Nonviolent Communication

Nonviolent Communication (abbreviated NVC, also called Compassionate Communication or Collaborative Communication) is an approach to nonviolent living developed by Marshall Rosenberg beginning in the 1960s.[1][2][3]

Marshall Rosenberg (2005)
Marshall Rosenberg lecturing in a Nonviolent Communication workshop (1990)

NVC is based on the assumption that all human beings have capacity for compassion and empathy and that people only resort to violence or behavior harmful to others when they do not recognize more effective strategies for meeting needs.[4]

NVC theory supposes that all human behavior stems from attempts to meet universal human needs, and that these needs are never in conflict; rather, conflict arises when strategies for meeting needs clash. NVC proposes that people should identify shared needs, which are revealed by the thoughts and feelings surrounding these needs, and then they should collaborate to develop strategies and make requests of each other to meet each other's needs. The goal is interpersonal harmony and learning for future cooperation.[5]

NVC aims to support change on three interconnected levels: within self, between others, and within groups and social systems. NVC is taught as a process of interpersonal communication designed to improve compassionate connection to others. Practitioners also emphasize that it can have many beneficial "side effects" as a spiritual practice, as a set of values, as parenting best practices, as a tool for social change, as a mediation tool, as an educational orientation, and as a worldview.

Applications

NVC has been applied in organizational and business settings,[6][7] in parenting,[8][9][10] in education,[11][12][13][14] in mediation,[15] in psychotherapy,[16] in healthcare,[17] in addressing eating issues,[18] in justice,[19][20][21] and as a basis for a children's book,[22] among other contexts.

Rosenberg related ways he used Nonviolent Communication in peace programs in conflict zones including Rwanda, Burundi, Nigeria, Malaysia, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Colombia, Serbia, Croatia, Ireland, and the Middle East including the disputed West Bank.[23]

History and development

According to a biography of Rosenberg on the Center for Nonviolent Communication (CNVC) website,[24] Nonviolent Communication training evolved from his search for a way to rapidly disseminate peacemaking skills. CNVC says that NVC emerged from work he was doing with civil rights activists in the early 1960s, and that during this period he also mediated between rioting students and college administrators, and worked to peacefully desegregate public schools in long-segregated regions.[24]

A master's thesis by Marion Little (2008) says that the roots of the NVC model developed in the late 1960s, when Rosenberg was working on racial integration in schools and organizations in the Southern United States.[25] The earliest version of the model (observations, feelings, and action-oriented wants) was part of a training manual Rosenberg prepared in 1972. The model had evolved to its present form (observations, feelings, needs and requests) by 1992. The dialog between Rosenberg and NVC colleagues and trainers continued to influence the model, which by the late 2000s put more emphasis on self-empathy as a key to the model's effectiveness. Another shift in emphasis, since 2000, has been the reference to the model as a process. The focus is thus less on the "steps" themselves and more on the practitioner's intentions in speaking ("Is the intent to get others to do what one wants, or to foster more meaningful relationships and mutual satisfaction?") in listening ("Is the intent to prepare for what one has to say, or to extend heartfelt, respectful attentiveness to another?") and the quality of connection experienced with others.[25]

Also according to Little's thesis, Rosenberg's work with Carl Rogers on research to investigate the necessary and sufficient conditions of a therapeutic relationship was central to the development of NVC. Rogers emphasized: 1) experiential learning, 2) "frankness about one's emotional state," 3) the satisfaction of hearing others "in a way that resonates for them," 4) the enriching and encouraging experience of "creative, active, sensitive, accurate, empathic listening," 5) the "deep value of congruence between one's own inner experience, one's conscious awareness, and one's communication," and, subsequently, 6) the enlivening experience of unconditionally receiving love or appreciation and extending the same.[25]

Little says Rosenberg was influenced by Erich Fromm, George Albee, and George Miller to adopt a community focus in his work, moving away from clinical psychological practice. The central ideas influencing this shift by Rosenberg were that: (1) individual mental health depends on the social structure of a community (Fromm), (2) therapists alone are unable to meet the psychological needs of a community (Albee), and (3) knowledge about human behavior will increase if psychology is freely given to the community (Miller).[25]

According to Little, Rosenberg's early work with children with learning disabilities shows his interest in psycholinguistics and the power of language, as well as his emphasis on collaboration. In its initial development, the NVC model re-structured the pupil-teacher relationship to give students greater responsibility for, and decision-making related to, their own learning. The model has evolved over the years to incorporate institutional power relationships (i.e., police-citizen, boss-employee) and informal ones (i.e. man-woman, rich-poor, adult-youth, parent-child). The ultimate aim is to develop societal relationships based on a restorative, "partnership" paradigm and mutual respect, rather than a retributive, fear-based, "domination" paradigm.[25]

