Institutional Affiliation

Nova Southeastern University

Start Date

January 2026

End Date

January 2026

Proposal Type

Presentation

Proposal Format

Virtual

Proposal Description

Discourse Markers in Conflict Management: A Literature Review

Discourse markers, often seen as fillers in conversation, are important for managing interpersonal conflicts. This literature review aims to show how these markers influence conflict dynamics, with implications for promoting peace and strengthening community relationships. By combining research from linguistics, communication studies, and conflict resolution, the review looks at how discourse markers function during three phases of conflict: initiation, escalation, and de-escalation. The authors aim to improve both theoretical understanding and practical approaches to engaging constructively in conflicts, enhancing cohesion within global and local communities through better communication.

Using a qualitative synthesis methodology, this review examines peer-reviewed studies from 2000 to 2025, drawing on materials from fields like linguistics, communication, psychology, and conflict resolution. Data will be gathered through comprehensive searches in databases such as PsycINFO, JSTOR, and Communication & Mass Media Complete. Inclusion criteria will focus on empirical studies that investigate spoken conflicts involving discourse markers, excluding those solely focused on fillers or non-conflictual conversations. Extracted data will be systematically categorized based on marker type, conversational function, conflict phase, and cultural or relational context.

Early findings suggest that mitigating markers (e.g., “I mean,” “kind of”) can help ease conflict escalation, while directive markers (e.g., “so,” abrupt “well”) might increase tension, especially in hierarchical or intercultural interactions. The review will identify existing research gaps and suggest future research directions, including the use of discourse analysis in conflict coaching and mediation practices.

By highlighting the impact of everyday language on the progression of interpersonal conflicts, the authors aim to make significant contributions to peace and conflict studies, interpersonal communication, and human security. Insights from this analysis could lead to the development of more empathetic and effective conflict engagement strategies, grounded in dialogue, respect, and relational peace.

Share

COinS
 
Jan 15th, 1:30 PM Jan 15th, 3:00 PM

Discourse Markers in Conflict Management: A Literature Review

Discourse Markers in Conflict Management: A Literature Review

Discourse markers, often seen as fillers in conversation, are important for managing interpersonal conflicts. This literature review aims to show how these markers influence conflict dynamics, with implications for promoting peace and strengthening community relationships. By combining research from linguistics, communication studies, and conflict resolution, the review looks at how discourse markers function during three phases of conflict: initiation, escalation, and de-escalation. The authors aim to improve both theoretical understanding and practical approaches to engaging constructively in conflicts, enhancing cohesion within global and local communities through better communication.

Using a qualitative synthesis methodology, this review examines peer-reviewed studies from 2000 to 2025, drawing on materials from fields like linguistics, communication, psychology, and conflict resolution. Data will be gathered through comprehensive searches in databases such as PsycINFO, JSTOR, and Communication & Mass Media Complete. Inclusion criteria will focus on empirical studies that investigate spoken conflicts involving discourse markers, excluding those solely focused on fillers or non-conflictual conversations. Extracted data will be systematically categorized based on marker type, conversational function, conflict phase, and cultural or relational context.

Early findings suggest that mitigating markers (e.g., “I mean,” “kind of”) can help ease conflict escalation, while directive markers (e.g., “so,” abrupt “well”) might increase tension, especially in hierarchical or intercultural interactions. The review will identify existing research gaps and suggest future research directions, including the use of discourse analysis in conflict coaching and mediation practices.

By highlighting the impact of everyday language on the progression of interpersonal conflicts, the authors aim to make significant contributions to peace and conflict studies, interpersonal communication, and human security. Insights from this analysis could lead to the development of more empathetic and effective conflict engagement strategies, grounded in dialogue, respect, and relational peace.