Social-based learning and leadership in school: conflict management training for holistic, relational conflict resolution

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.

Drawing on results from 32 published and 20 unpublished laboratory and field experiments, we conducted an enumerative review of the primed goal effects on outcomes of organizational relevance including performance and the need for achievement. The enumerative review suggests that goal-setting theory is as applicable for subconscious goals as it is for consciously set goals. A meta-analysis of 23 studies revealed that priming an achievement goal, relative to a no-prime control condition, significantly improves task/job performance (d = 0.44, k = 34) and the need for achievement (d = 0.69, k = 6). Three moderators of the primed goal effects on the observed outcomes were identified: (1) context-specific vs. a general prime, (2) prime modality (i.e., visual vs. linguistic), and (3) experimental setting (i.e., field vs. laboratory). Significantly stronger primed goal effects were obtained for context-specific primes, visual stimuli, and field experiments. Theoretical and managerial implications of and future directions for goal priming are discussed.