Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rethinking Intractable Conflict: The Perspective of Dynamical Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Conflict, Interdependence, and Justice

Part of the book series: Peace Psychology Book Series ((PPBS,volume 11))

Abstract

Intractable conflicts are demoralizing. Beyond destabilizing the families, communities, or international regions in which they occur, they tend to perpetuate the very conditions of misery and hate that contributed to them in the first place. Although the common factors and processes associated with intractable conflicts have been identified through research, they represent an embarrassment of riches for theory construction. Thus, the current task in this area is integrating these diverse factors into an account that provides a coherent perspective, yet allows for prediction and a basis for conflict resolution in specific conflict settings. We suggest that the perspective of dynamical systems provides such an account. This chapter outlines the key concepts and hypotheses associated with this approach. It is organized around a set of basic questions concerning intractable conflict for which the dynamical perspective offers fresh insight and testable propositions. The questions and answers are intended to provide readers with basic concepts and principles of complexity and dynamical systems that are useful for rethinking the nature of intractable conflict and the means by which such conflict can be transformed.

Vallacher, R. R., Coleman, P. T., Nowak, A., & Bui-Wrzosinska, L. (2010). Rethinking intractable conflict: The perspective of dynamical systems. American Psychologist, 65, 262–278.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Three types of attractors have been identified in dynamical systems: fixed-point, periodic (including multi-periodic and quasi-periodic), and deterministic chaos. We have found fixed-point attractors to be the most relevant to issues of intractable conflict and they provide the focus of this article. Periodic and chaotic evolution are expressed in various social processes (Guastello et al., 2009; Vallacher & Nowak, 2007), though, and may prove useful in the investigation of social conflicts as well (see, e.g., Hanson & Sword, 2008).

  2. 2.

    More precisely, a fixed-point attractor corresponds to a stable equilibrium. An unstable equilibrium, referred to as a repellor, represents a state that the system tries to avoid.

References

  • Azar, E. E. (1990). The management of protracted social conflict. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Tal, D. (2000). From intractable conflict through conflict resolution to reconciliation: Psychological analysis. Political Psychology, 21, 351–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartoli, A., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., & Nowak, A. (in press). Peace is in movement: A dynamical-systems perspective on the emergence of peace in Mozambique. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Bowden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103, 5–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, D. S. (1996). Security, bargaining, and the end of interstate rivalry. International Studies Quarterly, 40, 157–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J. (2005). Mediation in the most resistant cases. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. Aall (Eds.), Grasping the nettle: Analyzing cases of intractable conflict. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. (1987). Resolving deep-rooted conflict: A handbook. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, E. & Darby, J. (1998). The conflict in Northern Ireland: Causes, consequences, and controls. American Psychologist, 53, 754–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cannon, W. B. (1932). The wisdom of the body. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. F. (1999). Themes and issues in the self-regulation of behavior. In R. S. Wyer, Jr. (Ed.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 12, pp. 1–105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2000). Intractable conflict. In M. Deutsch & P. T. Coleman (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2003). Characteristics of protracted, intractable conflict: Towards the development of a meta-framework – I. First paper in a three-paper series. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 9, 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2004). Paradigmatic framing of protracted, intractable conflict: Towards the development of a meta-framework – II. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 10(3), 197–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2006). Conflict, complexity, and change: A meta-framework for addressing protracted, intractable conflicts – III. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 12, 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2011). The 5 percent. New York, NY: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. & Bartoli, A. (2003). Dealing with extremists. Boulder: Conflict Resolution Consortium. http://www.beyondintractability.org/m/dealing_extremists.jsp

