respondents preferred an action- and time-oriented listening style. Significant sex-differences were also evident in listening styles. Females reported a relational, people-oriented style of listening while males reported a more action, content, and time-oriented style of listening. Next, Verret (2000) explored the effect of buyer/seller listening styles on mutual trust, satisfaction, and anticipation of future interactions. Results revealed no significant relationship between listening style similarity and buyer/seller relationship quality. Additional findings indicated a significant positive relationship between people-oriented salespeople and buyer trust, satisfaction, and anticipation of a future interaction. A significant, negative relationship was also found between time-oriented salespeople and buyer trust. Worthington (2001) investigated the influence of listening style preference on juror decision making for the assignment of negligence and damages. Utilizing the case of a failed savings and loan, results show that respondents with a people-oriented listening style tend to find the plaintiffs less a fault, while jurors who are time-oriented listeners tend to award higher damages to the defense.
Finally, there have been two studies looking into listening styles in the educational setting.
Brian & Kafka (1996) explored listener preference as an explanation for differences in traditional and nontraditional students’learning and listening orientationsin thecollegeclassroom.They found that traditional students preferred a people-oriented listening style while nontraditional students
were more likely to utilize an action-oriented style. Watson, Lazarus, & Thomas (1999) conducted a longitudinal study to examine the current preferences and developmental changes in particular listening habits of medical students during their first year of medical education. Results pointed out significant differences between the people orientation and the content and time orientations. As for literature directly related to the current study, no research has been found to explore the relationship between listening style preference and EFL listening proficiency. Thus, it is the aim of the present study to fill in the gap for the research literature on listening style.
METHOD Respondents
Respondents in the current study were 248 freshmen at a university in central Taiwan. They were selected based on cluster sampling. There were 105 male and 143 female students. In terms of respondents’major, they studied in three different colleges, including 87 students in the college of design, 56 in engineering, and 105 in management. Having learned English as a foreign language for about six years in high school, they were approximately EFL learners of low-intermediate level.
Respondents’listening proficiency was based on their scores in a listening test of GEPT (General English Proficiency Test) intermediate level.
Instrumentation
The instruments used in the present study consisted of an EFL listening test, a listening style questionnaire, and an interview survey. The test is a listening test of intermediate level GEPT (General English Proficiency Test), which includes three parts, i.e., picture description, question response, short conversation. Each part consists of 15 items, and the whole test lasts about 30
minutes.Respondents’scoreson thelistening testwereused to designatetheirEFL listening proficiency in the current study.
Another instrument adopted in the study were a questionnaire of listening style which is mainly based on the Listening Style Profile (LSP) designed by Watson, Barker, & Weaver (1995) (see Appendix). The questionnaire contains sixteen items designed to assess four different
approaches to listening and receiving information, which are People, Action, Content, and Time styles. On a five-point scale ranging from “never”to “always”, respondents indicated their perception of how well each statement applies to them. Previous research has demonstrated the following alpha reliabilities for each style: People, .61; Action, .64; Content, .58, and Time, .65 (Watson et al., 1995); People, .60; Action, .62; Content, .64, and Time, .66 (Sargent et al., 1997).
Furthermore, an interview survey was designed to probe respondents’perspectives toward listening style. There were four interview questions, including: (1) Which listening style do you like most or use most often? Why? (2) Which listening style do you like least or use least often? Why?
(3) In your opinion, is there any relationship between listening style and EFL listening proficiency?
(4) In your opinion, is there any relationship between listening styles and EFL listening gender?
Procedures
The present study was conducted during class hours of the freshman required course English Listening & Speaking Practice. Before the experiment began, students were told in detail what they were required to do in the study. The respondents first took the EFL listening test, and then
completed the listening style profile. Finally, to probe respondents’perceptions of listening styles, an individual interview was conducted by the researcher herself with ten respondents randomly selected from the 248 students.
