Misunderstood Moments: Managing Conflict Without Blame

With the human ability to converse comes the ability to create conflict and resolve it. Conflicts have been a part of human nature since creation, and now hold evolutionary value to the development, sustenance, and destruction of civilisation. Despite conflicts being almost as old as humans, society is yet to learn how to manage them appropriately. Misunderstandings and miscommunications form the majority of the causes behind conflict  (Crockett et al., 2022). Yet, as individuals, we fail to develop mechanisms that bypass such trivial issues and resort to assigning blame rather than effective conflict management. 

What are Misunderstood Moments?

‘Misunderstood moments’ are essentially instances in communication when an individual’s words, tonality, volume, behaviour, body language, intentions, and more are wrongly interpreted by another than what was intended.

The Impact of Misinterpretation

These occurrences can lead to confusion, emotional distress, and even conflict as they denote a breakdown of efficient communication.

The Consequences of Misunderstood Moments

When dealing with such situations, individuals fail to regard them as gaps in perception and begin to assign blame, which ultimately proves detrimental. These instances can take place in a variety of settings, including personal and professional. A common example would be: 

The Interaction

Parent: “Are you sure you can do this?” 

Intended Message

Intent: Genuine concern for the child’s well-being and safety. It may also be a method in which the parent may seek reassurance to calm their anxiety regarding the well-being of the child. 

Misperceived Meaning

Child’s Perception: “My parent does not trust me enough and lacks confidence in me.” 

The Outcome

Result: A defensive response from the child, which may aggravate the parent’s concern and lead to conflict.

Why Do We Assign Blame?

Blame is an evaluation of actions, whether they are right or wrong, and the ultimate judgment of the individual (Alicke, 2000).

How Blame Functions

The process of assigning blame can take place on multiple levels, such as emotional, cognitive, and moral, and yet can be instantaneous. It is always associated with negative outcomes and can even tend to be a defence mechanism when dealing with conflict as a strategy to avoid accountability.

The Maladaptive Nature of Blame

The maladaptive nature of blame differs from responsibility, making it potentially lethal to effective communication (Gupta, 2024).

Theory suggests a few reasons why individuals assign blame, including: 

1. Attribution Theory

Understanding Attributions

Social psychologists suggest that ‘Attributions’ are processes that individuals indulge in to explain one another’s behaviour through various cognitive processes and causal inferences (Gupta, 2024).

Types of Attributions

These can be internal, aimed towards the dispositional or personality traits, or external, aimed towards the situation (Böhm & Pfister, 2015).

When Attributions Go Wrong

If fundamentally incorrect, they can lead to misjudgment. Blame assigned based on faulty attributions only worsens misunderstandings.

Example: After a tedious day, when a student approaches a faculty member, they might respond using shorter sentences or words such as ‘noted.’ While this may be an outcome of one’s fatigue, the student may interpret it as being curt and rude. The student may attribute the behaviour to the faculty’s overall personality. This is a form of internal dispositional attribution.

Miscommunication and the Threat to Safety or Control

Especially when instances of miscommunication lead to conflict where one’s sense of safety, control or moral superiority is threatened, one is likely to adopt a defensive stance.

Projection and Deflection as a Blame Strategy

To distance themself from the perceived threat, an individual may delve into projection or deflection, which are common defence mechanisms that lead to blaming. 

Example: During an attempt to establish communication between partners, one expresses their concern regarding the other’s dismissive nature. Their counterpart immediately opts to become defensive and blames their dismissive nature on the individual’s emotional unavailability. This defence allows a partner not only to avoid feelings of guilt, but also to assign blame to the other.

Also Read: Projection as a Defense Mechanism in Psychology

3. Self-Serving Bias

What Is Self-Serving Bias?

Self-serving bias is a common cognitive bias wherein individuals will attribute their successes to internal factors such as skills and efforts while assigning blame for failures to external situations, factors which can even include the actions of other people (MSEd, 2023).

Impact of Self-Serving Bias in Conflict

When dealing with conflict, the self-serving bias will make it easier for an individual to blame the other person for the misunderstanding than to accept their contributions towards this perceptual gap.

How to Manage Conflict without Blame?

To deal with conflict effectively, one has to leave judgment aside and become comfortable with vulnerability to truly sit down and converse to reach a solution. Simply meeting an individual halfway will not be enough. They will also have to indulge in empathy, curiosity and accountability to deal with conflict as an opportunity for growth rather than a battle that needs to be won.

Some strategies would include: 

Listen! Don’t Talk

Active listening is crucial for conflict management, especially without assigning blame. Truly hearing the other individual out will help one understand their perspective before reaching conclusions. Active listening also ensures that an individual is heard without any judgment and with empathy.

Express and don’t Criticise

Marshall Rosenberg, in 2003, developed the concept of nonviolent communication, which focuses on compassionate expression of an individual without blame, criticism or aggression as a method to deepen connection and reduce conflict (Steinhardt, 2025). It is essentially a framework that focuses upon observation without judgement, emotions that express feelings and needs, and requests, as a method of expression which can be non-violent towards the other.

Example: Instead of saying “You never listen to me,” one can opt for the non-violent approach and say, “ I feel hurt, then I talk to you and you don’t respond. I wish we could work on that.” 

