IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v13y2025a9871.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Harmony in Political Discourse? The Impact of High-Quality Listening on Speakers’ Perceptions Following Political Conversations

Author

Listed:
  • Guy Itzchakov

    (Department of Human Services, University of Haifa, Israel)

  • Niv Navon

    (Department of Human Services, University of Haifa, Israel)

  • Jarret T. Crawford

    (Department of Psychology, The College of New Jersey, USA)

  • Netta Weinstein

    (Department of Psychology, University of Reading, UK)

  • Kenneth G. DeMarree

    (Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, USA)

Abstract

Conversations with people who hold opposite partisan attitudes can elicit defensiveness, reinforce extreme attitudes, and undermine relationships with those with opposing views. However, this might not be the case when speakers experience high-quality (attentive, understanding, and non-judgmental) listening from their conversation partners. We hypothesized that high-quality listening would increase speakers’ positive views toward, and their willingness to further interact with, others who hold politically opposed attitudes, and that these effects would be mediated by greater state openness. We conducted three experiments using different modalities to manipulate listening. In Study 1 ( N = 379), participants recalled a conversation with an opposing political party member, with listening quality described as high-quality, low-quality, or control. Study 2 ( N = 269) used imagined interactions, with participants reading vignettes describing either high-quality listening or a control condition. In Study 3 (preregistered; N = 741), participants watched a video of a listener modeling high-quality or moderate-quality listening and imagined themselves engaging in a similar interaction. Across studies, we found that high-quality listening consistently increased speakers’ state openness to politically opposed others but did not change political attitudes. We found inconsistent evidence for speakers’ increased willingness to engage in future interactions (meta-analytic effect: = 0.20, p = 0.015). However, we observed a consistent indirect effect of listening on positive attitudes and willingness for future interactions through increased openness.

Suggested Citation

  • Guy Itzchakov & Niv Navon & Jarret T. Crawford & Netta Weinstein & Kenneth G. DeMarree, 2025. "Harmony in Political Discourse? The Impact of High-Quality Listening on Speakers’ Perceptions Following Political Conversations," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v13:y:2025:a:9871
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.9871
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/9871
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.9871?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lilach Nir, 2011. "Disagreement and Opposition in Social Networks: Does Disagreement Discourage Turnout?," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 59(3), pages 674-692, October.
    2. Kalla, Joshua L. & Broockman, David E., 2020. "Reducing Exclusionary Attitudes through Interpersonal Conversation: Evidence from Three Field Experiments," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 410-425, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Geoffrey Henderson & Matto Mildenberger & Leah C. Stokes, 2025. "The effect of environmental voter mobilization on voter turnout and environmental attitudes: evidence from a field experiment in British Columbia, Canada," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 178(6), pages 1-13, June.
    2. Freddi, Eleonora & Potters, Jan & Suetens, Sigrid, 2024. "The effect of brief cooperative contact with ethnic minorities on discrimination," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 64-76.
    3. Dorison, Charles A. & Minson, Julia A., 2022. "You can’t handle the truth! Conflict counterparts over-estimate each other’s feelings of self-threat," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Massoc, Elsa Clara & Lubda, Maximilian, 2022. "Social media, polarization and democracy: A multi-methods analysis of polarized users' interactions on Reddit's r/WallStreetBets," LawFin Working Paper Series 28, Goethe University, Center for Advanced Studies on the Foundations of Law and Finance (LawFin).
    5. Sara Giunti & Andrea Guariso & Mariapia Mendola & Irene Solmone, 2024. "Hacking Anti-Immigration Attitudes and Stereotypes: A Field Experiment in Italian High Schools," Development Working Papers 499, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
    6. Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & Kirchler, Michael & König-Kersting, Christian, 2024. "Financial professionals and climate experts have diverging perspectives on climate action," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122590, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Fang, Ximeng & Heuser, Sven & Stötzer, Lasse S., 2025. "How in-person conversations shape political polarization: Quasi-experimental evidence from a nationwide initiative," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    8. Carcillo, Stéphane & Valfort, Marie-Anne & Vergara Merino, Pedro, 2025. "Combating LGBTphobia in Schools: Evidence from a Field Experiment in France," IZA Discussion Papers 17683, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Divine Q. Agozie & Muesser Nat, 2022. "Do communication content functions drive engagement among interest group audiences? An analysis of organizational communication on Twitter," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    10. Elizabeth A. Sharrow, 2021. "Sports, Transgender Rights and the Bodily Politics of Cisgender Supremacy," Laws, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-29, July.
    11. Jiawei Fu & Donald P. Green, 2025. "Causal Inference for Experiments with Latent Outcomes: Key Results and Their Implications for Design and Analysis," Papers 2505.21909, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    12. Giunti, Sara & Guariso, Andrea & Mendola, Mariapia & Solmone, Irene, 2025. "Hacking Anti-Immigration Attitudes and Stereotypes: A Field Experiment in Italian High Schools," IZA Discussion Papers 17978, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Conroy-Krutz, Jeffrey, 2018. "Media exposure and political participation in a transitional African context," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 224-242.
    14. Florian Foos & Eline A. de Rooij, 2017. "All in the Family: Partisan Disagreement and Electoral Mobilization in Intimate Networks—A Spillover Experiment," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 289-304, April.
    15. Gwen-Jiro Clochard, 2022. "Contact Interventions: A Meta-Analysis," Working Papers 2022-14, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    16. Ximeng Fang & Sven Heuser & Lasse S. Stötzer, 2023. "How In-Person Conversations Shape Political Polarization: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from a Nationwide Initiative," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 270, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    17. Massoc, Elsa & Lubda, Maximilian, 2022. "Social media, polarization and democracy: A multi-methods analysis of polarized users' interactions on Reddit's r/WallStreetBets," SAFE Working Paper Series 337, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v13:y:2025:a:9871. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.