Little also says Rosenberg identified Mahatma Gandhi as an inspiration for the NVC model, and that Rosenberg's goal was to develop a practical process for interaction rooted in the philosophy of Ahimsa, which Little translates as "the overflowing love that arises when all ill-will, anger, and hate have subsided from the heart."[25]

Unlike Gandhi, Rosenberg endorses the idea of protective force when physical conflict may prove unavoidable. As long as force is not punitive, the use of protective force is acceptable with the sole intent of protecting life; without passing judgment on the person or behavior.[26]

In order to show the differences between communication styles, Rosenberg started to use two animals. Violent communication was represented by the carnivorous Jackal as a symbol of aggression and especially dominance. The herbivorous Giraffe on the other hand, represented his NVC strategy. The Giraffe was chosen as symbol for NVC as its long neck is supposed to show the clear-sighted speaker, being aware of his fellow speakers' reactions; and because the Giraffe has a large heart, representing the compassionate side of NVC. In his courses he tended to use these animals in order to make the differences in communication clearer to the audience.[27]

Overview
Cards with basic human needs in the hands of exercise group participants.

Nonviolent Communication holds that most conflicts between individuals or groups arise from miscommunication about their human needs, due to coercive or manipulative language that aims to induce fear, guilt, shame, etc. These "violent" modes of communication, when used during a conflict, divert the attention of the participants away from clarifying their needs, their feelings, their perceptions, and their requests, thus perpetuating the conflict.[28]

Marshall Rosenberg, the founder of Nonviolent Communication, published numerous training materials to help in efforts to bring about radical social change.[29] He was concerned with transforming the "gangs and domination structures" through the method he called "ask, ask, ask". He suggested social change activists could focus on gaining access to those in power in order to "ask, ask, ask" for changes that will make life better for all including the powerful.[30] He wrote about the need for the protective use of force, distinguishing it from the punitive use of force.[31]

Assumptions

Two NVC trainers characterize the assumptions underlying NVC as follows:[4]

  1. All human beings share the same needs
  2. Our world offers sufficient resources for meeting everyone's basic needs
  3. All actions are attempts to meet needs
  4. Feelings point to needs being met or unmet
  5. All human beings have the capacity for compassion
  6. Human beings enjoy giving
  7. Human beings meet needs through interdependent relationships
  8. Human beings change
  9. Choice is internal
  10. The most direct path to peace is through self-connection

Intentions

The trainers also say that practicing NVC involves having the following intentions:[4]

  • Open-hearted living
  1. Self-compassion
  2. Expressing from the heart
  3. Receiving with compassion
  4. Prioritizing connection
  5. Moving beyond "right" and "wrong" to using needs-based assessments
  • Choice, responsibility, peace
  1. Taking responsibility for our feelings
  2. Taking responsibility for our actions
  3. Living in peace with unmet needs
  4. Increasing capacity for meeting needs
  5. Increasing capacity for meeting the present moment
  • Sharing power (partnership)
  1. Caring equally for everyone's needs
  2. Using force minimally and to protect rather than to educate, punish, or get what we want without agreement

Communication that blocks compassion

Rosenberg says that certain ways of communicating tend to alienate people from the experience of compassion:[32]:ch.2

  • Moralistic judgments implying wrongness or badness on the part of people who don't act in harmony with our values. Blame, insults, put-downs, labels, criticisms, comparisons, and diagnoses are all said to be forms of judgment. (Moralistic judgments are not to be confused with value judgments as to the qualities we value.) The use of moralistic judgments is characterized as an impersonal way of expressing oneself that does not require one to reveal what is going on inside of oneself. This way of speaking is said to have the result that "Our attention is focused on classifying, analyzing, and determining levels of wrongness rather than on what we and others need and are not getting."
  • Demands that implicitly or explicitly threaten listeners with blame or punishment if they fail to comply.
  • Denial of responsibility via language that obscures awareness of personal responsibility. It is said that we deny responsibility for our actions when we attribute their cause to: vague impersonal forces ("I had to"); our condition, diagnosis, personal or psychological history; the actions of others; the dictates of authority; group pressure; institutional policy, rules, and regulations; gender roles, social roles, or age roles; or uncontrollable impulses.
  • Making comparisons between people.
  • A premise of deserving, that certain actions merit reward while others merit punishment.

