Intrapersonal conflict - concept, causes, types, consequences

Intrapersonal conflict is a difficult to resolve contradiction that occurs within the individual. An intrapersonal psychological conflict is experienced by an individual as a serious problem of psychological content that requires prompt resolution. This type of confrontation can simultaneously speed up the process of self-development, forcing the individual to mobilize his own potential, and harm the individual, slowing down the process of self-knowledge and driving self-affirmation into a dead end. Intrapersonal conflict arises in conditions when interests, drives, and needs of equal importance and opposite in direction collide in the human mind.

The concept of intrapersonal conflict

Internal confrontation of a person is a confrontation that arises within the psyche of a person, which is a clash of contradictory, often oppositely directed motives.

This type of confrontation has a number of specific features. Features of intrapersonal conflict:

unusual structure of the conflict (intrapersonal confrontation does not have subjects of interaction represented by individuals or groups of people);
latency, which consists in the difficulty of identifying internal contradiction, since often the individual does not realize that he is in a state of confrontation, he can also hide his own state under the guise of euphoria or vigorous activity;
specificity of forms of manifestation and course, since internal confrontation occurs in the form of complex experiences and is accompanied by: fear, depressive states, stress.

The problem of intrapersonal conflict has been most actively developed in Western psychological science. Its scientific basis is inextricably linked with the founder of psychoanalytic theory, S. Freud.

All approaches and concepts of intrapersonal conflict are determined by the specific understanding of the content and essence of personality. Therefore, starting from the understandings of personality that have developed in different psychological schools, we can identify several main approaches to the consideration of internal confrontation.

Freud provided evidence of the biopsychological and biosocial content of intrapersonal confrontation. At its core, the human psyche is contradictory. Her work is associated with constant tension and overcoming the conflict that arises between the biological desires of the individual and sociocultural foundations, between unconscious contents and consciousness. It is precisely in contradiction and constant confrontation that the whole essence of intrapersonal confrontation lies, according to Freud’s concept.

The described concept was further developed in the works of its adherents: K. Jung and K. Horney.

German psychologist K. Lewin put forward his own concept of intrapersonal conflict called “field theory,” according to which the inner world of an individual simultaneously falls under the influence of polarly directed forces. A person has to choose from them. Both such forces can be positive or negative, and one of them can be negative and the other positive. K. Levin considered the main conditions for the emergence of conflict to be parity and equal importance of such forces for the individual.

K. Rogers believed that the emergence of internal conflict is due to the discrepancy between the subject’s self-image and his understanding of the ideal “I”. He was convinced that such a discrepancy could provoke serious mental disorders.

The concept of intrapersonal confrontation, developed by A. Maslow, is very popular. He argued that the structure of personal motivation is based on a hierarchy of needs, the highest of which is the need for self-realization. Hence, the main reason for the emergence of intrapersonal conflicts lies in the gap between the desire for self-realization and the achieved result.

Among the Soviet psychologists who made a significant contribution to the development of theories of confrontation, one can highlight the concepts of intrapersonal conflict by A. Luria, V. Merlin, F. Vasilyuk and A. Leontiev.

Luria considered intrapersonal confrontation as a collision of two oppositely directed, but equal in strength, tendencies. V. Merlin - as a consequence of dissatisfaction with deep, actual personal motives and relationships. F. Vasilyuk - as a confrontation between two internal motives, reflected in the consciousness of an individual’s personality as independent opposing values.

The problem of intrapersonal conflict was considered by Leontyev as a completely normal phenomenon. He believed that internal confrontation is inherent in the personality structure. Every personality is contradictory in its structure. Often, the resolution of such contradictions occurs in the simplest variations and does not lead to the emergence of an intrapersonal conflict. Sometimes conflict resolution goes beyond the simplest forms, becoming the main thing. The consequence of this is intrapersonal confrontation. He believed that internal conflict is the result of a struggle between individual motivational courses ranked in the hierarchy.

A. Adler considered the basis for the emergence of internal conflicts to be an “inferiority complex” that arises in childhood under the pressure of an unfavorable social environment. In addition, Adler also identified the main methods for resolving internal confrontation.

E. Fromm, explaining intrapersonal confrontation, proposed the theory of “existential dichotomy.” His concept stated that the causes of internal conflicts lie in the dichotomous nature of the individual, which is revealed in the problems of existence: the problem of the limitations of human life, life and death, etc.

E. Erikson in his own concept of the stages of psychosocial personality formation, putting forward the idea that each age stage is marked by a favorable or unfavorable overcoming of a crisis event.

With a successful exit, positive personal development occurs, its transition to the next life period with useful prerequisites for its favorable overcoming. If there is an unsuccessful exit from a crisis situation, the individual moves into a new period of his own life with the complexes of the previous stage. Erikson believed that it is practically impossible to go through all stages of development safely, therefore each individual develops the prerequisites for the emergence of intrapersonal confrontation.

Definition

Internal conflict is the contradictions that arise in a person’s subconscious. The patient most often does not understand what this is and describes his situation as emotional problems that cannot be solved.

Depression is an indispensable companion to the internal conflict of the individual and depends only on the person whether he can overcome it or not.

