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.
Listening and perceived responsiveness: Unveiling the significance and exploring crucial research endeavors
Guy Itzchakov and Harry T. Reis
Listening
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.
Keep reading
Feeling torn and fearing rue: Attitude ambivalence and anticipated regret as antecedents of biased information seeking
Guy Itzchakova, Frenk Van Harreveld
Attitudes
Theoretical work on attitudinal ambivalence suggests that anticipated regret may play a role in causing
awareness of contradictions that subsequently induce a feeling of an evaluative conflict. In the present paper we empirically examined how the anticipation of regret relates to the association between the simultaneous pre-
sence of contradictory cognitions and emotions (objective ambivalence), and the evaluative conflict associated with it (subjective ambivalence), in the context of decision-making. Across three studies (Ns = 204,127,244), manipulating both objective ambivalence and regret, we consistently found that when a dichotomous ambiva-
lent choice had to be made, (objectively) ambivalent attitude holders for whom feelings of anticipated regret were made salient reported higher levels of subjective-attitude ambivalence than participants in the other
conditions. Moreover, in Studies 2 and 3 we found that the effect of anticipated regret on subjective ambivalence
had consequences on information processing. Specifically, anticipating regret made ambivalent participants
search for attitude-congruent information. This effect was mediated by the increase in subjective ambivalence. This work provides the first empirical evidence for the role of regret in the association between objective-and-
subjective attitude ambivalence, and its consequences.
Keep reading