Debra L. Worthington

What Would a Unified Field of Listening Look Like? A Proposal Linking Past Perspectives and Future Endeavors

Most reviews of “listening research” are narrow in scope, focusing only on research published by listening and communication scholars. Given that unique contributions to listening have been provided by scholars from disciplines as varied as psychology, anthropology, management, and linguistics, this review explores connections and divergences that span the academic landscape. After briefly introducing and reviewing listening related research from three primary areas—information processing, competent behavior, and individual differences—we offer a heuristic framework that ties these lines of study together and provides a structure for assessing and generating new listening research. A concluding section suggests lines of future investigation.

Revisiting the Listening Styles Profile (LSP-16): A Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach to Scale Validation and Reliability Estimation

The Listening Styles Profile (LSP-16) was developed to measure an individuals preferred listening style. One frequent criticism of the LSP-16 is the consistently low estimates of internal consistency. The following study addresses this concern using confirmatory factor analysis to assess both the latent constructs of the scale (i.e., People, Content, Action, Time) and the scales reliability. Results suggest that listening style is multidimensional; however, additional scale development is needed to increase subscale reliability estimates. Suggestions for future research and development are provided.

The Listening Styles Profile-Revised (LSP-R): A Scale Revision and Evidence for Validity

The Listening Styles Profile (LSP-16) is the most widely used self-report listening instrument in the communication discipline. Unfortunately, researchers have utilized the instrument despite its uncharacteristically low reliability estimates and unvalidated factor structure. The following manuscript presents results from two studies designed to address these limitations. Study 1 proposes a revised measure (Listening Styles Profile-Revised; LSP-R) based on four factors: relational, analytical, task-oriented, and critical listening. Study 2 was designed to further refine and provide validity evidence for the revised scale. Internal consistency estimates and latent variable test–retest correlations showed the LSP-R to be consistent over repeated administrations; the factors were related to number of listening, information processing, empathy, communication trait, and personality variables. Beyond identifying orientations toward attending to others, the instrument developed here possesses heuristic potential for investigating the role and positive potential of listening within a variety of specific research agendas and theoretical perspectives.

The influence of opening statement/closing argument organizational strategy on juror verdict and damage awards.

This study examines the influence of the organizational strategy used to structure opening statements and closing arguments on presentation effectiveness in a simulated civil trial. Two organizational structures, a narrative and a legal-expository format, were manipulated to produce a 2 (plaintiff organizational strategy) × 3 (defense organizational strategy) experimental design. Results indicate that a mixed organizational strategy (narrative opening/legal-expository closing) is more effective for the plaintiff than a strict narrative strategy, and either a mixed or strict legal-expository organizational strategy is more effective than a strict narrative strategy for the defense.

Exploring the Relationship Between Listening Style and Need for Cognition

To further our understanding of listening as a cognitive process, a greater understanding of the relationship between listening and other personality and cognitive constructs is needed. To that end, this study explores the relationship between need for cognition and listening style preference. Results indicate that need for cognition is moderately associated with the Content listening style such that participants with higher need for cognition scores exhibit a higher preference for content listening.

A Comparison of Four Measurement Models for the Watson-Barker Listening Test (WBLT)-Form C

This article compares 4 measurement models for the Watson–Barker Listening Test (WBLT)–Form C and constitutes the first confirmatory test of this listening comprehension measure. Results show that data does not conform to (a) a 5-factor correlated model, (b) a second-order model, or (c) a unidimensional model; and no model was sufficiently better than (d) the independence model. Exploratory analyses provide additional evidence that items are largely unrelated to one another. Given these findings, the use of the WBLT–Form C in assessments of listening comprehension is not recommended. The discussion explores what these findings imply for the conceptualization and measurement of listening and for potential revisions of the WBLT.

The influence of individual noise sensitivity on mobile phone attitudes and behavior

Research in psychoacoustics and public health reveals that individuals respond differently to noise, with some being more sensitive to noise than others. Given the prevalence of mobile technology and that noise sensitivity appears to be a relatively stable individual difference, it is possible that noise sensitivity may distinguish individual mobile phone use. This study investigates the relationship between noise sensitivity and mobile phone attitudes and behaviors. Study results suggest that noise sensitive bystanders find mobile phone conversations more annoying, that they differ in their assessment of the distraction level of ambient noise when making and receiving calls, are more likely to report mobile phones as distracting, and are more likely to seek privacy from others when receiving a call.

Listening in Mediated Contexts: Introduction to a Special Issue

New communication technologies, applications, and software have fundamentally changed how we communicate. However, listening research and scholarship has not kept pace – conceptually, methodologically, or theoretically – with this emerging area of research. This special issue takes an important step toward addressing the intricacies and complexities associated with mediated listening.