A person suffering from internal conflict thinks negatively and lacks rational thinking.

It is important to know that an advanced form of conflict leads to neurotic and even mental illness. Therefore, it is so important to worry about it in time and start treatment. It will depend on how large the internal conflict is. This means that the specialist will first have to classify the problem and only then take on its solution.

Causes of intrapersonal conflict

Intrapersonal psychological conflict has three types of causes that provoke its occurrence:

internal, that is, reasons hidden in the contradictions of the individual;
external factors determined by the status of the individual in society;
external factors determined by the status of the individual in a certain social group.

All of these types of reasons are interrelated, and their differentiation is considered rather arbitrary. For example, internal factors that cause confrontation are the result of the individual’s interaction with the group and society, and do not appear out of nowhere.

The internal conditions for the emergence of intrapersonal confrontation are rooted in the opposition of various motives of the individual, in the inconsistency of its internal structure. A person is more susceptible to internal conflicts when his inner world is complex, his feelings of value and the ability to self-analysis are developed.

Intrapersonal conflict arises in the presence of the following contradictions:

between social norm and need;
mismatch of needs, motives, interests;
confrontation of social roles (intrapersonal conflict example: it is necessary to fulfill an urgent order at work and at the same time the child should be taken to training);
the contradiction of sociocultural values and foundations, for example, it is necessary to combine the duty of defending the Motherland during war and the Christian commandment “thou shalt not kill.”

For a conflict to arise within a person, these contradictions must have a deep meaning for the individual, otherwise he will not attach significance to them. In addition, different aspects of contradictions must be equal in terms of the intensity of their own impact on the individual. Otherwise, an individual will choose the greater and the lesser of two goods—of “two evils.” In this case, internal confrontation will not arise.

External factors that provoke the emergence of intrapersonal confrontation are determined by: personal status in the group, organization and society.

The reasons determined by the position of an individual in a certain group are quite diverse, but they are united by the impossibility of satisfying various important motives and needs that have significance and deep meaning for the individual in a particular situation. From here we can distinguish four variations of situations that provoke the emergence of intrapersonal conflict:

physical obstacles that prevent the satisfaction of basic needs (intrapersonal conflict example: a prisoner whose cell does not allow free movement);
the absence of an object that is needed to satisfy a felt need (for example, a person dreams of a cup of coffee in a foreign city, but it’s too early and all the cafeterias are closed);
biological barriers (individuals with physical defects or mental retardation, in whom the obstacle is nested in the human body itself);
social circumstances are the main root cause of most intrapersonal conflicts.

At the organizational level, the reasons that provoke the manifestation of intrapersonal conflict can be represented by the following types of contradictions:

between excessive responsibility and limited rights for its implementation (the person was transferred to a leadership position, the functions were expanded, but the rights remained the same);
between poor working conditions and strict job requirements;
between two incompatible tasks or tasks;
between the strictly established framework of the task and the vaguely prescribed mechanism for its implementation;
between the requirements of the profession, traditions, norms established in the company and individual needs or values;
between the desire for creative self-realization, self-affirmation, career and the potential opportunities for achieving this within the organization;
confrontation caused by contradictory social roles;
between the desire for profit and moral values.

External factors determined by personal status in society are associated with discrepancies that arise at the level of the social macrosystem and lie in the nature of the social system, the structure of society, and political and economic life.

Internal beacons

There are values that we strive to satisfy at all costs. We want to have what we value. We all want to be healthy, happy, successful.

But a person does not always get what he wants. It is not always possible to achieve complete satisfaction. Quite the contrary. Both external circumstances and internal doubts interfere.

“Can I?”, “Do I want to?”, “Do I have to?” — such doubts are common to all people at certain moments.

Elena K., HR Director: “When doubts attack me, I can’t do anything. I take a break and listen to myself. I know very well: if there is a storm inside, then it is better not to make any decisions, it costs a lot.”

Types of intrapersonal conflicts

K. Levin proposed a classification of internal confrontation by type. He identified 4 types, namely equivalent (first type), vital (second), ambivalent (third) and frustrating (fourth).

Equivalent type - confrontation arises when the subject needs to perform two or more functions that are significant to him. Here, the usual model for resolving a contradiction will be a compromise, that is, partial substitution.

A vital type of conflict is observed when a subject has to make decisions that are equally unattractive to him.

Ambivalent type - clash appears when similar actions and results equally seduce and repel.

Frustrating type. Features of an intrapersonal conflict of a frustrating type are disapproval by society, divergence from accepted norms and foundations, the desired result and, accordingly, the actions necessary to achieve what is desired.

In addition to the above systematization, there is a classification, the basis of which is the value-motivational sphere of the individual.

A motivational conflict occurs when two equally positive tendencies and unconscious aspirations come into conflict. An example of this type of confrontation is “Buridan’s donkey.”

Moral contradiction or normative conflict arises from discrepancies between aspirations and duty, personal attachments and moral attitudes.

The collision of an individual’s desires with reality, which blocks their satisfaction, provokes the emergence of a conflict of unfulfilled desires. For example, it appears when a subject, due to physical imperfection, cannot fulfill his desire.

