Can holding a stick improve listening at work? The effect of Listening Circles on employees’ emotions and cognitions

Abstract Listening and perceived responsiveness evoke a sense of interpersonal connection that benefits individuals and groups and is relevant to almost every field in Psychology, Management, Education, Communication, and Health, to name a few. In this paper, we, researchers who have devoted their careers to studying listening (first author) and perceived responsiveness (second author), address the necessity of integrating the two constructs. Moreover, we offer several questions for future research that we believe are crucial to produce a more profound and comprehensive understanding of this important process. These research questions include empirical issues, cross-cultural and inter-racial interactions, age differences, the emergence of new technologies, and opportunities to bridge political, ethnic, and social divides. By highlighting the undeniable impact of listening and perceived responsiveness on interpersonal connection across diverse domains, we emphasize the need to integrate these constructs in future research. Our proposed set of eight pivotal research questions is intended as a starting point for gaining a deeper and more holistic understanding of this critical study area while building a strong empirical foundation for interventions. By addressing these questions, we can foster meaningful advances that have the potential to bridge gaps, improve relationships, and enhance the well-being of individuals and communities alike.

The effect of feedback and a self-set goal on the relationship between a goal primed in the subconscious and performance were examined in three laboratory experiments and one field experiment (n = 241, 465, 201, 74 respectively), using normative (bogus) and absolute feedback manipulations, and different performance tasks that were coded for both performance quality (i.e. creativity) and quantity. The hypothesis that providing feedback, a moderator in goal-setting theory, amplifies the causal effect of a primed goal on performance was supported. Specifically, in experiment 1, participants were randomly assigned to a 2 (prime of effective vs. ineffective performance) × 3 (positive, negative, no feedback) factorial design. The primed goal for effective performance led to higher performance than the negative primed goal. In addition, feedback, regardless of its sign, increased both task and creative performance when a primed goal for effective performance was presented but did not do so when the goal primed ineffective performance. This effect was replicated in two subsequent laboratory experiments which employed three primed goal conditions (effective/neutral/ineffective). In experiments 2 and 3, a consciously set goal, with no prompting by an experimenter, mediated the relationship between a primed goal and performance when feedback was provided. Experiment 4 provided a conceptual replication in a work setting, involving employees in a customer service department of a large communication company. Finally, a meta-analysis of these four experiments indicated an average effect size of d = 0.36, 95 percent CI [0.23, 0.49] with no evidence of heterogeneity across the four experiments. These findings suggest that not only are subconscious goals a foundation for the difficulty level of consciously set goals but in addition, subconscious goals and conscious goals work together in affecting performance.