Listening

Listening to Understand: The Role of High-Quality Listening on Speakers’ Attitude Depolarization During Disagreements

Abstract

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.
Eli Vinokur, Avinoam Yomtovian, Marva Shalev Marom, Guy Itzchakov and Liat Baron
|
Listening
Navigating conflicts is crucial for promoting positive relationships between pupils, teachers, and parents. The objective of this paper is to present Social- Based Learning and Leadership (SBL), an innovative approach to group dynamics and conflict resolution within the school setting, aiming to foster meaningful relationships and personal and social growth. The methods of SBL focus on group evolution by navigating conflicts rooted in higher needs while balancing the interplay of separation and connection. It proactively embeds prosocial values and conduct into the school culture, with teachers prioritizing the wellbeing of others, fostering shared problem-solving, and positive feedback amid conflicts. Teachers acquire tools to transform the classroom into a “social laboratory” and constructmeaningful partnerships with parents. Practical conflict management within the SBL framework involves dynamic group discussions, shifting fromother blaming to accountability, and reflective group introspection. Experiential learning through crafted case studies and role-plays enhances students’ conflict management skills by fostering perspective-taking and inclusiveness.We conducted a qualitative case study in an SBL training in a school from 2020 to 2023. These conflict management processes allow the school community to reimagine conflict as an invaluable educational opportunity, equipping pupils with essential soft skills for navigating the challenges of the 21st century.
Keep reading
Guy Itzchakov, Graham D. Bodie
|
Listening
Listening is widely recognized as essential to human interaction, yet research on it remains conceptually fragmented and theoretically inconsistent. Although extensive evidence shows that good listening benefits emotional, cognitive, motivational, and relational outcomes, the field lacks consensus about what listening is, how it should be defined, and under what conditions it helps or hinders interaction. This article synthesizes these tensions by identifying 10 core “listening puzzles” that reveal contradictions in existing theories and findings: (1) what constitutes good listening and its dimensions such as empathy and non‐judgment; (2) the paradox of distraction and invisible inattention; (3) the relationship between listening and agreement; (4) when listening requires follow‐up action; (5) the benefits and risks of silence; (6) asymmetries between speakers' and listeners' perceptions; (7) the dual role of question‐asking; (8) the role of paraphrasing in demonstrating active engagement and non‐judgmentalness; (9) the balance between speaking and listening; and (10) the link between listening and personality. Together, these puzzles demonstrate that listening is neither a fixed skill nor a uniformly positive behavior, but a context‐dependent, relational process shaped by perception, goals, and situational norms. By mapping these puzzles, the article provides a foundation for a more integrated and nuanced understanding of how listening operates across interpersonal and social contexts.
Keep reading