Four components
How Observation, Feelings, Needs and Requests are connected in the NVC system

Rosenberg invites NVC practitioners to focus attention on four components:

Observation
The facts (what we are seeing, hearing, or touching) as distinct from our evaluation of meaning and significance. NVC discourages static generalizations. It is said that "When we combine observation with evaluation others are apt to hear criticism and resist what we are saying." Instead, a focus on observations specific to time and context is recommended.[32]:ch.3
Feelings
Emotions or sensations, free of thought and story. These are to be distinguished from thoughts (e.g., "I feel I didn't get a fair deal") and from words colloquially used as feelings but which convey what we think we are (e.g., "inadequate"), how we think others are evaluating us (e.g., "unimportant"), or what we think others are doing to us (e.g., "misunderstood", "ignored"). Feelings are said to reflect whether we are experiencing our needs as met or unmet. Identifying feelings is said to allow us to more easily connect with one another, and "Allowing ourselves to be vulnerable by expressing our feelings can help resolve conflicts."[32]:ch.4
Needs
Universal human needs, as distinct from particular strategies for meeting needs. It is posited that "Everything we do is in service of our needs."[33]
Request
Request for a specific action, free of demand. Requests are distinguished from demands in that one is open to hearing a response of "no" without this triggering an attempt to force the matter. If one makes a request and receives a "no" it is not recommended that one gives up, but that one empathizes with what is preventing the other person from saying "yes," before deciding how to continue the conversation. It is recommended that requests use clear, positive, concrete action language.[32]:ch.6

Modes

There are three primary modes of application of NVC:

  • Self-empathy involves compassionately connecting with what is going on inside us. This may involve, without blame, noticing the thoughts and judgments we are having, noticing our feelings, and most critically, connecting to the needs that are affecting us.[33]:ch.4
  • Receiving empathically, in NVC, involves "connection with what's alive in the other person and what would make life wonderful for them... It's not an understanding of the head where we just mentally understand what another person says... Empathic connection is an understanding of the heart in which we see the beauty in the other person, the divine energy in the other person, the life that's alive in them... It doesn't mean we have to feel the same feelings as the other person. That's sympathy, when we feel sad that another person is upset. It doesn't mean we have the same feelings; it means we are with the other person... If you're mentally trying to understand the other person, you're not present with them."[33]:ch.5 Empathy involves "emptying the mind and listening with our whole being." NVC suggests that however the other person expresses themselves, we focus on listening for the underlying observations, feelings, needs, and requests. It is suggested that it can be useful to reflect a paraphrase of what another person has said, highlighting the NVC components implicit in their message, such as the feelings and needs you guess they may be expressing.[32]:ch.7
  • Expressing honestly, in NVC, is likely to involve expressing an observation, feeling, need, and request. An observation may be omitted if the context of the conversation is clear. A feeling might be omitted if there is sufficient connection already, or the context is one where naming a feeling isn't likely to contribute to connection. It is said that naming a need in addition to a feeling makes it less likely that people will think you are making them responsible for your feeling. Similarly, it is said that making a request in addition to naming a need makes it less likely that people will infer a vague demand that they address your need. The components are thought to work together synergistically. According to NVC trainer Bob Wentworth, "an observation sets the context, feelings support connection and getting out of our heads, needs support connection and identify what is important, and a request clarifies what sort of response you might enjoy. Using these components together minimizes the chances of people getting lost in potentially disconnecting speculation about what you want from them and why."[34]

Research

As of 2008, NVC was said to lack significant "longitudinal analytical research," and few studies had evaluated the effectiveness of NVC training programs.[5][25] There had been little discussion of NVC in academic contexts, and most evidence for the effectiveness of NVC was said to be anecdotal or based on theoretical support. Since that time, the number of publications reporting research on NVC has more than doubled.[35]

Carme Juncadella produced a systematic review of research as of 2013 related to the impact of NVC on the development of empathy. She found 13 studies which met her inclusion criteria (three were published in peer reviewed journals; ten were unpublished theses or researcher reports). Eleven of these suggested an increase in empathy subsequent to the application of NVC (five of these with evidence of statistical significance) and two did not. Juncadella notes several shortcomings of her review. None of the studies she included were randomized and only three used validated instruments. As a result she used a narrative synthesis review format, which, "lacks precision," but allows the summarization of studies of different types, sizes, outcome measures and aims. She suggests the primary limitation of her review is that a number of relevant studies exist that could not be included due to lack of availability. She suggests these might have significantly altered her results. Finally, she includes the following caveat: "I must mention the inevitable subjectivity bias present throughout the whole review. In spite of the efforts made towards 'disciplined subjectivity'... my decisions show a degree of uncertainty and inaccuracy born via the tension between the weak evidence of the studies and my own convictions about the NVC model." Her overall assessment of the current research on NVC's efficacy in promoting the development of empathy is that the results are promising, but "would need to be confirmed with further studies bearing stronger designs and more appropriate measures." She notes that a major shortcoming of the existing research is the "mismatch between the constructs of the model and the validated empathy measures" and suggests that improved instruments need to be developed to adequately test NVC.[36]

As of 2017, fifteen master's theses and doctoral dissertations are known to have tested the model on sample sizes of 108 or smaller and generally have found the model to be effective.[2][25][35][37]

