In honor of PYM's 1-year anniversary last week, I'm re-posting my very first post for PYM today. I also wanted to re-post it because, almost one year later, I found myself in a situation very similar to the one that prompted this post! Last week, after a few bad nights of sleep, I got into a stupid fight with my husband. Just as the last time, I was baffled at how a pleasant evening could suddenly end with us barely speaking to each other. In the midst of things, I returned to this post and decided that I should try taking my own advice. The good news - the advice still works!
Last weekend my husband and I got into a fight over a pillowcase. It was one of those times where it was clearly his fault, and I was sure he would apologize the next day. He didn't. Instead he seemed surprised that I wasn't apologizing to him. How could we have such different views of the same conflict? Which one of us was right?It turns out that we were both right, in our own way. Misunderstandings like the one that led to a fight over a pillowcase occur because people tend to be naïve realists. That is, we believe that we see social interactions as they truly are, and that other people see them the same way that we do. However, one of the most enduring contributions of social psychology is the understanding that two people can interpret the same social interaction in very different ways based on their own personal knowledge and experiences (Asch, 1952). What does this mean for me? I thought my husband had taken my pillowcase as a joke. He knew he had done it on accident. These different pieces of knowledge led us to interpret the same conversation in very different ways.
0 nhận xét:
Đăng nhận xét