The Active-Empathic Listening Scale (AELS): Conceptualization and Evidence of Validity Within the Interpersonal Domain

Abstract

Although several theoretical perspectives highlight the importance of listening, our field has largely neglected developing valid listening measures. The purpose of this article is to provide a conceptualization and measurement of one type of listening important to relational and individual well-being: active-empathic listening. Results from two studies provide evidence of construct validity of a self- and other-report version of the Active-Empathic Listening Scale. The discussion focuses on directions for future research using this scale and for the need to develop additional measures that tap components of listening.

Keywords:

• Active Listening
• Cognition
• Communication Competence
• Information Processing
• Scale Development

Notes

Note. The first number represents data from Study 1, and the second number represents data from Study 2.

Note. Mean is not a whole number because of data imputation. When the mean was calculated on the non-imputed data, the range for the responding subscale was 2 to 7. AELS = Active-Empathic Listening Scale; S = sensing; P = processing; R = responding; II = interaction involvement; CS = conversational sensitivity.

*p < .01. **p < .001. ***p < .05.

Note. AELS = Active-Empathic Listening Scale; CA = conversational appropriateness; CE = conversational effectiveness; NVI = nonverbal immediacy.

*p < .01. **p < .001. ***p < .05.

Note. DV = discriminant validity; CA = conversational appropriateness; CE = conversational effectiveness; AELS = Active-Empathic Listening Scale; NVI = nonverbal immediacy.

It is important here that the studies contained in this article seek to provide validity evidence and not to establish validity, per se (Carmines & Zeller, 1979; Cronbach, 1971).

These data are not reported due to space considerations, but all relevant analyses are available from the author upon request.

The Active-Empathic Listening Scale–Other-Report (AELS–OR) total score was kept out of the model due to concerns of matrix singularity caused by multicolinearity. A separate discriminant function analysis was run with the AELS–OR total score in place of the three subscales. This analysis produced equivalent multivariate results—Λ = .406, χ²(4, N = 217) = 192.13, p < .001—and suggested that conversational effectiveness and the AELS–OR total score contributed unique variance to discrimination among groups, whereas conversational appropriateness (.023) and nonverbal immediacy (−.003) did not. Moreover, the AELS total score had a standardized canonical discriminant function coefficient nearly two times that of the coefficient for conversational effectiveness (.736 vs. .389) suggesting, as expected, that active-empathetic listening better discriminates among good and bad listeners than conversational effectiveness. The classification analysis using the AELS total score mirrored that obtained using the subscales.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Graham D. Bodie

Graham D. Bodie (Ph.D., Purdue University, 2008) is Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication Studies at Louisiana State University.