Allan Rohlfs, who first met Rosenberg in 1972 and was a founder of the Center for Nonviolent Communication, in 2011 explained a paucity of academic literature as follows:

Virtually all conflict resolution programs have an academic setting as their foundation and therefore have empirical studies by graduate students assessing their efficacy. NVC is remarkable for its roots. Marshall Rosenberg, Ph.D. (clinical psychology, U of Wisconsin) comes from a full time private practice in clinical psychology and consultation, never an academic post. NVC, his creation, is entirely a grassroots organization and never had until recently any foundation nor grant monies, on the contrary funded 100% from trainings which were offered in public workshops around the world. ... Empirical data is now coming slowly as independent researchers find their own funding to conduct and publish empirical studies with peer review.[38]

Richard Bowers' master's thesis (2012),[39] updated to book form by Bowers and Moffett (2012),[40] asserts that NVC has been absent from academic programs due to a lack of research into the theoretical basis for the model and lack of research on the reliability of positive results. Bowers' thesis meets the first objection through an analysis of existing theories which provide solid support for each element of the NVC (mediation) model. Without this theoretical understanding, it would not be clear what aspects of the NVC model make it work or even if it can be effectively applied by anyone other than Marshall Rosenberg. This theoretical analysis can provide a foundation for further empirical research on the effectiveness and reliability of the model.

Connor and Wentworth examined the impact of 6-months of NVC training and coaching on 23 executives in a Fortune 100 corporation. A variety of benefits were reported, including "conversations and meetings were notably more efficient, with issues being resolved in 50-80 percent less time."[41]

NVC has reportedly been an element of a bundle of interventions that produced dramatic changes in forensic psychiatric nursing settings in which a high level of violence is the norm. NVC was adopted, in combination with other interventions, in an effort to reduce violence. The interventions were said to reduce key violence indicators by 90 percent over a three-year period in a medium security unit,[42] and by around 50 percent in a single year in a maximum security unit.[43]

A 2014 study examined the effects of combined NVC and mindfulness training on 885 male inmates of the Monroe Correctional Complex in Monroe, Washington. The training was found to reduce recidivism from 37% to 21%, and the training was estimated as having saved the state $5 million per year in reduced incarceration costs. The training was found to increase equanimity, decrease anger, and lead to abilities to take responsibility for one's feelings, express empathy, and to make requests without imposing demands.[44]

NVC has also been reported as effective in reducing domestic violence. Male participants who graduated from an NVC-based batterer intervention program in California had zero percent recidivism within 5 years, according to the relevant District Attorneys' offices. The news report contrasted this with a recidivism rate of 40 percent within 5 years as reported by the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project for graduates of their batterer intervention program based on the Duluth Model, said to previously offer the lowest known domestic violence recidivism rate.[45]

Bowers and Moffett[40] provide a thoughtful study of the important role of empathy and human needs in mediation through the development of a theoretical model to explain the effectiveness of NVC mediation. The authors present theories of human needs and the basis for a common core of needs. They discuss theories that explain the importance of understanding human needs in the context of conflict resolution. They clearly distinguish core human needs from interests (strategies) and how focusing on needs is a paradigm shift in the field of conflict resolution. Further, Bowers and Moffett present theories of empathy from the pioneering work of Carl Rogers, Heinz Kohut, and others. Empathy is distinguished from sympathy and active listening, pointing out how the word empathy is often confused in the literature by using it interchangeably with these other two terms. They also examine stage theories of the development of empathy as well as constructive-developmental theories related to empathy.

Some recent research appears to validate the existence of universal human needs.[46][47]

Relationship to spirituality

As Theresa Latini notes, "Rosenberg understands NVC to be a fundamentally spiritual practice."[48] Marshall Rosenberg describes the influence of his spiritual life on the development and practice of NVC:

I think it is important that people see that spirituality is at the base of Nonviolent Communication, and that they learn the mechanics of the process with that in mind. It's really a spiritual practice that I am trying to show as a way of life. Even though we don't mention this, people get seduced by the practice. Even if they practice this as a mechanical technique, they start to experience things between themselves and other people they weren't able to experience before. So eventually they come to the spirituality of the process. They begin to see that it's more than a communication process and realize it's really an attempt to manifest a certain spirituality.[49]

Rosenberg further states that he developed NVC as a way to "get conscious of" what he calls the "Beloved Divine Energy".[49]

Some Christians have found NVC to be complementary to their Christian faith.[48][50][51][52][53] Many people have found Nonviolent Communication to be very complementary to Buddhism, both in theory and in manifesting Buddhist ideals in practice.[54][55][56]