ALSO READ: Constructive Criticism: Building Better Relationships

Accountability

In cases of conflict, instead of holding another accountable for the situation which have arisen, an individual needs to understand their responsibility towards the outcome and take ownership for it as well. Especially in the cases of emotional reactions, it is of utmost importance that an individual takes responsibility for their perceptions and feelings instead of projecting blame upon the other.

Example: In a workplace setting, when a leader negatively evaluates an employee’s work, they might blame it on their team, which can foster conflict amongst the team. Rather, they can take accountability for their fallacies and effectively communicate with their team. 

ALSO READ: Responsibility vs Accountability: Is Responsibility Enough?

Choose Clarity over Assumption

Since misunderstandings and miscommunication are often causes of interpersonal conflict, it can always be beneficial to opt for clarity. By opting for clarity, conflicts may de-escalate because unexamined assumptions will not arise. Clarity can also help an individual reach a more accurate understanding without judging them for their words or actions.

Example: A simple “ What do you mean?” will allow for clarification of one’s words and help their intent become clearer. 

Use ‘I’ Statements

While conflict management always promotes using sentences that consist of ‘We’, it is vital that once concerns and needs are expressed through ‘I’  statements. A common strategy is to use ‘I’ statements to express how one feels without casting blame. This allows for the communication of personal experience without blame and may even reduce the chances of the other individual becoming defensive.

Example: “I felt hurt when you said that” instead of “You hurt me when you said that.”

Value Impact more than Intent

Often, when dealing with conflicts, individuals can get caught up in the intent of the parties involved. It is in basic human nature to become defensive when one’s intent is questioned, especially since it is a vulnerable moment. However, instead, if the focus were on the impact of the actions and individuals are less likely to feel attacked and vulnerable, making them easier to converse with.

Example: Instead of “It feels like you did this to upset me,” one can opt to say, “I feel upset because of what you did to me.”

Avoiding Absolutist Language

Using absolute terms such as “always,” “never,” and “everyone” during conflict resolution can lead to overgeneralizations. Such language not only triggers defensiveness but also amplifies the conflict itself. Additionally, it tends to overshadow any positive actions the individual may have shown in the past.

Example: Instead of saying, “You always are so rude to me,” one can say, “I felt that you were rude to me at that moment.”

Emotional Cool-Off Periods

Conflicts are not easy to manage and can involve a lot of emotions and underlying politics. Especially in cases where the nature of the conflict is emotionally draining and seeking a resolution is causing fatigue, it is better for all parties involved to pause the conversation and revisit it at a later time. This will not only allow for the emotions to calm down but also give individuals enough time to indulge in reflective thinking and ponder over the situation. 

ALSO READ: How to deal with conflicts in a relationship?

Conclusion

Despite efforts to communicate effectively, miscommunications and conflicts are an inevitable part of human interaction. These misunderstood moments can prove to be an opportunity for growth and a strengthened connection rather than threats to the integrity of any kind of relationship. Conflict management is a necessary skill that all individuals must develop while understanding the detrimental impacts of the blame game. In the battle of conflict management, if an individual can actively listen, show empathy and opt for non-violent communication, more than half the battle is won.

ALSO READ: Mastering Effective Communication: Building Trust and Strong Relationships

FAQs

1. Isn’t it necessary to assign blame to hold people accountable? 

A common misconception is that blame leads to responsibility or is the same. However, it is important to understand that blame is only given in negative situations. While responsibility can be given in both negative and positive situations, which only highlights that blame does not lead to responsibility or accountability. It is not necessary to assign blame because that does not promote growth and repair rather promotes guilt and shame, which can lead to resistance and defensiveness.

2. What should I do if someone keeps blaming me during an argument? 

In situations when an individual continues to blame another during a conflict, one needs to stay grounded and practice emotional regulation. Efforts can also be taken to redirect the conversation towards the impact and away from the intent. It is important to use kinder words and draw boundaries wherever necessary.

3. How can I respond when I feel hurt without blaming the person? 

To effectively communicate your emotions without assigning blame, one must opt to use strategies that can help them. A common strategy is to use “I” statements, which express emotions clearly and respectfully, without making the other person feel attacked. 

4. Why is it important to manage conflict without blame?

It is of utmost importance to manage conflict without blame because blame will trigger a lot of defensiveness, emotional dysregulation, and escalation of the conflict. Rather, opting for open dialogue with mutual respect, which lacks blame and judgement, will help focus efforts towards the resolution of the conflict rather than understanding the factors which led up to the conflict.

References:

 Alicke, M. D. (2000). Culpable control and the psychology of blame. Psychological Bulletin, 126(4), 556–574. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.556

Böhm, G., & Pfister, H. (2015). How people explain their own and others’ behavior: A theory of lay causal explanations. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00139

Blame (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). (2024, August 30). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/blame/

Crockett, E. E., Pollmann, M. M., & Olvera, A. P. (2022). You just don’t get it: The impact of misunderstanding on psychological and physiological health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 39(9), 2847–2868. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221089903

Defense Mechanisms. (2021, October 21). Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/defense-mechanisms

Gupta, S. (2024, January 8). What Is the Blame Game? Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/blame-game-definition-signs-impact-and-prevention-5215208

MSEd, K. C. (2023, July 7). Self-Serving Bias: What It Is, Examples, Negative and Positive Effects. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-self-serving-bias-2795032

Steinhardt, S. (2025, April 30). The power of nonviolent communication – scienceofintelligence.de. scienceofintelligence.de. https://www.scienceofintelligence.de/the-power-of-non-violent-communication/