User talk:Tara mott

= Social Ecological Model =

The Social Ecological Model (SEM), also called “Social Ecological Perspective” can provide a theoretical framework to analyze various contexts in research in conflict communication (Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006). Social ecology refers to the “study of relationships between organisms and the environment” (Hawley, 1950). This model allows the “connective fibers” (Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 728) to integrate multiple levels and contexts to establish the “big picture” in communication involving conflict. Research that focuses on any one level underestimates the effects of other contexts (Klein et al., 1999; Rousseau & House, 1994; Stokols, 1996).

SEM relies on Urie Bronfenbrenner's (1977, 1979) “Ecological Systems Theory” which divides factors into four levels: macro-, exo-, meso-, and micro-, which describe influences as intercultural, community, organizational, and interpersonal, respectively. Traditionally many research theorists have considered only a dichotomy of perspectives, either micro (individual behavior) or macro (media or cultural influences). There are many effects that occur from cross-level influences and relationships between and among levels that the SEM addresses. Relationships include parallels (isomorphisms) and discontinuities or cross-level effects (Klein et al., 1999; Rousseau and House, 1994). Below is diagram of the SEM of conflict contexts, taken from Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, & Rinderle (2006, p. 731). The single direction arrows indicated cross-level effects, whereas the circular arrows indicate isomorphisms or discontinuities.



Spheres of Influence
Microsystems are the “interpersonal processes and primary groups that provide social identity” (Gregson, 2001, p. 5) which may include roles that a person plays (i.e. mother, father, sister, brother, child, etc.). These are strong as to how an individual perceives oneself. These qualities and factors can be learned, as in membership to a group, but many are ingrained. In the interpersonal sphere, there are also many components of the individual, including psychological and cognitive factors, like personality, knowledge, beliefs (Gregson, 2001, p. 12).

Mesosystems are the organizational or institutional factors that shape or structure the environment within which the individual and interpersonal relations occur (Gregson, 2001, p. 5). These aspects can be rules, policies, and acceptable business etiquette within a more formal organization. There are some organizations that foster entirely different atmospheres than other corporations, i.e. Google, whereas employees may wear pajamas to the office.

Exosystems refer to the community level influence, including fairly established norms, standards, and social networks (Gregson, 2001, p. 6). There will likely be many organizations and interpersonal relationships that compose the community, and this web of organizations and relationships creates the community. The community is larger than the meso-; however, it is considerably smaller than the respective nation or culture it composes. A community could be like Midwestern or Iowan, while the next level would be an American.

Macrosystems are the cultural contexts (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), not solely geographically or physically, but emotionally and ideologically. These influences are more easily seen than the other factors, mainly due to the magnitude of the impact. Examples may include Communism, Western culture, Islam, and Christianity.

Cross-Level Effects
The consideration of top-down effects (McLeroy et al., 1988; Stokols, 1996) establishes that environmental effects shape individual behavior. The nested factors are essentially influenced by the external influences that embody these factors. Rogan and Hammer (Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 733) state that community and organizational situations establish determine how individuals will respond in crisis situations. Orbe and Everett (Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 733) describe how ethnicity and historical relationships shape individual conflict behavior. This is obviously true in many situations observed in the conflict in the Middle East. Media additionally plays a significant role in reinforcing these stereotypes (Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 735).

Bottom-up effects describe how individuals or community affect higher levels in conflict. For instance, “how do individuals form alliances and build coalitions to counteract top-down initiatives?” (Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 735) There is also an impact in cultures due to global corporations’ presence in some countries (i.e. Google China). Guerro and La Valley (Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 733) recognize emotions are caused by feelings (i.e. anger, guilt, jealousy, greed, etc.) and that these feelings impact events likely to occur. The psychological instability of the shooter in the Virginia Tech incident demonstrates microcosms impacting macrocosms.

Interactive effects demonstrate there are “mutual and simultaneous effects at more than one level” (Rousseau and House, 1994, as quoted in Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 734). For instance in culturally diverse workgroups, there would likely be conflicts between group members, interaction effects in completing the goal of workgroup for the organization, and some learning at the individual level. Another excellent question from Oetzel, Ting- Toomey, & Rinderle (2006, p. 738) is what role does technology play in cultures, organizations, community, and interpersonal conflicts? McLeroy et al. (1988, p. 354) noted that the “ecological perspective implies reciprocal causation between the individual and the environment” which essentially defines interactive effects.

SEM provides “rich theoretical and practical insight” (Klein et al., 1999, as stated in Oetzel, Ting-Toomey, & Rinderle, 2006, p. 729) into analysis and research of conflict communication. This model may also be applied in a variety of additional contexts, such as Child Development, Economics, and Geography, to name a few.

Image copyright problem with Image:SEM.png
Thanks for uploading Image:SEM.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)