Relationship to other models

Marion Little examines theoretical frameworks related to NVC. The influential interest-based model for conflict resolution, negotiation, and mediation developed by Fisher, Ury, and Patton at the Harvard Negotiation Project and at the Program on Negotiation in the 1980s appears to have some conceptual overlap with NVC, although neither model references the other.[25]:31–35 Little suggests The Gordon Model for Effective Relationships (1970) as a likely precursor to both NVC and interest-based negotiation, based on conceptual similarities, if not any direct evidence of a connection.[25]:35–41 Like Rosenberg, Gordon had worked with Carl Rogers, so the models' similarities may reflect common influences.[25]:35

Suzanne Jones sees a substantive difference between active listening as originated by Gordon and empathic listening as recommended by Rosenberg, insofar as active listening involves a specific step of reflecting what a speaker said to let them know you are listening, whereas empathic listening involves an ongoing process of listening with both heart and mind and being fully present to the other's experience, with an aim of comprehending and empathizing with the needs of the other, the meaning of the experience for that person.[57]

Gert Danielsen and Havva Kök both note an overlap between the premises of NVC and those of Human Needs Theory (HNT), an academic model for understanding the sources of conflict and designing conflict resolution processes, with the idea that "Violence occurs when certain individuals or groups do not see any other way to meet their need, or when they need understanding, respect and consideration for their needs."[58][59][60]

Chapman Flack sees an overlap between what Rosenberg advocates and critical thinking, especially Bertrand Russell's formulation uniting kindness and clear thinking.[61]

Martha Lasley sees similarities with the Focused Conversation Method developed by the Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA), with NVC's observations, feelings, needs, and requests components relating to FCM's objective, reflective, interpretive, and decisional stages.[62][63]

Responses

Several researchers have attempted a thorough evaluation of criticisms and weaknesses of NVC and assessed significant challenges in its application.[36][64][65][66] These span a range of potential problems, from the practical to the theoretical, and include concerns gathered from study participants and researchers.

The difficulty of using NVC as well as the dangers of misuse are common concerns. In addition, Bitschnau[65] and Flack[61] find a paradoxical potential for violence in the use of NVC, occasioned by its unskilled use. Bitschnau further suggests that the use of NVC is unlikely to allow everyone to express their feelings and have their needs met in real life as this would require inordinate time, patience and discipline. Those who are skilled in the use of NVC may become prejudiced against those who are not and prefer to converse only among themselves.

Furthermore, the exclusivity of NVC appears to favor the well-educated, valuing those with more awareness of grammar, word choice, and syntax.[67] This could lead to problems of accessibility for the underprivileged and favoring a higher social class.

NVC also gives the oppressor tools to appear more loving and kind towards someone else, thus granting an oppressor the ability to maintain power over a more victimized party.[68]

Oboth suggests that people might hide their feelings in the process of empathy, subverting the nonviolence of communication.[66]

Though intended to strengthen relationships between loved ones, NVC may lead to the outcome of an ended relationship. We are finite creatures with finite resources, and understanding one another's needs through NVC may teach that the relationship causes too much strain to meet all needs.[69]

The massive investment of time and effort in learning to use NVC has been noted by a number of researchers.[36]

Chapman Flack, in reviewing a training video by Rosenberg, finds the presentation of key ideas "spell-binding" and the anecdotes "humbling and inspiring", notes the "beauty of his work", and his "adroitly doing fine attentive thinking" when interacting with his audience. Yet Flack wonders what to make of aspects of Rosenberg's presentation, such as his apparent "dim view of the place for thinking" and his building on Walter Wink's account of the origins of our way of thinking. To Flack, some elements of what Rosenberg says seem like pat answers at odds with the challenging and complex picture of human nature history, literature, and art offer.[61]

Flack notes a distinction between the "strong sense" of Nonviolent Communication as a virtue that is possible with care and attention, and the "weak sense," a mimicry of this born of ego and haste. The strong sense offers a language to examine one's thinking and actions, support understanding, bring one's best to the community, and honor one's emotions. In the weak sense, one may take the language as rules and use these to score debating points, label others for political gain, or insist that others express themselves in this way. Though concerned that some of what Rosenberg says could lead to the weak sense, Flack sees evidence confirming that Rosenberg understands the strong sense in practice. Rosenberg's work with workshop attendees demonstrates "the real thing." Yet Flack warns that "the temptation of the weak sense will not be absent." As an antidote, Flack advises, "Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others," (also known as the robustness principle) and guard against the "metamorphosis of nonviolent communication into subtle violence done in its name."[61]

Ellen Gorsevski, assessing Rosenberg's book, Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion (1999) in the context of geopolitical rhetoric, states that "the relative strength of the individual is vastly overestimated while the key issue of structural violence is almost completely ignored."[70]

PuddleDancer Press reports that NVC has been endorsed by a variety of public figures.[71]

Sven Hartenstein has created a series of cartoons spoofing NVC.[72]