  • Coleman, P. T., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Vallacher, R. R., & Nowak, A. (2006). Protracted conflicts as dynamical systems. In A. K. Schneider & C. Honeyman (Eds.), The negotiator’s fieldbook: The desk reference for the experienced negotiator (pp. 61–74). Chicago: American Bar Association Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T., Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Bui-Wrzosinska, L. (2007). Intractable conflict as an attractor: Presenting a model of conflict, escalation, and intractability. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1454–1475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T., Vallacher, R., Nowak, A., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., & Bartoli, A. (in press). Navigating the landscape of conflict: Applications of dynamical systems theory to protracted social conflict. In N. Ropers (Ed.), Systemic thinking and conflict transformation. Berlin, Germany: Berghof Foundation for Peace Support.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. (2005). Grasping the nettle: Analyzing cases of intractable conflict. Washington: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1985). Distributive justice: A social-psychological perspective. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (2006). A framework for thinking about oppression and its change. Social Justice Research, 19(1), 7–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. T., & Marcus, E. C. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, C. J. G. (1991). Revolutionary change theories: A multilevel exploration of the punctuated equilibrium paradigm. Academy of Management Review, 16, 10–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goertz, G. & Diehl, P. F. (1993). Enduring rivalries: Theoretical constructs and empirical patterns. International Studies Quarterly, 37, 147–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottman, J., Swanson, C., & Swanson, K. (2002). A general systems theory of marriage: Nonlinear difference equation modeling of marital interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 326–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guastello, S., Koopmans, M., & Pincus, D. (Eds.) (2009). Chaos and complexity in psychology: The theory of nonlinear dynamical systems. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, T. R. (1970). Why men rebel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haken, H. (1978). Synergetics. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, B. & Sword, L. D. (Eds.) (2008). Chaos, complexity and conflict. Emergence: Complexity in Organizations, 10 (special issue).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1995). Emergence: From chaos to order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopfield, J. J. (1982). Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 79, 2554–2558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C. K., Abelson, R. P., & Salovey, P. (1991). The relative weighting of position and velocity in satisfaction. Psychological Science, 2, 263–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Brett, W., & Carvallo, M. R. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Implicit and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. (1999). The interdependence of Israeli and Palestinian national identities: The role of the other in existential conflicts. Journal of Social Issues, 55 (3), 581–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., Li, N. P., & Butner, J. (2003). Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms. Psychological Review, 110, 3–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kressel, K. (2006). Medition revisited. In M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman, & E. Marcus (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kriesberg, L. (2005). Nature, dynamics, and phases of intractability. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. Aall (Eds.), Grasping the nettle: Analyzing cases of intractable conflict. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kugler, K. & Coleman, P. T. (2009, June). Moral conflict and complexity: The dynamics of constructive versus destructive discussions over polarizing issues. Presented at the 22nd Annual Conference of the International Association of Conflict Management. Kyoto, Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebovitch, L. S. (1998). Chaos and fractals simplified for the life sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Losada, M. & Markovitch, S. (1990). Group analyzer: A system for dynamic analysis of group interaction. Proceedings of the 23 rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 101–110). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Science Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, M. G. & Gurr, T. R. (2005). Peace and conflict. College Park, MD: Center for International Development and Conflict Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, N. E. (1944). Experimental studies of conflict. In J. M. Hunt (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disorders. New York: Ronald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 347–412). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. (2004). Dynamical minimalism: Why less is more in psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 183–193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Coleman, P. T., Vallacher, R. R., Bartkowski, W., & Jochemczyk, L. (2010). Seeking sustainable solutions: Using an attractor simulation platform for teaching multi-stakeholder negotiation in complex cases. Negotiation Journal, 26, 49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. & Lewenstein, M. (1994). Dynamical systems: A tool for social psychology? In R. R. Vallacher & A. Nowak (Eds.), Dynamical systems in social psychology (pp. 17–53). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. Psychological Review, 97, 362–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. & Vallacher, R. R. (1998). Dynamical social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A. & Vallacher, R. R. (2001). Societal transition: Toward a dynamical model of social change. In W. Wosinska, R. B. Cialdini, D. W. Barrett, & J. Reykowski (Eds.), The practice of social influence in multiple cultures (pp. 151–171). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A., Vallacher, R. R., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., & Coleman, P. T. (2007). Attracted to conflict: A dynamical perspective on malignant social relations. In A. Golec & K. Skarzynska (Eds.), Understanding social change: Political psychology in Poland. Haauppague, NY: Nova Science Publishers Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, W. B., & Littlejohn, S. W. (1997). Moral conflict: when social worlds collide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouhana, N. & Bar-Tal, D. (1998). Psychological dynamics of intractable conflicts: The Israeli-Palestinian case. American Psychologist, 53, 761–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruelle, D. (1989). Elements of differentiable dynamics and bifurcation theory. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 101–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, H. G. (1984). Deterministic chaos. Vienna: Physik Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidanius, J. & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync: The emerging science of spontaneous order. New York: Hyperion Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A. (1978). Self-generated attitude change. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 85–117). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tesser, A., Martin, L. L., & Cornell, D. P. (1996). On the substitutability of self-protective mechanisms. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action (pp. 48–68). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. W. & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tononi, G. & Edelman, G. M. (1998). Consciousness and complexity. Science, 282, 1846–1851.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. R., & Smith, H. J. (1998). Social justice and social movements. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.) The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 595–632.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R. & Nowak, A. (1999). The dynamics of self-regulation. In R. S. Wyer (Ed.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 12, pp. 241–259). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R. & Nowak, A. (2007). Dynamical social psychology: Finding order in the flow of human experience. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 734–758). New York: Guilford Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., Coleman, P. T., Bui-Wrzosinska, L., Bartoli, A. & Liebovitch, L. (2008). Dynamical social psychology: Twenty frequently asked questions. http://www.dynamicsofconflict.iccc.edu.pl/

  • Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Kaufman, J. (1994). Intrinsic dynamics of social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., Markus, J., & Strauss, J. (1998). Dynamics in the coordination of mind and action. In M. Kofta, G. Weary, & G. Sedlek (Eds.), Personal control in action: Cognitive and motivational mechanisms (pp. 27–59). New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Miller, M. E. (2003). Social influence and group dynamics. In I. Weiner (Series Ed.) & T. Millon & M. J. Lerner (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 5. Personality and social psychology (pp. 383–417). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., Froehlich, M., & Rockloff, M. (2002). The dynamics of self-evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 370–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallacher, R. R. & Wegner, D. M. (in press). Action identification theory. In P. Van Lange, A.W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner, D. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101, 34–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA

    Robin R. Vallacher & Andrzej Nowak

  2. Teachers College, International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Peter T. Coleman

  3. Warsaw University, Warsaw, Poland

    Andrzej Nowak

  4. Warsaw School of Social Sciences and Humanities, Warsaw, Poland

    Lan Bui-Wrzosinska

Authors
  1. Robin R. Vallacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter T. Coleman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrzej Nowak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lan Bui-Wrzosinska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robin R. Vallacher .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University, International Center for Cooperation and, Teacher's College, West 120th Street 525, New York, 10027, USA

    Peter T. Coleman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vallacher, R.R., Coleman, P.T., Nowak, A., Bui-Wrzosinska, L. (2011). Rethinking Intractable Conflict: The Perspective of Dynamical Systems. In: Coleman, P. (eds) Conflict, Interdependence, and Justice. Peace Psychology Book Series, vol 11. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9994-8_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation