Can high quality listening predict lower speakers' prejudiced attitudes?
Abstract
Theorizing from humanistic and motivational literature suggests attitude change may occur because high-quality listening facilitates the insight needed to explore and integrate potentially threatening information relevant to the self. By extension, self-insight may enable attitude change as a result of conversations about prejudice. We tested whether high-quality listening would predict attitudes related to speakers' prejudices and whether self-insight would mediate this effect. Study 1 (preregistered) examined scripted conversations characterized by high, regular, and poor listening quality. In Study 2, we manipulated high versus regular listening quality in the laboratory as speakers talked about their prejudiced attitudes. Finally, Study 3 (preregistered) used a more robust measure of prejudiced attitudes to testing whether perceived social acceptance could be an alternative explanation to Study 2 findings. Across these studies, the exploratory (pilot study and Study 2) and confirmatory (Studies 1 & 3) findings were in line with expectations that high, versus regular and poor, quality listening facilitated lower prejudiced attitudes because it increased self-insight. A meta-analysis of the studies (N = 952) showed that the average effect sizes for high-quality listening (vs. comparison conditions) on self-insight, openness to change and prejudiced attitudes were, ds = 1.19, 0.46, 0.32 95%CIs [0.73, 1.51], [0.29, 0.63] [0.12, 0.53], respectively. These results suggest that when having conversations about prejudice, high-quality listening modestly shapes prejudice following conversations about it, and underscores the importance of self-insight and openness to change in this process.
Sowing the seeds of love: Cultivating perceptions of culture of companionate love through listening and its effects on organizational outcomes
Guy Itzchakov | Sigal Barsade | Arik Cheshin
Organizational Behavior and Social Psychology
Fostering a culture of companionate love in the workplace
offers numerous benefits for employees, yet the
methods for achieving this remain unclear. We propose
that high-quality listening, characterized by undivided
attention, understanding, and a positive and nonjudgmental
intention toward the speaker, could be a
key facilitator. We hypothesized that such listening
could enhance employees' perceptions of companionate
love. Additionally, we hypothesized that an enhanced
perception of companionate love would increase
employees' subjective well-being, resilience, affective
commitment, and willingness to cooperate at work. To
examine these hypotheses, we conducted four studies.
Study 1 was a preregistered and highly-powered field
study (N = 752) involving employees from various
organizations. Study 2 (N = 37), was a longitudinal
research that included a listening training of 16 hours
for teachers in a single school. Study 3 was a quasi-field
experiment within a risk-management company, with
employees receiving 12 hours of listening education
while a waitlist served as a control group (N = 67).
Study 4 was a quasi-experiment that served as a conceptual
replication and extension of Studies 2 and
3. The study involved listening training for employees
in a global communications company, providing
14 hours of online listening training. An active control
group (N = 60) was included. Across all studies, we
found that feeling listened to by colleagues led to
increased perceptions of companionate love in the
organization, which, in turn, increased employees' subjective
well-being, resilience, affective organizational
commitment, and willingness to collaborate. Theoretical
and practical implications are discussed.
Keep reading
Don't let the facts ruin a good story: The effect of vivid reviews on attitude ambivalence and its coping mechanisms
Guy Itzchakov, Moty Amar, Frenk Van Harreveld
Attitudes
Purchasing decisions are increasingly based on reviews by fellow consumers which often consist of positive and negative evaluations about the product (i.e. valence-
inconsistency). We tested how the vividness of these reviews affects individuals' attitude ambivalence towards the product and their strategies to cope with this ambivalence. We hypothesized that reading vivid and valence-inconsistent reviews would lead to increased awareness of opposing features of attitudes towards the
product (i.e. increased simultaneous accessibility) as compared to reading less vivid valence-inconsistent reviews. If this is indeed the case, individuals should feel
more conflicted towards the attitude object (i.e. increased subjective ambivalence) and should be motivated to reduce it by using ambivalence-coping strategies,
specifically (a) processing additional information that is congruent with their initial attitude and (b) delaying their decision. These hypotheses were mostly supported across five experiments. The experiments included manipulations of valence-inconsistent information between reviews and within a review including three pre-
registered studies (Ns = 247, 396, 701, 433, 313, respectively).
Keep reading