Listening

Understanding and Cultivating Effective Listening: A Dialectical Theory of the Tensions Between Intuition and Behavior

Abstract

Abstract High-quality listening is a multifaceted social behavior, and theories and research concerning listening and how to train people to listen are mixed in terms of listening definitions and recommendations. The current study canvassed lay practitioners’ understanding of optimal listening qualities and training, drawing on a wide range of listening training materials (N = 207) sourced from the World Wide Web. Thematic analysis results were critically examined to systematically position praxis against our current understanding of listening theories. Findings are presented as a “dialectical listening theory,” which posits that at its core, listeners’ behaviors often exist in direct tension with their mindset or intuition. Furthermore, we posit that this tension is amplified when individuals are faced with conversations that conflict with their perspectives or values, making learning to listen challenging in practice. We conclude that high-quality listening requires direct recognition and strategic management of these tensions throughout the listening process and make recommendations based on listening and cognitive theories to inform best practice in listening training. Keywords: listening; listening training; active listening; dual-processing
Xiao Chen, Gary P. Latham, Ronald F. Piccolo, Guy Itzchakov
|
Goal Setting
In this rejoinder, we address three issues discussed in the commentaries on our lead article: possible ethical issues in goal priming in organizational settings, whether goal priming is restricted to routine behaviors, and the relationship of goal priming with self-fulling prophecies and an organization’s climate. Finally, our data were examined by an independent researcher who tested for publication bias.
Keep reading
Guy Itzchakov, Moty Amar, Frenk Van Harreveld
|
Attitudes
Purchasing decisions are increasingly based on reviews by fellow consumers which often consist of positive and negative evaluations about the product (i.e. valence- inconsistency). We tested how the vividness of these reviews affects individuals' attitude ambivalence towards the product and their strategies to cope with this ambivalence. We hypothesized that reading vivid and valence-inconsistent reviews would lead to increased awareness of opposing features of attitudes towards the product (i.e. increased simultaneous accessibility) as compared to reading less vivid valence-inconsistent reviews. If this is indeed the case, individuals should feel more conflicted towards the attitude object (i.e. increased subjective ambivalence) and should be motivated to reduce it by using ambivalence-coping strategies, specifically (a) processing additional information that is congruent with their initial attitude and (b) delaying their decision. These hypotheses were mostly supported across five experiments. The experiments included manipulations of valence-inconsistent information between reviews and within a review including three pre- registered studies (Ns = 247, 396, 701, 433, 313, respectively).
Keep reading