Listening and Experiences of Interpersonal Transcendence

References

• Antonucci, T., Akiyama, H., & Takahashi, K. (2004). Attachment and close relationships across the life span. Attachment and Human Development, 4, 353–370. doi:10.1080/1461673042000303136
   Google Scholar
• Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45. doi:10.1177/1073191105283504
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker, R. T., Pearce, C. G., & Johnson, I. W. (1992). An investigation of perceived managerial listening ability. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 6, 438–457. doi:10.1177/1050651992006004003
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 815–824. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter, L. A., & DeGooyer, D. H., Jr. (2001). Perceived aesthetic characteristics of interpersonal conversations. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 1–18. doi:10.1080/10417940109373215
   Google Scholar
• Bernieri, F. J. (2005). The expression of rapport. In V. Manusov (Ed.), The sourcebook of nonverbal measures: Going beyond words (pp. 347–359). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bodenhausen, G. V., & Richeson, J. A. (2010). Prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination. In R. F. Baumeister & E. J. Finkel (Eds.), Advanced social psychology (pp. 535–571). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D. (2011a). The Active Empathic Listening Scale (AELS): Conceptualization and evidence of validity within the interpersonal domain. Communication Quarterly, 59, 277–295. doi:10.1080/01463373.2011.583495
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D. (2011b). The understudied nature of listening in interpersonal communication: Introduction to a special issue. International Journal of Listening, 25, 1–9. doi:10.1080/10904018.2011.536462
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D. (2013). Issues in the measurement of listening. Communication Research Reports, 30, 76–84. doi:10.1080/08824096.2012.733981
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D. (2016). Listening. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.279
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D., & Worthington, D. L. (2010). Revisiting the Listening Styles Profile (LSP-16): A confirmatory factor analytic approach to scale validation and reliability estimation. International Journal of Listening, 24, 69–88. doi:10.1080/10904011003744516
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D., Worthington, D. L., & Gearhart, C. C. (2013). The Listening Styles Profile-Revised (LSP-R): A scale revision and evidence for validity. Communication Quarterly, 61, 72–90. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.720343
   Google Scholar
• Bodie, G. D., Worthington, D. L., Imhof, M., & Cooper, L. O. (2008). What would a unified field of listening look like? A proposal linking past perspectives and future endeavors. International Journal of Listening, 22, 103–122. doi:10.1080/10904010802174867
   Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carstensen, L. L. (1995). Evidence for life-span theory of socioemotional selectivity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 4, 151–156. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carstensen, L. L., Fung, H. H., & Charles, S. T. (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 103–123. doi:10.1023/A:1024569803230
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casler, K., Bickel, L., & Hackett, E. (2013). Separate but equal? A comparison of participants and data gathered via Amazon’s MTurk, social media, and face-to-face behavioral testing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2156–2160. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csikeszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Csikeszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
   Google Scholar
• Drollinger, T., Comer, L. B., & Warrington, P. T. (2006). Development and validation of the active empathic listening scale. Psychology & Marketing, 23, 161–180. doi:10.1002/mar.20105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erskine, R. G. (1998). Attunement and involvement: Therapeutic responses to relational needs. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 3, 235–244.
   Google Scholar
• Fresco, D. M., Moore, M. T., Van Dulmen, M. H. M., Segal, Z. V., Ma, S. H., Teasdale, J. D., & Williams, J. M. G. (2007). Initial psychometric properties of the Experiences Questionnaire: Validation of a self-report measure of decentering. Behavior Therapy, 38, 234–246. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2006.08.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, R. D. (1985). Dimensions of peak communication experiences: An exploratory study. Psychological Reports, 57, 824–826. doi:10.2466/pr0.1985.57.3.824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, J. O. (1997). A second generation action assembly theory. In J. O. Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 151–170). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, J. O. (2000). Evanescent mentation: An ameliorative conceptual foundation for research and theory on message production. Communication Theory, 10, 139–155. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00184.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, J. O., & Herbers, L. E. (2011). Conditions of interpersonal transcendence. International Journal of Listening, 25, 66–84. doi:10.1080/10904018.2011.536472
   Google Scholar
• Herbers, L. E., & Greene, J. O. (2010, November). Conversations that “click”: The experience of connection and rapport in interpersonal interactions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Imhoff, M., & Janusik, L. A. (2006). Development and validation of the Imhof-Janusik Listening Concepts Inventory to measure listening conceptualization differences between cultures. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 35, 79–85. doi:10.1080/17475750600909246
   Google Scholar
• Keaton, S. A. (2017). Active-empathic listening scale. In D. L. Worthington & G. D. Bodie (Eds.), The sourcebook of listening research: Methodology and measures (pp. 161–166). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Keaton, S. A., Bodie, G. D., & Keteyian, R. V. (2015). Relational listening goals influence how people report talking about problems. Communication Quarterly, 63, 480–494. doi:10.1080/01463373.2015.1062407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K.-T. (1996). Assessing goodness of fit. Journal of Experimental Education, 64, 364–390. doi:10.1080/00220973.1996.10806604
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNallie, J., Gettings, P. E., & Greene, J. O. (2018, May). Exploring interpersonal transcendence: Conceptual foundations, scale development, and application across five samples. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Prague, Czech Republic.
   Google Scholar
• Norrick, N. R. (2003). Issues in conversational joking. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 1333–1359. doi:10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00180-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oring, E. (2011). Parsing the joke: The general theory of verbal humor and appropriate incongruity. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 24, 203–222. doi:10.1515/HUMR.2011.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce, C. G., Johnson, I. W., & Barker, R. T. (2003). Assessment of the Listening Styles Inventory: Progress in establishing reliability and validity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 17, 84–113. doi:10.1177/1050651902238546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouse, S. V. (2015). A reliability analysis of Mechanical Turk data. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 304. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tickle-Degnen, L. (2006). Nonverbal behavior and its functions in the ecosystem of rapport. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 381–399). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Tickle-Degnen, L., & Rosenthal, R. (1990). The nature of rapport and its nonverbal correlates. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 285–293. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0104_1
   Google Scholar
• Watson, K. W., Barker, L. L., & Weaver, J. B., III. (1995). The Listening Styles Profile (LSP-16): Development and validation of an instrument to assess four listening styles. International Journal of Listening, 9, 1–13. doi:10.1080/10904018.1995.10499138
   Google Scholar
• Williams, K. D. (2009). Ostracism: A temporal need-threat model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 275–314. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00406-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolvin, A. D., Coakley, C. G., & Halone, K. K. (1995). A preliminary look at listening development across the life-span. International Journal of Listening, 9, 62–83. doi:10.1080/10904018.1995.10499142
   Google Scholar