In this project, we examine four dimensions of misunderstanding as a source of conflict. The first is seriousness by which we mean the degree to which an individual believes that a misunderstanding may threaten his or her relationship with the conversational partner. A more serious misunderstanding is more likely to disrupt or even lead to the termination of a relationship than is a less serious misunderstanding. Seriousness may be a function of the importance of the issue surrounding the misunderstanding, the partners’ willingness to resolve the misunderstanding, or the degree to which a misunderstanding is a reflection of differences in worldviews. A second dimension is the frequency of misunderstanding. This is the extent to which an interlocutor perceives that misunderstanding happens on a regular basis with a particular partner. The third factor is conflict management strategy following the misunderstanding, specifically whether the interlocutor and his or her partner used an avoidant, distributive, or integrative approach to manage the misunderstanding. Finally, communication satisfaction is an internal affective response that occurs when a communicator perceives that his or her positive expectations are fulfilled (Hecht, 1978). The communication in the aftermath of a misunderstanding may be associated with more or less communication satisfaction.