WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.727 Hi everyone, and welcome back to COMM 1035: Listening. 00:00:04.727 --> 00:00:10.727 I’m thrilled you’re here for Unit 3, because this is where we shift from the “what” of 00:00:10.727 --> 00:00:13.878 listening to the “why” and “how.” 00:00:13.878 --> 00:00:19.878 In Units 1 and 2, we explored the listening process, the role of attention, and the barriers 00:00:19.878 --> 00:00:21.979 that interfere with understanding. 00:00:21.979 --> 00:00:27.979 Now, in Unit 3, we step into the world of theories and principles—the academic models 00:00:27.979 --> 00:00:33.979 scholars use to explain stages, behaviors, and the more complex cognitive processes of 00:00:33.979 --> 00:00:35.555 listening. 00:00:35.555 --> 00:00:38.706 Our main goal in this unit: 00:00:38.706 --> 00:00:44.706 Analyze and evaluate key theories and concepts that contribute to effective listening. 00:00:44.706 --> 00:00:50.706 By the end of this unit, you won’t just practice listening—you’ll be able to explain and 00:00:50.706 --> 00:00:54.382 analyze how listening works using theoretical frameworks. 00:00:54.382 --> 00:00:55.958 [Why Theories Matter] 00:00:55.958 --> 00:00:58.059 Listening theories help us: 00:00:58.059 --> 00:01:00.160 Break down complex moments 00:01:00.160 --> 00:01:02.260 Understand why misunderstandings occur 00:01:02.260 --> 00:01:06.462 See how cognition, emotion, behavior, and context interact 00:01:06.462 --> 00:01:10.664 Evaluate what “went wrong” and how to improve 00:01:10.664 --> 00:01:16.664 The Foundations of Listening Theory When Did Listening Become an Academic Discipline? 00:01:16.664 --> 00:01:22.664 Alright — before we dive into models and frameworks, let’s zoom out for a minute. 00:01:22.664 --> 00:01:28.664 Have you ever noticed that in school we’re taught how to read, write, and speak… but almost 00:01:28.664 --> 00:01:30.765 never how to listen? 00:01:30.765 --> 00:01:32.865 That’s not accidental. 00:01:32.865 --> 00:01:38.865 For most of history, listening wasn’t treated as a separate academic discipline. 00:01:38.865 --> 00:01:44.865 It was assumed to be automatic — something you either did well or didn’t. 00:01:44.865 --> 00:01:50.117 But that assumption started to change in the 20th century. 00:01:50.117 --> 00:01:53.794 Early Roots: Before Listening Was a Field 00:01:53.794 --> 00:01:59.046 In ancient rhetoric — think Aristotle and classical education — communication focused 00:01:59.046 --> 00:02:00.622 heavily on speaking. 00:02:00.622 --> 00:02:02.197 Persuasion. Argument. Delivery. 00:02:02.197 --> 00:02:05.348 Listening was implied, but not analyzed. 00:02:05.348 --> 00:02:11.348 Fast forward to the early 1900s, and speech communication programs were emerging in 00:02:11.348 --> 00:02:12.924 universities. 00:02:12.924 --> 00:02:17.651 But even then, listening wasn’t a major focus. 00:02:17.651 --> 00:02:22.378 The emphasis was still on public speaking and rhetoric. 00:02:22.378 --> 00:02:28.378 It wasn’t until mid-century that scholars began asking a simple but powerful question: 00:02:28.378 --> 00:02:34.378 If communication is transactional… shouldn’t we study the receiver just as much as the 00:02:34.378 --> 00:02:35.953 sender? 00:02:35.953 --> 00:02:40.155 That shift laid the groundwork for listening research. 00:02:40.155 --> 00:02:43.832 The 1950s–1970s: Listening Gains Academic Attention 00:02:43.832 --> 00:02:49.084 Listening began to gain serious academic attention in the 1950s. 00:02:49.084 --> 00:02:50.659 Why then? 00:02:50.659 --> 00:02:52.235 Two major reasons: 00:02:52.235 --> 00:02:55.386 The rise of interpersonal communication research 00:02:55.386 --> 00:02:57.487 Organizational and workplace studies 00:02:57.487 --> 00:03:03.487 Researchers began to notice that breakdowns in communication weren’t always about poor 00:03:03.487 --> 00:03:07.163 speaking — they were often about poor listening. 