The research of Dr. Ma'an Katzir from Bar-Ilan University examines how psychological needs that are violated in conflict translate into emotions such as anger and fear - and how meeting a need, even from a third party, may reduce negative emotions and increase willingness to reconcile.
“In every conflict, needs are violated,” says Dr. Ma’in Katzir, a senior lecturer in the Conflict Management and Resolution and Negotiation Program at Bar Ilan University, who has been dealing in recent years with the intersection of interpersonal relationships, conflict management and resolution, and emotional regulation. “It can be a need for security, a need for status, a need for justice – it doesn’t matter if it’s a conflict at work, between neighbors, in a relationship, or within the family. When a need is violated, negative emotions often arise. And when you succeed in addressing the need – something calms down, and the path to reconciliation becomes possible.”
As part of her research (supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation), Katzir and her research partners are examining how to identify the needs that are violated in conflicts, how they are “translated” into emotions such as anger or fear, and what exactly happens when the need is fulfilled – sometimes even without the offending party doing anything.
The question is: How can we identify the needs that are violated in conflicts, how are they “translated” into emotions like anger or fear, and what exactly happens when the need is fulfilled?
A track that connects psychology, cognition, and conflicts
Katzir’s path to her current research began in behavioral sciences at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, where she was exposed to anthropology, sociology, and psychology – but was particularly captivated by the charm of social psychology. She then went on to earn a master’s degree in social-organizational psychology at Ben-Gurion University, with the idea of turning to the world of organizational psychology. Her curiosity for research, she says, “swept her inward”: she went on to do her doctorate at Ben-Gurion University under the supervision of Prof. Tal Eyal and Prof. Nachshon Meiren, and studied emotions on the “seam line” between social psychology and cognitive psychology.
After several years as a postdoctoral fellow, in October 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, she joined the Conflict Management and Resolution and Negotiation Program, part of the Interdisciplinary Studies Unit – an environment that brings together psychology with political science, sociology, and professional mediation practice. There, she says, she began to see up close what conflicts look like “when they’re alive,” and how mediators try to unravel what’s really stuck beneath the surface.
What happens when a need is met – and what changes when it is met?
At the heart of the research is a clear claim: conflict is not just a difference of opinion. It is an experience of hurt. This hurt is almost always related to a psychological need. And the hurt in a need is associated with a specific negative emotion.
For example, in the workplace: a colleague “takes” a promotion that you perceive as your due, perhaps unfairly. What is affected here may be a need for status (the esteem of your colleagues), as well as a need for justice (a sense of fairness). The typical emotional response in such a situation is anger. “And when you are angry,” explains Katzir, “it is very difficult to be open to interaction, connection, or reconciliation.”
But here comes the finding that intrigues her particularly: Sometimes the anger subsides even without the colleague “correcting” his actions. For example, if another promotion is subsequently received – even from a different source and through a different route – the sense of status or justice improves, and the anger towards the other party decreases. In other words, fulfilling the need can change the emotional dynamic, and hence the willingness to continue working together, talking, or restoring relationships.
Another example comes from the world of relationships: a couple hosts friends, and since one of them is under a heavy workload, the other shoulder most of the preparation. A small glitch in the preparations (for example, the partner forgot to buy something for the evening) can be a trigger for the partner to hurl insults. After the evening, the question is not just “who is right,” but whether the need that was violated was met—for example, the need for justice and being treated fairly. Giving credit, acknowledging effort, or otherwise correcting a sense of unfairness—can reduce negative feelings of anger, restore a sense of balance, and make reconciliation more possible.
Even in divorce mediation, Katzir describes how a process “stuck” not necessarily because of one legal formula or another, but because of an unmet need. A mediator she worked with described a case in which progress was made possible only after it was understood that the fear and apprehension that one of the parties was experiencing stemmed from a lack of financial-functional insecurity: he or she had never managed finances alone. When a focused solution was offered – financial counseling that would provide a sense of competence and security – the process loosened up and progressed to an agreement.
Fulfilling the need can change the emotional dynamic, and hence the willingness to continue working together, talking, or rebuilding relationships.
Regulating Emotions Without Intention: The Advantage of an “Implicit Strategy”"
This is where Katzir’s research connects to the world of emotion regulation. Generally, emotion regulation is thought of as a deliberate action: I’m angry, so I try to calm down. For example, to distract myself, or to “reappraisal” – trying to interpret the event differently in order to reduce the anger.
But in conflicts, there is not always a motivation to regulate. Sometimes we “want” to hold onto anger because it feels justified. Here, need fulfillment offers another route: it can act as emotional regulation. Implicit (implicit) – that is, one that does not necessarily aim to regulate the emotion itself. A mediator who identifies a need and helps to fulfill it does not “address anger” directly; he addresses the need that has been violated. But once the need is met, the negative emotion diminishes.
Another advantage is that the fulfillment of the need can come from a third party. It is not always the injured party who fulfills the needs of justice or security. Sometimes it is an organization, family, institution, or process that produces another correction – and yet the emotion is still soothed, and reconciliation with the injured party becomes possible.
The next step in the research, according to Katzir, is a systematic mapping of needs and emotions: which needs are repeatedly violated in various conflicts, which emotions “accompany” each need (e.g., fear around security, anger around justice), and whether an emotion can be used as a “cue” that targets the violated need. The ability to identify a need and respond to it may be a factor that enables forward movement.
Short FAQ:
What does the study examine? How psychological needs that are violated in conflict trigger negative emotions, and how meeting a need can reduce them.
Do you need to deal directly with the emotion in order to achieve reconciliation? Not necessarily. According to the research, sometimes meeting a violated need indirectly reduces the negative emotion.
Why is this important for mediation? Because identifying the need that has been violated may help mediators and professionals understand what is really holding back progress in the conflict.
More of the topic in Hayadan:
