Building Listening Theory: The Validation of the Conversational Listening Span

Abstract

Listening research has not gained legitimacy as a field of study in communication primarily due to the lack of testable theories. Listening research is a challenge, as listening is performed cognitively and perceived behaviorally, but listening cognitions and behaviors are not always congruent (Witkin, 1990). Listening researchers have focused on the observable listening behaviors; however, results from these studies are not reliable due to the incongruency in cognitions and behaviors. Other listening studies have used verbal recall as a listening indicator; however, verbal recall often is undistinguishable from memory. Further, these studies have taken place in a linear context, so they would not be appropriate for use in conversational listening studies.

The first step to developing listening theory is to create an instrument that produces a reliable measure of the cognitive listening process. This study (N = 360), grounded in cognitive psychology's working memory (WM) and capacity theories, demonstrates that the Conversational Listening Span (CLS) instrument can provide a valid measure of one's conversational listening capacity. The CLS represents the first step in building a listening model that is grounded in empirically supported research. This model, with measurable elements, can serve as the foundation for testable listening theories.

Keywords:

• Capacity Theory
• Conversational Listening
• Listening
• Listening Theory
• Working Memory Theory

An earlier version of this article was presented at the Central States Communication Association Annual Conference in Kansas City, Missouri, in April 2005. It received the Top Faculty Paper Award in the Theory Division.

Notes

Note. SD = standard deviation; CLS = conversational listening span

Note. CLS = conversational listening span

∗p < 0.01

Scientifically, the alternate hypothesis must be advanced (Cohen, 1988). However, the author believes there will not be a difference because capacity is a function of WM, which is temporary and distinct from long-term memory.

For further information on the certification, see Janusik, 2004.

This manuscript was accepted by the previous editor, Professor Jim L. Query.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Laura Ann Janusik

Laura A. Janusik (PhD, University of Maryland at College Park) is an assistant professor as well as the McGee Chair of Communication at Rockhurst University.