Reportedly, one of the first acts of Satya Nadella when he became CEO of Microsoft in 2014 was to ask top company executives to read Rosenberg's book, Nonviolent Communication.[73]

Organizations

The Center for Nonviolent Communication (CNVC), founded by Marshall Rosenberg, has trademarked the terms NVC, Nonviolent Communication and Compassionate Communication, among other terms, for clarity and branding purposes.[74]

CNVC certifies trainers who wish to teach NVC in a manner aligned with CNVC's understanding of the NVC process.[75] CNVC also offers trainings by certified trainers.[76]

Some trainings in Nonviolent Communication are offered by trainers sponsored by organizations considered as allied with, but having no formal relationship with, the Center for Nonviolent Communication founded by Marshall Rosenberg.[77][78] Some of these trainings are announced through CNVC.[79] Numerous NVC organizations have sprung up around the world, many with regional focuses.[80][81]

See also

References
  1. "The Center for Collaborative Communication". Retrieved Nov 11, 2011.
  2. Jane Branscomb (2011), Summation Evaluation of a Workshop in Collaborative Communication Archived 2015-09-23 at the Wayback Machine, M.A. Thesis, Rollins School of Public Health of Emory University.
  3. Gates, Bob; Gear, Jane; Wray, Jane (2000). Behavioural Distress: Concepts & Strategies. Bailliere Tindall.
  4. Inbal Kashtan, Miki Kashtan, Key Assumptions and Intentions of NVC, BayNVC.org
  5. Fullerton, Elaine (February 2009). "The development of "Nonviolent Communication" in an early years setting to support conflict resolution and develop an emotional intelligence related to both self and others". Behaviour4Learning. GTC Scotland. Retrieved Sep 22, 2011.
  6. Miyashiro, Marie R. (2011). The Empathy Factor: Your Competitive Advantage for Personal, Team, and Business Success. Puddledancer Press. p. 256. ISBN 978-1-892005-25-0.
  7. Lasater, Ike; Julie Stiles (2010). Words That Work In Business: A Practical Guide to Effective Communication in the Workplace. Puddledancer Press. p. 160. ISBN 978-1-892005-01-4.
  8. Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson (2006). Respectful Parents, Respectful Kids: 7 Keys to Turn Family Conflict into Cooperation. Puddledancer Press. p. 208. ISBN 1-892005-22-0.
  9. Kashtan, Inbal (2004). Parenting From Your Heart: Sharing the Gifts of Compassion, Connection, and Choice. Puddledancer Press. pp. 48. ISBN 1-892005-08-5.
  10. Rosenberg, Marshall B. (2004). Raising Children Compassionately: Parenting the Nonviolent Communication Way. Puddledancer Press. p. 48. ISBN 1-892005-09-3.
  11. Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson (2008). The No-Fault Classroom: Tools to Resolve Conflict & Foster Relationship Intelligence. Puddledancer Press. p. 240. ISBN 978-1-892005-18-2.
  12. Cadden, Catherine Ann (2009). Peaceable Revolution Through Education. Baba Tree. p. 160. ISBN 978-0-9825578-0-8.
  13. Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson (2004). The Compassionate Classroom: Relationship Based Teaching and Learning. Puddledancer Press. p. 208. ISBN 1-892005-06-9.
  14. Rosenberg, Marshall B.; Riane Eisler (2003). Life-Enriching Education: Nonviolent Communication Helps Schools Improve Performance, Reduce Conflict, and Enhance Relationships. Puddledancer Press. p. 192. ISBN 1-892005-05-0.
  15. Larsson, Liv (2011). A Helping Hand, Mediation with Nonviolent Communication. Friare Liv Konsult. p. 258. ISBN 978-91-976672-7-2.
  16. "Open Hearted Therapy: A Year-long Program for Therapists". NVC Academy. Retrieved Nov 30, 2011.
  17. Sears, Melanie (2010). Humanizing Health Care: Creating Cultures of Compassion With Nonviolent Communication. Puddledancer Press. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-892005-26-7.
  18. Haskvitz, Sylvia (2005). Eat by Choice, Not by Habit: Practical Skills for Creating a Healthy Relationship with Your Body and Food. Puddledancer Press. pp. 128. ISBN 1-892005-20-4.
  19. "Freedom Project Seattle". Retrieved 23 April 2016.
  20. "Oregon Prison Project Teaches Empathy, A Key in Lowering Recidivism". Archived from the original on 2012-04-02. Retrieved 2011-09-21.
  21. "BayNVC Restorative Justice Project". Archived from the original on 2012-03-31. Retrieved 2011-09-21.
  22. Allen, J.P.; Marci Winters (2011). Giraffe Juice: The Magic of Making Life Wonderful. www.GiraffeJuice.com. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-615-26393-9. Retrieved Sep 22, 2011.
