eds.),Research in organizational behavior (Vol.6, pp.141–190).Greenwich, CT:JAI Press.

30.

Stewart

S. H.

, & Devine

(2000).Relations between personality and drinking motives in young adults.Personality and Individual Differences,29,495–511.

31.

Suls

, Martin

, & David

(1998).Person–environment fit and its limits: Agreeableness, neuroticism, and emotional reactivity to interpersonal conflict.Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,24,88–98.

32.

Thompson

, Neale

, & Sinaceur

(2005).The evolution of cognition and biases in negotiation research. In Gelf

M. J.

, & Brett

J. M.

(Eds.),The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp.7–44).Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.

33.

Triandis

H. C.

(1995).Individualism and collectivism.Boulder, CO:Westview.

34.

Tyler

T. R.

(1990).Why people obey the law.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.

35.

Tyler

T. R.

, & Blader

(2005).Justice and negotiation. In Gelf

M. J.

, & Brett

J. M.

(Eds.),The handbook of negotiation and culture (pp.295–312).Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.

36.

Ury

L. W.

, Brett

J. M.

, & Goldberg

S. B.

(1988).Getting disputes resolved: Designing systems to cut the costs of conflict.San Francisco, CA:Jossey–Bass.

37.

Van de Vliert

(1981).Siding and other reactions to a conflict: A theory of escalation toward outsiders.Journal of Conflict Resolution,25,495–520.

38.

Van de Vliert

, & Cottrell

D. A.

(1979).The validity of the moral and expedient role orientation test.Journal of Social Psychology,109,147–148.

39.

Winter

, John

, Stewart

, Klohnen

, & Duncan

(1998).Traits and motives: Toward an integration of two traditions in personality research.Psychological Review,105,230–250.

40.

Wood

V. F.

, & Bell

P. A.

(2008).Predicting interpersonal conflict resolution styles from personality characteristics.Personality and Individual Differences,45,126–131.

41.

A. D.

, Li

, & Zumbo

B. D.

(2007).Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi–group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data.Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation,12,1–26.

42.

Yang

, Van de Vliert

, & Shi

(2007).Interpersonal relationship and lay third parties’ side–taking preference: A cross–cultural study among Chinese and Dutch.Journal of Cross–Cultural Psychology,38,438–457.

43.

Yang

, Van de Vliert

, Shi

, & Huang

(2008).Whose side are you on? Relational–orientations and their impacts on side–taking among Dutch and Chinese employees.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,81,713–731.

44.

Yang

, Van de Vliert

, & Shi

(2009).How lay third parties weigh legitimacy and sanctions in a siding dilemma: A study among Chinese and Dutch employees.Applied Psychology: An International Review,58,214–232.

What Motivates Lay Third Parties to Take Sides in a Conflict? Examining the Relationships between the Big Five Personality Traits and Side–Taking Motives

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References