Data Analysis
For the scoring of GEPT listening test, the total scores are 120 points. As for the
questionnaire, the scale range for each item is 1-5. Data analysis involved two stages. First, the correlations between respondents’listening test scores and the four listening style measures were computed. Pearson correlation coefficients were computed across the entire sample. In the second stage, the LSP indices were subjected to analysis of variance. A 2 x 3 factorial design were utilized with subject gender (female, male) and subject major (design, engineering, management) as independent-measure factors. Mean comparisons subsequent to significant univariate effects were computed using the post hoc t-test. Finally, respondents’answersfortheinterview werenot analyzed statistically, but they were transcribed and categorized according to the four listening styles.
RESULTS
Respondents’Responses to the Questionnaire of Listening Styles
In the present study, the questionnaire of listening styles contains sixteen items designed to
assess four different approaches to listening and receiving information, which are People, Action, Content, and Time styles. On a five-point scale ranging from “never”to “always”, respondents indicated their frequencies of how often each statement applies to them. In terms of the four approaches of listening styles, results show that respondents adopted the people-oriented listening styles most often, and next are content-oriented styles, followed by time-oriented styles. They used action-oriented listening styles least often (see Table 1). Moreover, female respondents employed more people-oriented listening styles than male respondents did, while male respondents used more action, content, and time approaches.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of Listening Style Approach on Gender
Male Female Total
Gender
Approach N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD
People 105 3.96 0.56 143 4.05 0.44 248 4.01 0.50 Action 105 3.34 0.72 143 3.31 0.75 248 3.32 0.73 Content 105 3.52 0.69 143 3.49 0.62 248 3.50 0.65 Time 105 3.40 0.64 143 3.30 0.64 248 3.34 0.64
Pearson product-moment correlation was conducted to examine the relationship between participants’listening stylesand theirEFL listening proficiency.Results show that there is a
significant correlation between respondents’people-oriented listening styles and their scores of EFL listening test (r＝0.195, p＜0.01). No significant correlation was found between listening test scores and the other three listening styles.
With regard to the individual listening style, results show that total respondents used most often the people-oriented style “I focus my attention on other persons’feelings when listening to them.”Male respondents adopted most often the people-oriented style “When listening to others, I quickly notice if they are pleased or disappointed.”Besides, the listening style most often employed by female respondents was “I nod my head and/or use eye contact to show interest in what others are saying.”On the other hand, both male and female respondents employed least often the time-oriented style “I begin a discussion by telling others how long I have to meet.”
In terms of respondents’major, Table 2 indicates that respondents in the college of
management used more people-oriented listening styles than respondents of the other two majors.
Furthermore, engineering respondents adopted more action-oriented listening styles than the other two majors, and design respondents employed more content-oriented styles. Results indicate that respondents in the college of design used most often the people-oriented listening style “Ifocusmy attention on otherpersons’feelingswhen listening to them.”Engineering respondents adopted most often the style “When listening to others,Iquickly noticeifthey arepleased ordisappointed.”The listening style most often employed by management respondents was “I nod my head and/or use eye contact to show interest in what others are saying.”In addition, respondents of all majors least often used the time-oriented listening style “Ibegin adiscussion by telling othershow long Ihave
to meet.”
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Listening Style Approach on Major
Besides, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the relationship between respondents’
listening styles and their gender and major. Results show that significant effect was not found for both factors, i.e., gender and major. That is, there are no significant differences in listening styles between male and female respondents and respondents of different majors. However, results of pairwise comparisons also indicate that respondents in the college of management used
significantly more people-oriented listening styles than respondents of engineering did (t=0.84, p=0.027).
Respondents’Perceptions of Listening Styles
In the current study, an interview was held with ten of the respondents in order to probe specifically EFL learners’perceptions of listening styles. Results of the interview were presented based on the four interview questions. First, moststudentspreferthelistening styleof“people.” Theirresponsesincludethefollowing statements:Inoticetheinterlocutors’feeling to seewhether he or she is willing to listen to what I say. I can feel what other people are trying to express from their tone of voice. I emphasize the necessity of eye contact when I converse with other people, which make me feel that you really pay attention on what I am saying. I love to nod when I listen to otherpeople’stalking and Ireally careaboutotherpeople’sfeeling whileIam listening.Iprefer listening to otherpeopleattentively and Ineed otherpeople’sreaction whileIam talking.Itispolite to listen carefully and careabouttheinterlocutor’sfeeling when heorsheistalking to me.
