Perspective-taking, attributions, and conflict resolution : evidence from high-fidelity intercultural simulations

• Main Author: Tan, Mei Ling
• Other Authors: Ang Soon
• Format: Theses and Dissertations
• Language: English
• Published: 2015
• Subjects: DRNTU::Business::Management::Organizational behavior
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/65270
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

In this study, I advance perspective-taking research in three important ways. First, I focus on perspective-taking accuracy, rather than perspective-taking trait or active perspective-taking, as an antecedent of integrative conflict resolution. Second, I examine the mediating role of isomorphic attributions in the relationship between perspective-taking accuracy and integrative conflict resolution. Third, I examine perspective-taking of multiple targets simultaneously, rather than of single targets, and do so by adopting a third-party observer’s view of conflicts that involve two parties. To reflect the nuances of perspective-taking effects and the complexities of attributional processing in situations that involve multiple targets, I conceptualize a new form of attributional bias – selective fixedness in attribution for conflict (SFAC; the fixedness on selected parties as the cause of conflict). I examine SFAC as a moderator in the relationship between perspective-taking accuracy and integrative conflict resolution mediated by isomorphic attribution for conflict (IAC). I tested the moderated mediation model in two studies. In Study 1, I tested the model using 408 sets of responses to high-fidelity intercultural simulations collected from 102 university seniors from 18 countries. Analyses using random coefficient modeling with crossed random effects demonstrate that IAC partially mediates the relationship between perspective-taking accuracy and integrative conflict resolution, and that this mediated relationship is significant only when a conflict is attributed to joint causes, and not when there is selective fixedness on a single party as the cause of the conflict. Study 2, based on 580 sets of responses to high-fidelity intercultural simulations collected from 145 employees of 37 different nationalities from an international industry organization, replicate the findings in Study 1. This study makes three key contributions to research on perspective-taking. First, this study shows that it is perspective-taking accuracy, rather than perspective-taking trait, that is more strongly associated with integrative conflict resolution. Second, this study supports theoretical arguments that IAC acts as a mediator in the relationship between perspective-taking accuracy and integrative conflict resolution. Third, this study demonstrates the importance of accounting for selective fixedness biases in attributional processing when examining the mediating role of isomorphic attributions in the relationship between perspective-taking accuracy and conflict resolution decisions in multiple-target contexts.