IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0309848.html

Intellectual humility is reliably associated with constructive responses to conflict

Author

Listed:
  • Jonah Koetke
  • Karina Schumann
  • Keith Welker
  • Peter T Coleman

Abstract

Conflict is a ubiquitous, but potentially destructive, feature of social life. In the current research, we argue that intellectual humility—the awareness of one’s intellectual fallibility—plays an important role in promoting constructive responses and decreasing destructive responses to conflict in different contexts. In Study 1, we examine the role of intellectual humility in interpersonal conflicts with friends and family members. In Study 2, we extend this finding to workplace conflicts. In both studies we find that intellectual humility predicts more constructive and less destructive responses to conflict. This work extends the burgeoning literature on the benefits of intellectual humility by demonstrating its association with responses that help defuse conflictual encounters.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonah Koetke & Karina Schumann & Keith Welker & Peter T Coleman, 2024. "Intellectual humility is reliably associated with constructive responses to conflict," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(9), pages 1-12, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0309848
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309848
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0309848
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0309848&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0309848?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Igor Grossmann & Justin P. Brienza & D. Ramona Bobocel, 2017. "Wise deliberation sustains cooperation," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(3), pages 1-6, March.
    2. Morrison, Rachel L, 2008. "Negative relationships in the workplace: Associations with organisational commitment, cohesion, job satisfaction and intention to turnover," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 330-344, September.
    3. Justin P. Brienza & Franki Y. H. Kung & Melody M. Chao, 2021. "Wise reasoning, intergroup positivity, and attitude polarization across contexts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andor, Mark Andreas & Grossmann, Igor & Hönow, Nils Christian & Tomberg, Lukas, 2023. "Wisdom and prosocial behavior," Ruhr Economic Papers 1054, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    2. Michael B. Wironen & Robert V. Bartlett & Jon D. Erickson, 2019. "Deliberation and the Promise of a Deeply Democratic Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    3. Jordan Gašper & Miglič Gozdana & Todorović Ivan & Marič Miha, 2017. "Psychological Empowerment, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment Among Lecturers in Higher Education: Comparison of Six CEE Countries," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 50(1), pages 17-32, February.
    4. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Guarnieri, Pietro & Spadoni, Lorenzo, 2023. "Delaying and motivating decisions in the (Bully) dictator game," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Li, Xiaowei & Guo, Yuanfang & Zhou, Siyu, 2021. "Chinese preschool teachers’ income, work-family conflict, organizational commitment, and turnover intention: A serial mediation model," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    6. Igor Grossmann & Richard P. Eibach, 2021. "Reasonable bounds on rationality," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 20(1), pages 59-67, June.
    7. Clark H. Warner & Marion Fortin & Tessa Melkonian, 2024. "When Are We More Ethical? A Review and Categorization of the Factors Influencing Dual-Process Ethical Decision-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 189(4), pages 843-882, February.
    8. Patrick Bergemann & Brandy Aven, 2023. "Whistleblowing and Group Affiliation: The Role of Group Cohesion and the Locus of the Wrongdoer in Reporting Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1243-1265, May.
    9. Susana Iglesias Webering, 2020. "Cooperative Cooperation: Being, Doing, and Becoming," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 24(6), pages 567-581.
    10. Mastroianni, Adam M. & Cooney, Gus & Boothby, Erica J. & Reece, Andrew G., 2021. "The liking gap in groups and teams," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 109-122.
    11. Nick Drydakis, 2015. "Effect of Sexual Orientation on Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Greece," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(1), pages 162-187, January.
    12. Stefano Dughera & Alain Marciano, 2022. "Supervise me if you can. Relational feelings, incentive pays and supervisory violations," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 47-72, June.
    13. Zhangyan Deng & Jinyang Guo & Dong Wang & Zuosong Chen, 2022. "A Supplementary Approach for Effective Anti-Doping Education: A Pilot Study Applying Refutation Texts to Modify Misperception of the Whereabouts System," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-12, February.
    14. Marianna Belloc & Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Simone D'Alessandro, 2017. "A Social Heuristics Hypothesis for the Stag Hunt: Fast- and Slow-Thinking Hunters in the Lab," CESifo Working Paper Series 6824, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0309848. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.