Complexity Under Stress: Integrative Approaches to Overdetermined Vulnerabilities

Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrati...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of strategic security 2016-12, Vol.9 (4), p.11-31
Hauptverfasser: Fearon, Patricia Andrews, Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 31
container_issue 4
container_start_page 11
container_title Journal of strategic security
container_volume 9
creator Fearon, Patricia Andrews
Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.
description Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrative complexity offer a promising approach to preventing various forms of intergroup conflict (e.g. sectarianism, violent extremism). However, these contexts can also be extremely stressful, and dominant theory suggests that cognitive complexity diminishes in the face of high stress. However, we know that this is not always the case, with some findings demonstrating the opposite pattern: increases in complexity under high stress. How is it that some people in the midst of stressful conflict are able to recognize multiple perspectives and solutions, while others become increasingly narrow and rigid in their thinking? The aim of this paper is to integrate these divergent findings through the broader framework of the biopsychosocial model of stress and to explore possible underlying mechanisms such as affect. Implications for intervention will also be discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.5038/1944-0472.9.4.1557
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_JFNAL</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2205357519</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26471081</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26471081</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2847-a7f6795cbed73d8b4ad46d8ee8f319461464f5ba5d77b65f46660f0d0fc52d9d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1Lw0AQxRdRsNSeBUEoeE7cr9nZPUrwCwoetOclye5CQ9vE3RTsf29CJEfnMsPjvXnwI-SO0Ryo0I_MSJlRiTw3ucwZAF6QxSxezreS12SVUkOHkaDAqAW5LdpDt_c_u_683h6dj-vPPvqUbshVKPfJr_72kmxfnr-Kt2zz8fpePG2ymmuJWYlBoYG68g6F05UsnVROe6-DGFoVG0oDVCU4xEpBkEopGqijoQbujBNL8jD97WL7ffKpt017iseh0nJOQQACM_-5mAaGSnCEwcUnVx3blKIPtou7QxnPllE7krIjCDtCscZKO5IaQvdTqEl9G-cEVxIZ1Uz8Ai8MYbo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1851763275</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Complexity Under Stress: Integrative Approaches to Overdetermined Vulnerabilities</title><source>Jstor Journals Open Access</source><creator>Fearon, Patricia Andrews ; Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fearon, Patricia Andrews ; Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M. ; University of Cambridge ; University of California - Berkeley</creatorcontrib><description>Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrative complexity offer a promising approach to preventing various forms of intergroup conflict (e.g. sectarianism, violent extremism). However, these contexts can also be extremely stressful, and dominant theory suggests that cognitive complexity diminishes in the face of high stress. However, we know that this is not always the case, with some findings demonstrating the opposite pattern: increases in complexity under high stress. How is it that some people in the midst of stressful conflict are able to recognize multiple perspectives and solutions, while others become increasingly narrow and rigid in their thinking? The aim of this paper is to integrate these divergent findings through the broader framework of the biopsychosocial model of stress and to explore possible underlying mechanisms such as affect. Implications for intervention will also be discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1944-0464</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-0472</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5038/1944-0472.9.4.1557</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Jose: Henley-Putnam University Press</publisher><subject>Biopsychosocial aspects ; Cognition ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Cognitive complexity ; Complexity ; Conflict ; Content analysis ; Decision making ; Extremism ; Integrative complexity ; Intergroup relations ; Intervention ; Sectarian violence ; Sectarianism ; Social psychology ; Stress ; Terrorism ; Violence</subject><ispartof>Journal of strategic security, 2016-12, Vol.9 (4), p.11-31</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2016 by Henley-Putnam University</rights><rights>Copyright Henley-Putnam University Press Winter 2016</rights><rights>2016. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2847-a7f6795cbed73d8b4ad46d8ee8f319461464f5ba5d77b65f46660f0d0fc52d9d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26471081$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26471081$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,861,12826,25335,27905,27906,54505,54511</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26471081$$EView_record_in_JSTOR$$FView_record_in_$$GJSTOR</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fearon, Patricia Andrews</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Cambridge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of California - Berkeley</creatorcontrib><title>Complexity Under Stress: Integrative Approaches to Overdetermined Vulnerabilities</title><title>Journal of strategic security</title><description>Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrative complexity offer a promising approach to preventing various forms of intergroup conflict (e.g. sectarianism, violent extremism). However, these contexts can also be extremely stressful, and dominant theory suggests that cognitive complexity diminishes in the face of high stress. However, we know that this is not always the case, with some findings demonstrating the opposite pattern: increases in complexity under high stress. How is it that some people in the midst of stressful conflict are able to recognize multiple perspectives and solutions, while others become increasingly narrow and rigid in their thinking? The aim of this paper is to integrate these divergent findings through the broader framework of the biopsychosocial model of stress and to explore possible underlying mechanisms such as affect. Implications for intervention will also be discussed.