Secondly, halfofstudentsleastoften usethelistening styleof“time.”Theirperceptionsare described in the following: I try to finish my talking as soon as possible when I am in a hurry. I would say sorry if I have no time to listen to what other people talk. I might express that I am in a hurry by looking atmy watch.Ido notliketo hurry otherpeople’stalk.However,somestudents proposed they leastoften use“action”and “content.”They regard action isreally impolite, especially having preconception towardsotherpeople’ssaying orfeeling.Itisnotproperto presupposeotherpeople’spointofview.Also,it’stiring to listen to thecomplicated contentand they try not to listen to the complex information.
Thirdly, most students stated that there is no direct relationship between listening style and EFL listening proficiency.Somesaid that“usualhabits”,“listening contents”ismorerelated to
Design Engineering Management
Major Approach
N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD
People 87 4.05 0.48 56 3.86 0.58 105 4.07 0.44 Action 87 3.35 0.66 56 3.36 0.86 105 3.28 0.73 Content 87 3.55 0.62 56 3.52 0.72 105 3.45 0.63 Time 87 3.36 0.70 56 3.36 0.69 105 3.31 0.57
listening style. Only two students confirmed the positive relationship between listening style and EFL listening proficiency. Listening style is more related to the person who is talking to you. If you are not really care about him or her, you might not listen really attentively and this would influence on your listening style. Listening style is different between English and Chinese. When I listen to English, I would focus on the content. When I listen to Chinese, I would focus on the action.
Listening proficiency is more related to listening content rather than other three styles, people, action, and time. If you do not know what people are saying, you will not use the three listening styles. So, you need to have certain proficiency in order to understand the content.
Finally, six students agreed with the relationship between listening stylesand listeners’gender. Two students thought that there is no difference between listening styles of different gender: one studentsaid itdependson speakers’attitudes;theotheronestudentthoughtthatlistening stylesare more related to personality. Their responses include: a male is more impatient when he listens to a female talk. However, a female often expresses her sympathy and compassion when she is a listener.
When I talk to a female, I would like to listen more attentively. When I talk to a male, I prefer
casualway ofconversation.Unlikefemales,itdoesn’tmatterifIdo notcatch apartofaman’stalk.
I prefer talking indirectly to a female, and talking directly to a male. Comparing with female talk, male talk is more straight and direct. A femalelikesto focuson otherpeople’sfeelings;however,a malepreferstalking thekey points.A femaleprefersthelistening styleof“people”,butamale prefers“content.”
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION
According to Shiffrin & Schneider (1977), most people listen more as a function of habit than conscious choice and typically rely on a single listening style when communicating with others.
Based on the results of questionnaire and interview, the present study proposes that Taiwanese college students adopted the people-oriented listening styles most often. In the study investigating cultural differences in listening style preferences of young adults, Kiewitz & Weaver (1997) found that Germans preferred the action style, Israelis preferred the content style, and Americans preferred people and time styles. It seems that the young people in Taiwan have similar listening style
preferences to those in U.S. Maybe such a similarity can be attributed to the influence of American culture on the Taiwanese society.
Furthermore, the current study suggests that female college students in Taiwan used more people-oriented listening styles while male students used more action, content, and time styles. This result is consistent with the research finding of Johnson et al. (2000), that females reported a
relational, people-oriented style of listening while males reported a more action, content, and time-oriented listening style. As described by Watson et al. (1995), those adopting the people style try to find areas of common interests with others and respond empathetically to them. Sargent, Fitch-Hauser, & Weaver (1997) also indicated that females displayed a unique “everything for everybody”listening style. Moreover, one respondent in the interview mentioned that a female often expresses her sympathy and compassion when she is a listener. As a result, results of previous research as well as the present study seem to support the common stereotype that women are better listeners than men in terms of the attention and concern for their communication partners.
In addition, findings of the study reveal that there is positive relationship between respondents’
people-oriented listening styles and their scores of EFL listening test. That is, Taiwanese college students who employed higher frequency of people listening styles also had higher EFL listening proficiency. Several possible explanations can be provided for this research finding. For instance, the people-oriented listening style is defined by Watson et al. (1995) as the tendency to listen with a concern or awareness for others’feelings and emotions. Sargent, Weaver, & Kiewitz (1997) also found that individuals with the people listening style preferences exhibited low communication apprehension in group, meeting, and interpersonal settings. Moreover, Brian & Kafka (1996) indicated that traditional students were more likely to utilize the people listening style than nontraditional students did, who were at least 25 years old and have been away from formal education for at least three years. In light of the research evidences mentioned above, it may be inferred that EFL learners in the current study who were traditional students, i.e., young college students, tend to use people listening styles. They may probably have better EFL listening
comprehension because they have the habit of paying attention when listening to others. As a matter of fact, concentration has long been regarded as the key element of effective listening
comprehension.
In regard to other findings in the current study, results show that Taiwanese college students with management majors utilized more people-oriented listening styles while engineering-major students used more action listening styles. This finding is similar to Veret’s (2000) that a significant positive relationship was found between people-oriented salespeople and buyer trust, satisfaction, and anticipation of a future interaction. Not to mention, the main concern of management field is human being while the engineering field mainly focuses on machine operation. Furthermore, among the 16 individual listening styles, the study proposed that college students in Taiwan adopted least often the time-oriented style “I begin a discussion by telling others how long I have to meet.”This finding may be related to the Chinese traditional manners that it is considered impolite to tell others in advance how much time you have for listening to them.
Finally, asindicated by Chesebro (1999),theeffectivenessofan individual’scommunication is likely to be influenced by the listening style that person adopts. It seems that there exists some
relationship between listening style and listening comprehension. With regard to L1 listening, considerable research literature has been found to explore the relationship between listening styles and related variables,such asempathy,personality,listeners’gender,conversationalsensitivity, communication apprehension, juror decision making. However, very few studies have been
conducted to examine the listening styles of L2 listeners. Thus, by providing empirical descriptions and evidences of EFL learners’listening style preference in terms of their genders and majors, the present study is expected to contribute to our understanding of the relationship between listening styles and L2 listening proficiency. Moreover, Freshour (1987) proposed that the task to develop a profile of personal listening styles can help people be aware of their listening habits and further improve their listening effectiveness. Thus, the current study can also offer some implications for EFL listening instruction by helping university students in Taiwan understand their listening styles.
EFL teachers can teach their students to develop more people-oriented listening styles, such as noticing the interlocutors’feelings, and showing interests in their words. These people listening
styles are actually effective listening strategies which can facilitate students’performance in EFL listening comprehension.
REFERENCES
Chesebro,J.(1999).“TheRelationship between Listening Styles and Conversational Sensitivity.” Communication Research Reports, 16(3), 233-238.
Freshour,F.(1987).“Listening Effectively.”Streamlined Seminar, 6(2), 1-7.
Furio,B.,& Kafka,J.(1996).“Listening Preferences of Traditional and Nontraditional College Students and Their Relationship to Instruction.”New Jersey Journal of Communication, 4, 99-107.
Johnston,M.,Weaver,J.,Watson,K.,& Baker,L.(2000).“Listening Style: Biological or Psychological Differences?”International Journal of Listening, 14, 32-46.
Kiewitz, C., & Weaver, J. (1997). “Cultural Differences in Listening Style Preference: A
Comparison of Young Adults in Germany, Israel and U.S.”International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 9(3), 233-248.
Pearce, C., Johnson,E.& Barker,R.(2003).“AssessmentoftheListening Styles Inventory.”
Pearce, C., Johnson,E.& Barker,R.(2003).“AssessmentoftheListening Styles Inventory.”