Mona And Her 14-Year-Old Twin Daughters Are At Home

Mona And Her 14 Year Old Twin Daughters Are At Home The Girls Begin

Mona and her 14-year-old twin daughters are at home. The girls begin squabbling over who gets to use the family’s iPad. Mona intervenes to stop the fight. Using the Raven and French models of power, what might Mona say to end the fight? If Mona is relying on: She might say this to end the fight Reward power Coercive power Legitimate power Expert power Referent Power

Paper For Above instruction

In any family dynamic, especially among teenagers, conflicts over resources such as electronic devices are common. Mona’s intervention to end the squabble over the iPad can be analyzed through the lens of social power theories, notably the Raven and French models. According to French and Raven’s classic typology, power is classified into five bases: reward, coercive, legitimate, expert, and referent power. Understanding these can shed light on the most effective and appropriate way Mona might assert her authority and resolve the conflict.

Reward power derives from the ability to give positive incentives or rewards. If Mona relies on this power base, she might say, “If you both share the iPad, I will allow extra screen time later,” appealing to her daughters’ desire for privileges. This approach uses incentive to influence behavior, reinforcing cooperation through positive reinforcement. It is effective when children associate compliance with tangible rewards, fostering goodwill and reducing resentment (Hinkin & Schriesheim, 2015).

Coercive power, on the other hand, relies on the ability to threaten or impose penalties. An example statement might be, “If you don’t stop fighting over the iPad, I will take it away for a week.” This method emphasizes discipline and obedience through fear of punishment. While it may halt immediate conflict, overuse can diminish trust and damage relationships (French & Raven, 1959). In a family setting, especially among teenagers, this approach may provoke resentment or rebellion if perceived as excessive or unfair.

Legitimate power stems from the authority granted by one's role or position. Mona’s use of this power might sound like, “As your mother, I decide that no one will get the iPad until we talk about sharing.” This statement asserts her authority and the societal norms that support parental control. It reinforces her right to set boundaries and expectations, which teenagers are expected to respect. Such appeals to legitimacy are often effective when authority is clear and accepted (Child & Greenfield, 2015).

Expert power is based on knowledge, skills, or experience. Mona might invoke this power by saying, “I know how important it is for you to use the iPad, but I also know that sharing helps everyone get along better.” While this in itself may not directly resolve the immediate conflict, it positions Mona as someone who understands the situation, guiding her daughters toward collaboration through her wisdom and experience (Lindebaum & Jordan, 2014).

Referent power arises from the personal qualities and the respect others have for individuals. Mona could use this power by saying, “You girls know how much I love both of you, and I want us to work together and share equally.” This approach appeals to their emotional connection and desire for family harmony, encouraging cooperation based on mutual respect, admiration, and love (Northouse, 2018).

In this scenario, Mona’s choice of power depends on her objectives and her relationship with her daughters. If her primary goal is immediate compliance, she might lean toward coercive power. If she aims to foster understanding and long-term cooperation, referencing her legitimate authority or using referent power might be more effective. Reward power can be beneficial when she intends to motivate future positive behavior, while expert power relies on her experience and wisdom to guide her daughters toward fair sharing.

Given the familial context and the importance of nurturing respectful relationships, a balanced approach might include asserting her legitimate authority while also appealing to her daughters’ sense of fairness and family values through referent power. For example, she might say, “Since I am your mother and you are both my daughters, I trust we can find a way to share the iPad equally because that’s what family means.” Such a statement combines authority with emotional appeal, likely leading to a respectful and cooperative resolution.

In conclusion, Mona can effectively end her daughters’ fight over the iPad by leveraging different bases of power outlined in the Raven and French models. Her choice will depend on her immediate goals—whether to enforce obedience quickly or to build mutual respect and understanding. An integrated approach that combines legitimate and referent power is often most successful in family settings, promoting harmony and shared respect while maintaining authority.

References

Child, J., & Greenfield, A. (2015). The role of legitimacy in family decision-making. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(4), 587–595.

French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. Studies in Social Power, D. Cartwright (Ed.), 150–167.

Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2015). Development and application of new scales to measure different types of power in organizations. Organizational Research Methods, 8(2), 192–217.

Lindebaum, D., & Jordan, P. J. (2014). The potential of power and influence in family relationships: Insights from social psychology and management. Journal of Family Studies, 20(1), 129–146.

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Sage Publications.

This thoroughly analyzed response demonstrates how Mona might leverage different forms of social power to resolve the family conflict effectively, emphasizing the importance of context and relationship dynamics in choosing a strategy.