</description><subject>Biopsychosocial aspects</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Cognitive complexity</subject><subject>Complexity</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Content analysis</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Extremism</subject><subject>Integrative complexity</subject><subject>Intergroup relations</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Sectarian violence</subject><subject>Sectarianism</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><subject>Stress</subject><subject>Terrorism</subject><subject>Violence</subject><issn>1944-0464</issn><issn>1944-0472</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1Lw0AQxRdRsNSeBUEoeE7cr9nZPUrwCwoetOclye5CQ9vE3RTsf29CJEfnMsPjvXnwI-SO0Ryo0I_MSJlRiTw3ucwZAF6QxSxezreS12SVUkOHkaDAqAW5LdpDt_c_u_683h6dj-vPPvqUbshVKPfJr_72kmxfnr-Kt2zz8fpePG2ymmuJWYlBoYG68g6F05UsnVROe6-DGFoVG0oDVCU4xEpBkEopGqijoQbujBNL8jD97WL7ffKpt017iseh0nJOQQACM_-5mAaGSnCEwcUnVx3blKIPtou7QxnPllE7krIjCDtCscZKO5IaQvdTqEl9G-cEVxIZ1Uz8Ai8MYbo</recordid><startdate>20161201</startdate><enddate>20161201</enddate><creator>Fearon, Patricia Andrews</creator><creator>Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</creator><general>Henley-Putnam University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161201</creationdate><title>Complexity Under Stress</title><author>Fearon, Patricia Andrews ; Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2847-a7f6795cbed73d8b4ad46d8ee8f319461464f5ba5d77b65f46660f0d0fc52d9d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Biopsychosocial aspects</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Cognitive complexity</topic><topic>Complexity</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Content analysis</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Extremism</topic><topic>Integrative complexity</topic><topic>Intergroup relations</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Sectarian violence</topic><topic>Sectarianism</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><topic>Stress</topic><topic>Terrorism</topic><topic>Violence</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fearon, Patricia Andrews</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Cambridge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of California - Berkeley</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of strategic security</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fearon, Patricia Andrews</au><au>Boyd-MacMillan, Eolene M.</au><aucorp>University of Cambridge</aucorp><aucorp>University of California - Berkeley</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Complexity Under Stress: Integrative Approaches to Overdetermined Vulnerabilities</atitle><jtitle>Journal of strategic security</jtitle><date>2016-12-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>11</spage><epage>31</epage><pages>11-31</pages><issn>1944-0464</issn><eissn>1944-0472</eissn><abstract>Over four decades of cognitive complexity research demonstrate that higher integrative complexity (measured by the ability to differentiate and integrate multiple dimensions or perspectives on an issue) predicts more lasting, peaceful solutions to conflict. Interventions that seek to raise integrative complexity offer a promising approach to preventing various forms of intergroup conflict (e.g. sectarianism, violent extremism). However, these contexts can also be extremely stressful, and dominant theory suggests that cognitive complexity diminishes in the face of high stress. However, we know that this is not always the case, with some findings demonstrating the opposite pattern: increases in complexity under high stress. How is it that some people in the midst of stressful conflict are able to recognize multiple perspectives and solutions, while others become increasingly narrow and rigid in their thinking? The aim of this paper is to integrate these divergent findings through the broader framework of the biopsychosocial model of stress and to explore possible underlying mechanisms such as affect. Implications for intervention will also be discussed.</abstract><cop>San Jose</cop><pub>Henley-Putnam University Press</pub><doi>10.5038/1944-0472.9.4.1557</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 1944-0464
ispartof Journal of strategic security, 2016-12, Vol.9 (4), p.11-31
issn 1944-0464
1944-0472
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2205357519
source Jstor Journals Open Access
subjects Biopsychosocial aspects
Cognition
Cognition & reasoning
Cognitive complexity
Complexity
Conflict
Content analysis
Decision making
Extremism
Integrative complexity
Intergroup relations
Intervention
Sectarian violence
Sectarianism
Social psychology
Stress
Terrorism
Violence
title Complexity Under Stress: Integrative Approaches to Overdetermined Vulnerabilities
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T12%3A55%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_JFNAL&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Complexity%20Under%20Stress:%20Integrative%20Approaches%20to%20Overdetermined%20Vulnerabilities&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20strategic%20security&rft.au=Fearon,%20Patricia%20Andrews&rft.aucorp=University%20of%20Cambridge&rft.date=2016-12-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=11&rft.epage=31&rft.pages=11-31&rft.issn=1944-0464&rft.eissn=1944-0472&rft_id=info:doi/10.5038/1944-0472.9.4.1557&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_JFNAL%3E26471081%3C/jstor_JFNAL%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1851763275&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26471081&rfr_iscdi=true