Role intrapersonal conflict is anxiety caused by the inability to simultaneously “play” several roles. It also occurs as a result of discrepancies in understanding the requirements for the implementation of one role by an individual.

An adaptation conflict is characterized by the presence of two meanings: in a broad sense, it is a contradiction caused by an imbalance between the individual and the surrounding reality; in a narrow sense, it is a collision caused by a violation of the social or professional adaptation process.

The conflict of inadequate self-esteem arises as a result of the discrepancy between personal aspirations and assessment of one’s own potential.

Multiple personalities

There is such a phenomenon in psychiatry. What should you do in such a situation? Contact a professional. But treatment does not always give results.

An example is a story that happened in America. American Billy Milligan was convicted, but when he appeared in the courtroom, he did not understand what was happening. The jurors listened to several people, and everything would have been fine, but only the defendant spoke throughout the entire trial. His habits changed, his manner of speaking changed, and he even acquired an accent. Billy could behave cheekily, light a cigarette in the courtroom, and dilute his monologue with prison slang. And after two minutes the voice became higher, flirtatiousness appeared in behavior, and the accused began to express himself very gracefully.

After all kinds of research, scientists came to the conclusion that Billy was diagnosed with multiple personality disorder. In his consciousness there were twenty-four completely formed personalities. From time to time he felt like an attractive woman, a political figure, a small child or a prisoner.

Still, this is an extreme state of internal conflict. As a rule, with timely consultation with a doctor, such complications can be avoided.

Resolving intrapersonal conflict

According to the beliefs of A. Adler, the development of an individual’s character occurs before the age of five. At this stage, the baby feels the impact of many unfavorable factors that give rise to an inferiority complex. In later life, this complex reveals a significant influence on personality and intrapersonal conflict.

Adler described not only the mechanisms that explain the origin and manifestation of intrapersonal conflict, but also revealed ways to overcome such internal contradictions (compensation for an inferiority complex). He identified two such methods. The first is to develop social feeling and interest. Because ultimately, a developed social sense manifests itself in the professional sphere and adequate interpersonal relationships. An individual may also develop an “underdeveloped” social feeling, which has various negative forms of intrapersonal conflict: alcoholism, crime, drug addiction. The second is to stimulate one’s own potential, achieving superiority over the environment. It can have the following forms of manifestation: adequate compensation (coincidence of the content of social interests with superiority), overcompensation (hypertrophied development of one particular ability) and imaginary compensation (illness, prevailing circumstances or other factors beyond the control of the individual compensate for the inferiority complex).

M. Deutsche, the founder of the motivational approach to interpersonal conflict, identified ways to overcome intrapersonal confrontation, starting from the specifics of their “spheres of reality”, to which he attributed:

an objective situation of confrontation, which is the foundation of contradiction;
conflict behavior, which is a way of interaction between subjects of conflict confrontation that arises when realizing a conflict situation.

Ways to overcome internal confrontation can be open or latent.

Open paths require:

individual decision making;
cessation of doubts;
fixation on solving the problem that has arisen.

Latent forms of intrapersonal conflict include:

simulation, torment, hysteria;
sublimation (transition of mental energy to other areas of functioning);
compensation (replenishment of what was lost by acquiring other goals and, accordingly, results);
escape from reality (fantasizing, daydreaming);
nomadism (change of professional sphere, place of residence);
rationalization (self-justification using logical conclusions, targeted selection of arguments);
neurasthenia;
idealization (separation from reality, abstraction);
regression (suppression of desires, recourse to primitive behavioral forms, avoidance of responsibility);
euphoria (feigned joy, joyful state);
differentiation (mental separation of thoughts from the author);
projection (the desire to free oneself from negative qualities by attributing them to another).

Analyzing personality and intrapersonal conflict, understanding the psychological problems of the emergence and overcoming of conflicts is necessary for the further successful development of communication skills, competent resolution of situations of confrontation in interpersonal interaction and group communication.

Correction

Every person has some ideas about himself. The essence of the method is that the struggle is not with the cause of the conflict, but with the individual’s own ideas about it. That is, it is easier not to look for ways to eradicate the cause, but simply to change the attitude towards the latter. The effect of the method is quite average, although there are people whom it really helped. In general, if a person understands that he has a problem and needs to be solved, then he must choose the methods for solving it himself. After all, the result largely depends on self-confidence.

Ways to deal with conflict

In order to permanently resolve psychological contradictions, it is necessary to approach this problem with all seriousness, make every effort and fully concentrate on it. Recovery takes place in five stages:

It is worth recognizing the presence of a disorder; acceptance is an important stage of the struggle.
It is necessary to conduct a deep analysis and identify all the reasons. Break everything down point by point.
It is necessary to work through every problem that has become a source of development of confrontation. A person must make the right decision and decide on the choice of option: act by listening to reason or feelings. It is extremely difficult to choose on your own; you should contact a professional psychologist.
Deal with anxious thoughts, free your head from negative thinking, and allow positivity to enter your brain.
Work on your attitudes.

Take care of your nervous system, all problems disappear over time and become unimportant.