  23. Rosenberg, Marshall (2001). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion. Encinitas, CA: Puddledancer Press. p. 212.
  24. Our founder's bio, cnvc.org
  25. Little, Marion (2008) Total Honesty/Total Heart: Fostering empathy development and conflict resolution skills. A violence prevention strategy Archived 2014-11-02 at the Wayback Machine. MA Thesis, Dispute Resolution, Victoria, B.C., Canada: University of Victoria, 286.
  26. "The Protective Use of Force - The Natural Child Project". www.naturalchild.org. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  27. "Learning to speak Giraffe - Nonviolent Communication in action". Seed of Peace. 2017-12-01. Retrieved 2019-11-18.
  28. "What is Violent Communication?" (PDF). Heartland Community College. Retrieved 2019-11-18.
  29. Rosenberg, Marshall (2006). The Nonviolent Communication Training Course. Boulder, Colorado: Sounds True, Inc. pp. Disc Eight, "How Nonviolent Communication Supports Social Change". ISBN 1-59179-443-9.
  30. Rosenberg, Marshall (2005). The Heart of Social Change: How You Can Make a Difference in Your World. Encinitas, California: PuddleDancer Press. pp. 10–12. ISBN 978-1-892005-46-5.
  31. Rosenberg, Marshall (August 2002). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion (8th Printing ed.). Encinitas, California: PuddleDancer Press. pp. 155–163. ISBN 1-892005-02-6.
  32. Rosenberg, Marshall (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. Puddledancer Press. ISBN 1-892005-03-4.
  33. Rosenberg, Marshall B. (2005). Speak Peace in a World of Conflict: What You Say Next Will Change Your World. Puddledancer Press. p. 240. ISBN 978-1-892005-17-5.
  34. Wentworth, Bob. "Roles of the Four Components of NVC". capitalnvc.net.
  35. "NVC Research". Center for Nonviolent Communication. Archived from the original on 11 May 2012. Retrieved 21 September 2017.
  36. Juncadella, Carme Mampel (October 2013). "What is the impact of the application of the Nonviolent Communication model on the development of empathy? Overvie" (PDF). MSC in Psychotherapy Studies. Retrieved 16 May 2014.
  37. Nash, A.L. (2007) Case Study of Tekoa Institute: Illustration of Nonviolent Communication Training's Effect on Conflict Resolution Archived 2015-09-23 at the Wayback Machine. MS Sociology. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia: pp.40
  38. "Note on the Origins of NVC". Northwest Compassionate Communication. Retrieved 22 Sep 2017.
  39. Bowers, Richard D. (2012). Toward an Integrated Model: Using Nonviolent Communication in Mediation. MA Thesis, Conflict Analysis and Engagement, Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch University Midwest.
  40. Bowers, Richard; Moffett, Nelle (2012). Empathy in Conflict Intervention: The Key to Successful NVC Mediation. Harmony World Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4776-1460-0.
  41. Connor, J. M.; Wentworth, R. (12–14 July 2012). Training in Collaborative Communication in an Organizational Context: Assessment of Impact. Psychologists for Social Responsibility 30th Anniversary Conference. Washington DC. Retrieved 21 Sep 2017.
  42. Riemer, D.; Corwith, C. (2007). "Application of core strategies: reducing seclusion & restraint use" (PDF). On the Edge. 13 (3): 7–10. Retrieved Mar 19, 2015.
  43. Riemer, D. (2009). "Creating Sanctuary: Reducing Violence in a Maximum Security Forensic Psychiatric Hospital Unit". On the Edge. 15 (1). Retrieved Sep 20, 2011.
  44. Suarez, Alejandra; Dug Y. Lee; Christopher Rowe; Alex Anthony Gomez; Elise Murowchick; Patricia L. Linn (11 February 2014). "Freedom Project: Nonviolent Communication and Mindfulness Training in Prison". SAGE Open. 4 (2014 4): 10. doi:10.1177/2158244013516154.
  45. "Batterers' intervention recidivism rates lowest known to date". Mountain Democrat (Placerville, CA). 30 April 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2014.
  46. The Atlantic, Maslow 2.0: A New and Improved Recipe for Happiness
  47. Tay, Louis; Diener, Ed (2011). "Needs and Subjective Well-Being Around the World" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 101 (2): 354–365. doi:10.1037/a0023779. PMID 21688922. Retrieved Sep 20, 2011.
  48. Latini, Theresa (2009). "Nonviolent Communication: A Humanizing Ecclesial and Educational Practice" (PDF). Journal of Education & Christian Belief. Kuyer's Institute for Christian Teaching and Learning. 13 (1): 19–31. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.614.8339. doi:10.1177/205699710901300104. S2CID 142887493. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 8, 2011. Retrieved January 19, 2011.
