Executive function deficits mediate the relationship between employees’ ADHD and job burnout

Disagreements can polarize attitudes when they evoke defensiveness from the conversation partners. When a speaker talks, listeners often think about ways to counterargue. This process often fails to depolarize attitudes and might even backfire (i.e., the Boomerang effect). However, what happens in disagreements if one conversation partner genuinely listens to the other’s perspective? We hypothesized that when conversation partners convey high-quality listening—characterized by attention, understanding, and positive intentions—speakers will feel more socially comfortable and connected to them (i.e., positivity resonance) and reflect on their attitudes in a less defensive manner (i.e., have self-insight). We further hypothesized that this process reduces perceived polarization (perceived attitude change, perceived attitude similarity with the listener) and actual polarization (reduced attitude extremity). Four experiments manipulated poor, moderate, and high-quality listening using a video vignette (Study 1) and live interactions (Studies 2–4). The results consistently supported the research hypotheses and a serial mediation model in which listening influences depolarization through positivity resonance and nondefensive self-reflection. Most of the effects of the listening manipulation on perceived and actual depolarization generalized across indicators of attitude strength, specifically attitude certainty and attitude morality. These findings suggest that high-quality listening can be a valuable tool for bridging attitudinal and ideological divides.

An understudied issue in the goal priming literature is why the same prime can provoke different responses in different people. The current research sheds light on this issue by investigating whether an individual difference variable, core self-evaluations (CSE), accounts for different responses from the same prime. Based on the findings of experiments showing that individuals with high CSE have higher performance after consciously setting a task-related goal than individuals with lower CSE, two hypotheses were tested: (1) Individuals who score high on CSE perform better following a subconsciously primed goal for achievement than do individuals who score low on CSE, and (2) this effect is mediated by a self-set goal. Two laboratory experiments (n = 207, 191) and one field experiment (n = 62) provided support for the hypotheses. These findings suggest that personality variables such as the CSE can provide an explanation for the “many effects of the one prime problem”.