Motivations for Reconciliation: Regulatory Mode, Individual Differences, and Evolutionary Considerations

Abstract

Conflict is an integral component of human and other group-living animals’ social nature. But conflicts are often managed and settled through a process called reconciliation, whereby friendly relations between former opponents are restored. In humans, conflict resolution research has focused primarily on forgiveness and less on this broader and perhaps more basic dynamic of when two individuals are actually motivated to come together in the first place. Further, research in all species has failed to emphasize individual differences as a potential source of variation in conciliatory tendencies, perhaps because reconciliation is inherently an inter- as opposed to intra-individual phenomenon. The overall goal of this paper is to expand what we know about reconciliation by examining whether there are individual differences in basic human motivations to reconcile. Regulatory Mode Theory (RMT) is a potentially useful starting point for addressing this question. RMT distinguishes between two fundamental and independent components of effective self-regulation: locomotion and assessment. Locomotion constitutes the aspect of self-regulation concerned with movement from state-to-state, while assessment is the aspect of self-regulation involved in making comparisons. This is the first research, to our knowledge, that examines the direct influence of regulatory mode on conflict resolution. In this study, participants were presented with various interpersonal conflict scenarios, and then rated their motivations for reconciliation and feelings of negativity following these conflicts. Results of multilevel mixed-effects regression analyses revealed that there were significant individual differences, such that as locomotion increased, the motivation to reconcile was higher and less influenced by feelings of negativity generated by the conflict. Conversely, as assessment increased, the motivation to reconcile decreased and became more influenced by these negative feelings. Further interactions revealed that high assessors are most sensitive to the roles that they are depicted playing in the conflict. Results are consistent with the idea that high locomotors are motivated to just do it whereas high assessors are motivated to do it right. RMT provides a promising approach to investigating the relation between motivation, individual differences, and reconciliation, not just in humans but in other species as well. Evolutionary implications and future steps for further research in humans and other animals are also discussed.