  49. "Spiritual Basis of Nonviolent Communication: A Question and Answer Session with Marshall B. Rosenberg, Ph.D". Center for Nonviolent Communication. Retrieved Dec 1, 2011.
  50. Prieto, Jaime L. Jr. (2010). The Joy of Compassionate Connecting: The Way of Christ through Nonviolent Communication. CreateSpace. p. 298. ISBN 978-1-4515-1425-4.
  51. Rohlfs, Allan (Nov 14, 2012). "Beyond anger and blame: How to achieve constructive conflict". The Christian Century. 129 (23). Retrieved 16 May 2014.
  52. van Deusen Hunsinger, Deborah (October 2009). "Practicing Koinonia" (PDF). Theology Today. 66 (3): 346–367. doi:10.1177/004057360906600306. S2CID 220982415. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 April 2012. Retrieved 16 October 2011.
  53. Latini, Theresa F. (May 2007). "Nonviolent Communication and the Image of God". Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought. Retrieved Nov 8, 2011.
  54. Shantigarbha (May 8, 2008). "NVC in the FWBO: Heart-to-Heart Communication". FWBO & TBMSG News.
  55. Little, Jason (January 31, 2009). "Buddhism and Nonviolent Communication". Shambhala Times. Archived from the original on June 25, 2016. Retrieved March 14, 2010.
  56. Lasater, Judith Hanson; Lasater, Ike K. (2009). What We Say Matters: Practicing Nonviolent Communication. Rodmell Press. p. 192. ISBN 978-1-930485-24-2.
  57. Jones, Suzanne (2009) Traditional Education or Partnership Education: Which Educational Approach Might Best Prepare Students for the Future? Archived 2015-09-23 at the Wayback Machine MA Thesis, Communication, San Diego, California. USA. San Diego University: 203.
  58. Danielsen, Gert. "Meeting Human Needs, Preventing Violence: Applying Human Needs Theory to the Conflict in Sri Lanka" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
  59. Havva Kök, "Nonviolent Communication in Political Conflicts" Archived 2012-04-25 at the Wayback Machine, USAK Yearbook of International Politics and Law, Volume 2, (2009). pp. 349–362
  60. Burton, John 1990b. Conflict: Basic Human Needs. New York: St. Martins Press.
  61. Flack, Chapman (September 2006). "The subtle violence of nonviolent language". CrossCurrents. 56 (3). ISSN 0011-1953. Retrieved January 19, 2011.
  62. Lasley, Martha (2005) Difficult Conversations: Authentic Communication Leads to Greater Understanding and Teamwork. Group Facilitation: A Research and Applications Journal, Number 7
  63. Stanfield, R. Brian, ed. (2000). The Art of Focused Conversation: 100 Ways to Access Group Wisdom in the Workplace (ICA series). New Society Publishers. p. 240. ISBN 978-0-86571-416-8.
  64. Altmann, Tobias (2010). Evaluation der Gewaltfreien Kommunikation in Quer- und Längsschnittdaten (PDF) (Unpublished dissertation). University of Leipzig, Institut für Psychologie II. Retrieved 16 May 2014.
  65. Bitschnau, Karoline (2008). Die Sprache der Giraffen. Wie die Gewaltfreie Kommunikation Ihr Leben verändern kann. Paderborn (Junfermann).
  66. Oboth, Monika (2007). "Inspiration und Herausforderung". Spektrum der Mediation. 28: 9–11.
  67. "The Protective Use of Force - The Natural Child Project". www.naturalchild.org. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  68. "Nonviolent Communication can be emotionally violent". Real Social Skills. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  69. Kashtan, Miki (2012-12-07). "Does Nonviolent Communication Work". Psychology Today. Retrieved 2019-11-18.
  70. Gorsevski, Ellen (2004). Peaceful Persuasion: The Geopolitics of Nonviolent Rhetoric. State University of New York Press. pp. 166, 227–228.
  71. "Endorsements of Nonviolent Communication". PuddleDancer Press. Retrieved Nov 30, 2011.
  72. Hartenstein, Sven. "ANVC (Almost Nonviolent Communication)". Retrieved 21 April 2013.
  73. MacCracken, Harry (18 Sep 2017). "Satya Nadella Rewrites Microsoft's Code". Fast Company. Retrieved 25 Sep 2017.
  74. Guidelines for sharing NVC, cnvc.org
  75. Certification, cnvc.org
  76. Nonviolent Communication International Intensive Training, cnvc.org
  77. "Organizations". nvcworld.com. NVC World. Retrieved October 6, 2016.
  78. Organization of the NVC Movement, capitalnvc.net
  79. Training Schedule, cnvc.org
  80. "International Organisations". nvcworld.com. 2011. Retrieved October 19, 2011.
  81. "Find nvc organizations". cnvc.org. 2011. Archived from the original on September 22, 2014. Retrieved October 19, 2011.

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.