Summary: A large new field experiment finds that high-quality, nonjudgmental listening improves how people feel about a conversation—but does not make persuasive messages more effective. Instead, sharing a vivid personal narrative produced measurable and lasting shifts in views on a contentious immigration policy.
The study shows that empathetic listening reduces defensiveness and improves impressions of the speaker, yet it did not increase the persuasive power of messages. By contrast, compelling personal stories about real people persuaded participants and produced durable attitude change, suggesting that the content of what is said can matter more than the manner in which it is delivered when attempting to change deeply held political beliefs.
Key findings
- Narratives persuade: Sharing a persuasive personal story changed attitudes more effectively than listening alone.
- Listening builds rapport: High-quality, nonjudgmental listening lowered emotional defensiveness and improved participants’ perceptions of the listener.
- Long-term effects: Narrative-driven conversations produced meaningful attitude changes that persisted at follow-up.
Source: Hebrew University of Jerusalem
A multidisciplinary team led by Dr. Roni Porat of Hebrew University of Jerusalem conducted a preregistered, well-powered field experiment to test a common assumption: that listening itself enhances persuasion. Collaborators on the project included Dr. Erik Santoro (Columbia University), Dr. David E. Broockman (University of California), and Dr. Joshua L. Kalla (Yale University). Their results, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, question the idea that listening is a direct amplifier of persuasive messaging.
To evaluate listening’s persuasive potential under realistic conditions, the researchers ran a randomized field experiment with nearly 1,500 U.S. participants. Each participant took part in a roughly 10-minute video conversation with a trained canvasser. Conversations focused on a salient and polarizing topic: in-state tuition eligibility for unauthorized or undocumented immigrants. The design varied two elements independently: whether the canvasser shared a persuasive personal narrative about an undocumented immigrant, and whether the canvasser practiced high-quality, nonjudgmental listening.
Researchers measured participants’ attitudes immediately after the conversation and again five weeks later. The experimental contrast made it possible to isolate the effects of narrative content from the interpersonal style of listening, allowing clear tests of whether listening amplifies persuasion or primarily affects interpersonal impressions and defensiveness.
The results were clear. Conversations that included a persuasive personal narrative produced meaningful reductions in prejudice and shifted policy attitudes. These effects were durable: changes persisted at the five-week follow-up. High-quality listening also had measurable benefits, but of a different kind: it reduced emotional defensiveness and improved how participants viewed the canvasser, and it increased cognitive processing of the conversation. Crucially, however, listening did not enhance the persuasive impact of the narrative. Personal stories were equally effective whether or not they were accompanied by high-quality listening.
These findings challenge a widely held belief in both scholarly and practical circles that skilled listening directly amplifies persuasion. While listening clearly has interpersonal value—improving rapport, lowering defenses, and fostering openness—the study suggests that content matters most when the goal is to change attitudes on deeply held political issues.
For organizers, mediators, and anyone aiming to bridge ideological divides, the implication is practical: invest in telling clear, humanizing personal stories as part of persuasion efforts. Listening remains important for relationship-building and reducing emotional resistance, but it may not substitute for compelling content when the objective is to alter policy positions or deeply rooted beliefs.
About this psychology research news
Author: Roni Porat
Source: Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Contact: Roni Porat – Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News
Original research: Closed access. “Listen for a change? A longitudinal field experiment on listening’s potential to enhance persuasion” by Erik Santoro et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2421982122
Abstract
Listen for a change? A longitudinal field experiment on listening’s potential to enhance persuasion
Scholars and practitioners often argue that listening to someone’s views enhances persuasive outcomes by encouraging deeper thinking, lowering defensiveness, and improving impressions of the persuader. Yet empirical tests of this hypothesis are limited. This study evaluates whether high-quality listening actually boosts persuasion, and under what conditions it does so.
Using a preregistered field experiment, trained canvassers conducted approximately 10-minute video conversations with U.S. participants (N = 1,485) about unauthorized immigration. The design randomized whether the canvassers shared a persuasive narrative about an undocumented immigrant and whether they used high-quality nonjudgmental listening. Outcomes were measured immediately and again five weeks later. Sharing a persuasive narrative meaningfully and durably reduced prejudice and influenced policy attitudes. The listening manipulation improved perceptions of the persuader and increased processing, but it did not enhance the narrative’s persuasive effect. The study discusses the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.