Hello, Are You Listening?!

Christoper Gearhart, Sarah K. Maben
{"title":"Hello, Are You Listening?!","authors":"Christoper Gearhart, Sarah K. Maben","doi":"10.58997/smc.v38i1.112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Past research has suggested that organizational listening motives and strategies align with those for interpersonal listening. In this study, researchers examined how stakeholders (n = 299) rated an organizational account’s response – or evidence of listening – to social media posts.  It was expected that responses demonstrating higher levels of active-empathic listening would be rated as more appropriate and effective.  Results provide partial support for this prediction and indicate that situational contingencies can mediate the amount of active-empathic listening a response should provide. The appropriateness of organizational social media accounts using emojis, GIFs, and memes was also investigated, with about equal thirds of respondents saying they were acceptable, neutral, or unacceptable. Instances when it would be considered appropriate were to align with the style of the stakeholder’s message, in response to a positive review, to convey a stronger indication of the message, and when messaging involved friendly or happy content. Implications for organizational social media managers and future directions for research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":243613,"journal":{"name":"Southwestern Mass Communication Journal","volume":"135 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southwestern Mass Communication Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58997/smc.v38i1.112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Past research has suggested that organizational listening motives and strategies align with those for interpersonal listening. In this study, researchers examined how stakeholders (n = 299) rated an organizational account’s response – or evidence of listening – to social media posts.  It was expected that responses demonstrating higher levels of active-empathic listening would be rated as more appropriate and effective.  Results provide partial support for this prediction and indicate that situational contingencies can mediate the amount of active-empathic listening a response should provide. The appropriateness of organizational social media accounts using emojis, GIFs, and memes was also investigated, with about equal thirds of respondents saying they were acceptable, neutral, or unacceptable. Instances when it would be considered appropriate were to align with the style of the stakeholder’s message, in response to a positive review, to convey a stronger indication of the message, and when messaging involved friendly or happy content. Implications for organizational social media managers and future directions for research are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
你好,你在听吗?
过去的研究表明,组织倾听的动机和策略与人际倾听的动机和策略是一致的。在这项研究中,研究人员调查了利益相关者(n = 299)如何评价一个组织账户对社交媒体帖子的回应或倾听的证据。研究人员预计,表现出更高水平的主动共情倾听的反应将被评为更合适和有效。结果为这一预测提供了部分支持,并表明情境偶然性可以调节反应应提供的主动共情倾听的数量。还调查了组织社交媒体账户使用表情符号、动图和表情包的适当性,大约三分之一的受访者表示可以接受、中性或不可接受。适当的情况是与涉众的信息风格保持一致,响应积极的评论,传达更强烈的信息指示,以及当消息传递涉及友好或愉快的内容时。讨论了对组织社交媒体管理者的启示和未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Former President and January 6 U.S Capitol Attack Influences of Media Routines on Fact-Checking: Summer of 45 2020 Presidential Election Vietnam Twiplomacy:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1