Schismogenesis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Schismogenesis is a concept used to explain problematic social behavior patterns between small groups or parts of society. It was developed in the 1930s by the anthropologist and psychologist Gregory Bateson and recorded in Germany by WE Mühlmann .

Mühlmann's concept can also be understood as a complement or opposition to the postulates of sociological functionalism , which made up processes of generating organic or mechanical solidarity in societies. Bateson's concept of schismogenesis, on the other hand, emphasizes processes of divergence (see Schisma ), confrontation and conflict.

species

Symmetrical

Bateson characterized a competitive relationship between peers as symmetrical schismogenesis . The psychologist Paul Watzlawick calls bragging here as a mirror-image, swaying antagonistic behavior ( positive feedback ). What it means is that partners of the same rank are constantly trying to outdo each other. An example would be e.g. B. to name two friends who tell jokes to each other and who always come up with funnier jokes.

Complementary

An escalating relationship between unequal partners, on the other hand, is called complementary schismogenesis : striving for dominance on the one hand, submission on the other; this is less a question of a one-sided exercise of power than a dynamic of misunderstanding between the participants - they “punctuate” (Watzlawick) the meaning of the situation differently. Kindly intended reluctance of one partner is z. B. interpreted as shyness or a lack of willpower that needs to be guided; the other person then assumes this role, thereby reinforcing the dominant partner ( positive feedback ).

Watzlawick postulates as a " metacommunicative axiom ": "Interpersonal communication processes are either symmetrical or complementary, depending on whether the relationship between people is based on equality or difference."

Gender differences

The sociolinguist Deborah Tannen took up the concept of schismogenesis again for conversation or conversation analysis in 1990. How do misunderstandings arise, how does a breakdown in communication, unsuccessful understanding come about, which ends in dislike and mutual distrust? Tannen mainly described direct, task-related as well as indirect, harmony- related communication strategies . The former are mostly used by men, the latter mostly by women. With the more "male" style of conversation, problems are to be tackled directly, wishes are not concealed, possibly verbalized immediately as commands or commands. Status and demonstrated sovereignty (willingness to make decisions, etc.) are important factors here. In the indirect communication style, which is more based on consensus and reinsurance, the question is not suddenly asked: "Could you go shopping?", But rather: "Oh, I urgently need a few things from the store if I weren't so tired ... "

Many men find this indirect form of message delivery to be "manipulative" . And in fact, the indirect message is ultimately supposed to achieve something similar to that of a direct placing of an order. The different styles of conversation lead to irritation, however, to complementary schismogenesis - there is a tacit or open switch to metacommunication about the relational aspect of the communication situation: "Why does she never say what she thinks, doesn’t speak specifically about what she wants?" - “Why doesn't he understand what I want from him? "

Cultural differences

Such situations can also arise not only between the sexes, but also between people from different cultures. Japanese business people are careful to create a friendly atmosphere with business partners. " Small talk " about non-business matters initiates the negotiations. American business people, on the other hand, want to "get down to business" as quickly as possible, and find the lengthy exchange of "flowery friendliness" to be annoying and superfluous. Even in the run-up to important negotiations, serious misunderstandings can arise, and complementary schismogenesis then creates antipathy in intercultural conversational situations .

Web links

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Paul Watzlawick; Janet H. Beavin; Don D. Jackson: Human Communication: Forms, Disorders, Paradoxes. - 12th, unchanged. Ed. - Huber, Bern [u. a.], 2011, p. 78