Dialectical Tension Examples

Dialectical tensions are important to practice and understand in order to maintain healthy relationships. There are three that are the most useful in my everyday life. They are autonomy verses connection, novelty verses predictability, and openness verses protection. I also use the three strategies of cyclic alternation, segmentation, and disqualifying to ease the dialectical tensions in life. I think it is important to know how to understand and work through these dialectical tensions in order to maintain healthy relationships.

Initially required is an analysis to the results of the, “Conflict Style Questionnaire” (Rahim and Wagner 122-132). According to the conflict style survey, base two separate situations from past occurrences; one with someone close to me, and the second with someone who I am not so interpersonal with. Moreover, the two personal conflicts that I apply to the questionnaire, base from two diverse relationships-personal as well as an impersonal, along with various context and environment pertaining to the particular

    In their book, Boundaries in Marriage, the authors, Cloud and Townsend, present a theoretical model for maintaining healthy relationships, specifically marriage relationships. This examination of Cloud and Townsend’s approach to maintaining healthy relationships summarizes both the theoretical and theological orientation of their proposed model, compares their approach to the model proposed by Sandra Wilson in her book, Hurt people hurt people, and considers the model in the context of Dr. Hawkins concentric circle theory of personality, and parents a critique with regard to some’ of the perceived strengths and

In A. L. Evangelista & D. Perlman, Cambridge handbook of personal relationships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ISBN 0-521-82617-9

Baxter and Rawlins (1988) say that there are three dialectical forces that must be in balance for the relationship to be successful (Trenholm, 2014). The dialectical forces are called expressive-protective, autonomy-togetherness, and the novelty-predictability dialectics (Trenholm, 2014). Expressive-protective dialectic involves a balance to share personal information and the need to have a little privacy (Trenholm, 2014). Autonomy-togetherness dialectic describes how interdependent they want to be with each other (Trenholm, 2014). There needs to have a balance of togetherness and being apart from each other (Trenholm, 2014). Novelty-predictability dialectic is how individuals interact with each other and how they fall into patterns of behavior (Trenholm, 2014). After a time these behaviors become predictable and they spend most of their time repeating old routines (Trenholm, 2014). This behavior can positive or it can be negative (Trenholm, 2014).

When conflict occurs within a partnership there is oftentimes a withdrawal from intimacy within the relationship before the conflict is resolved and intimacy can occur again. This is known as the intimacy-conflict cycle. In Little Miss Sunshine the parents, Richard and Sheryl, tend to manage their dissatisfactions with cyclic alternation responses, which are instances when one of the partners voices a complaint that prompts the other’s response in order to resolve their conflict (Galvin, et al., 219). This is seen very

After this first point of contact, the couple enters the next interpersonal stage of 'involvement,' as they get to know one another. Despite their differences, they become convinced that they have a future together and view their differences as potential positives rather than negatives. The couple moves in together and begins to establish greater intimacy. Unfortunately, it is at this juncture that the relationship begins to fall apart, as they try to establish a more private form of 'intimacy,' even though they are publically a couple.

Relational Dialectics Theory is “A dynamic knot of contradictions in personal relationships; an unceasing interplay between contrary or opposing tendencies” (Em Griffin, 2012, p. 137). This theory displays the tensions present in any relationship. According to professors Leslie Baxter and Barbara Montgomery, “this concept focuses on the contradictions in relationships. These contradictions arise when two people of varying differences maintain a relationship” (Relational Dialectics Theory in

Therefore, just like the coming together stages of a relationship there are five stages to coming apart. The first sign of a relationship coming to an end is Differentiating, meaning the couple’s commonalities and differences are affecting them. In the course of this stage, the impetus of “working together” stance instantly move from “couple” to “individualistic”. Temporary estrangement become a solution. For that reason, the relationship shifts rapidly from differences to setting boundaries on the couple’s interaction. This is called the Circumscribing stage, which means to know everything you need to know about your partner but you avoid it by going around the problem. It is like saying your partner isn’t sincere so you avoid the problem and not sort it out which includes less communication.

The core concept that stands out of relational dialectics theory is contradiction (Griffin, 2009). A contradiction happens whenever you have two interdependent forces that mutually work against each other (Griffin). This is continually happening in relationships because they are in a constant state of flux. Relationships are constantly changing and there is no complete certainty. Baxter and Montgomery give the example of contradiction as a game of tug-of-war created through interpersonal conversations. Moreover, these theorists believe that contradictions are inevitable and can be used to constructively enhance the quality of relationships (Griffin).

Every great scene as every movie or story follows a certain structure. Starting with an introduction, continues with progressive middle, and ends with the climax. Every character is coming into the scene with particular goals. These goals should ultimately collide with goals of another character in order to make the scene interesting. Changes in scenes and therefore changes in how the goals are being pursued are called scene beats. Your story will capture audiences only, if you have enough tension.

A romantic relationship might sound very beautiful but like any type of relationship has its ups and downs. That's known as the relational dialectics Theory,"explains the ups and downs and pushes temp was that dynamic of the relationship experiences ".(Gamble,371). The theory consist of four main parts that are integration/separation, stability/change, expression/privacy, and working through dialectical tensions. Integration/separation in a romantic relationshipis the tension between being together most of the time and also one in their personal space from each other. It's like a lunch break or vacation, a small amount of time to focus on yourself. Stability/change in this type of relationship in thetension between always going the extra

Throughout relationships, what separates them from healthy and unhealthy is a wide spectrum of uncertainty. Furthermore, not every relationship will be stagnant throughout each person’s lifetime. In this paper, I will be discussing the lengths of my relationship with a good friend of mine, Devon. Furthermore, I can pinpoint some areas in the Power and Control Wheel that may have been of use when we were younger. Also, I see an importance of the Equality wheel and how it relates to our relationship today.

Mark Knapp developed a theoretical model to which identifies the stages of interpersonal relationships which explains how relationships begin and grow, as well as how they deteriorate and end. This model defines ten separate stages of relational development under three different interrelating categories; Coming Together, Relational Maintenance, and Coming Apart. An analysis of a personal relationship through the use of Knapp’s stages of relational development leads to a better understanding of that relationship and our role within it. In this essay I will be analyzing a personal relationship of my own using Knapp’s stages as a guide. However, these stages are subjective to each individual’s unique situation. Therefore, I will only be examining my relationship in the “coming together” stages. Furthermore, it is possible to pass over or amalgamate stages, as these stages are closer to a guide rather than set rules. For this analysis I will be breaking the “coming together” stages into initiating, experimentation and intensifying, integration, and bonding.

Sociological perspectives explains love relationships as not perfect but a working progress. A commitment which relies on continuous maintenance and reassurance. Love relationship practices and investments are configured in experiences that will be shared in the past, present and in the future.