Erik Santoro, David E. Broockman, Joshua L. Kalla, Roni Porat
{"title":"Listen for a change? A longitudinal field experiment on listening’s potential to enhance persuasion","authors":"Erik Santoro, David E. Broockman, Joshua L. Kalla, Roni Porat","doi":"10.1073/pnas.2421982122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars and practitioners widely posit that listening to other people enhances efforts to persuade them. Listening may enhance persuasion by promoting cognitive processing, reducing defensiveness, and improving perceptions of the persuader. However, empirical tests of this widely theorized hypothesis are surprisingly scarce. We review the case for and against this hypothesis, arguing previous research has not sufficiently attended to reasons why listening may not enhance persuasion. We test this hypothesis using a preregistered, well-powered field experiment in which trained professional canvassers, acting as confederates, had ∼10 min video conversations with U.S. participants ( <jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 1,485) about unauthorized immigration, a salient topic of disagreement. We independently randomized whether confederates shared a persuasive narrative about an undocumented immigrant and whether they practiced high-quality nonjudgmental listening to participants’ opinions. We measured outcomes immediately after the conversation and again five weeks later. Sharing a persuasive narrative meaningfully and durably reduced prejudice and changed policy attitudes. The listening manipulation also successfully improved perceptions of the persuader and increased processing. Surprisingly, however, the listening manipulation did not enhance persuasion: Sharing a persuasive narrative was just as effective in the absence of high-quality listening. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.","PeriodicalId":20548,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2421982122","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Scholars and practitioners widely posit that listening to other people enhances efforts to persuade them. Listening may enhance persuasion by promoting cognitive processing, reducing defensiveness, and improving perceptions of the persuader. However, empirical tests of this widely theorized hypothesis are surprisingly scarce. We review the case for and against this hypothesis, arguing previous research has not sufficiently attended to reasons why listening may not enhance persuasion. We test this hypothesis using a preregistered, well-powered field experiment in which trained professional canvassers, acting as confederates, had ∼10 min video conversations with U.S. participants ( N = 1,485) about unauthorized immigration, a salient topic of disagreement. We independently randomized whether confederates shared a persuasive narrative about an undocumented immigrant and whether they practiced high-quality nonjudgmental listening to participants’ opinions. We measured outcomes immediately after the conversation and again five weeks later. Sharing a persuasive narrative meaningfully and durably reduced prejudice and changed policy attitudes. The listening manipulation also successfully improved perceptions of the persuader and increased processing. Surprisingly, however, the listening manipulation did not enhance persuasion: Sharing a persuasive narrative was just as effective in the absence of high-quality listening. We discuss theoretical and practical implications.
期刊介绍:
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer-reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), serves as an authoritative source for high-impact, original research across the biological, physical, and social sciences. With a global scope, the journal welcomes submissions from researchers worldwide, making it an inclusive platform for advancing scientific knowledge.