00:03:07.163 --> 00:03:12.415 By the 1960s and 1970s, scholars started treating listening as: 00:03:12.415 --> 00:03:13.991 A cognitive process 00:03:13.991 --> 00:03:15.567 A measurable skill 00:03:15.567 --> 00:03:18.718 A behavior that could be improved 00:03:18.718 --> 00:03:21.344 This was a major shift. 00:03:21.344 --> 00:03:25.546 Listening was no longer passive. It was active. 00:03:25.546 --> 00:03:30.272 It was something you could study, assess, and teach. 00:03:30.272 --> 00:03:33.949 The 1980s: Listening Becomes Its Own Subfield 00:03:33.949 --> 00:03:37.100 The 1980s were a turning point. 00:03:37.100 --> 00:03:43.100 This is when listening began to solidify as a recognized area within communication studies. 00:03:43.100 --> 00:03:49.100 Scholars like Judi Brownell and others began developing structured models — like HURIER — 00:03:49.100 --> 00:03:52.777 that broke listening into stages and competencies. 00:03:52.777 --> 00:03:56.453 Listening research during this time focused on: 00:03:56.453 --> 00:03:58.029 Cognitive processing 00:03:58.029 --> 00:03:59.604 Listening styles 00:03:59.604 --> 00:04:01.180 Workplace listening 00:04:01.180 --> 00:04:02.756 Educational listening 00:04:02.756 --> 00:04:04.331 Critical listening 00:04:04.331 --> 00:04:10.108 Professional organizations also emerged to support research and teaching in listening. 00:04:10.108 --> 00:04:16.108 At this point, listening was no longer an afterthought. It was a field. 00:04:16.108 --> 00:04:20.310 Expanding the Field: Emotion, Empathy, and Relational Listening 00:04:20.310 --> 00:04:25.562 In the 1990s and early 2000s, listening theory expanded again. 00:04:25.562 --> 00:04:29.764 Earlier research emphasized cognitive steps — hearing, understanding, remembering. 00:04:29.764 --> 00:04:32.390 But newer scholarship began exploring: 00:04:32.390 --> 00:04:33.966 Empathic listening 00:04:33.966 --> 00:04:35.541 Emotional intelligence 00:04:35.541 --> 00:04:37.117 Relational dynamics 00:04:37.117 --> 00:04:38.692 Cultural listening differences 00:04:38.692 --> 00:04:40.268 Identity and power 00:04:40.268 --> 00:04:44.470 Listening was no longer just about processing information. 00:04:44.470 --> 00:04:46.570 It was about connection. 00:04:46.570 --> 00:04:48.146 Researchers began asking: 00:04:48.146 --> 00:04:52.873 What makes someone feel heard? What creates psychological safety? 00:04:52.873 --> 00:04:55.499 How does listening impact trust? 00:04:55.499 --> 00:05:01.276 This shift moved the field beyond skill performance into relational meaning. 00:05:01.276 --> 00:05:02.852 Modern Listening Research 00:05:02.852 --> 00:05:06.528 Today, listening theory draws from multiple disciplines: 00:05:06.528 --> 00:05:08.104 Communication studies 00:05:08.104 --> 00:05:09.680 Psychology 00:05:09.680 --> 00:05:11.255 Neuroscience 00:05:11.255 --> 00:05:12.831 Organizational leadership 00:05:12.831 --> 00:05:14.406 Conflict resolution 00:05:14.406 --> 00:05:15.982 Counseling 00:05:15.982 --> 00:05:17.558 Modern research explores: 00:05:17.558 --> 00:05:19.659 Listening and mental health 00:05:19.659 --> 00:05:21.759 Listening and leadership effectiveness 00:05:21.759 --> 00:05:23.860 Listening in intercultural contexts 00:05:23.860 --> 00:05:25.961 Digital and mediated listening 00:05:25.961 --> 00:05:28.062 The neuroscience of empathy 00:05:28.062 --> 00:05:33.314 In other words, listening is now seen as foundational to: 00:05:33.314 --> 00:05:34.890 Relationship quality 00:05:34.890 --> 00:05:36.465 Workplace performance 00:05:36.465 --> 00:05:38.041 Conflict management 00:05:38.041 --> 00:05:39.616 Leadership credibility 00:05:39.616 --> 00:05:42.768 It is not a “soft skill.” 00:05:42.768 --> 00:05:45.919 It is a central communication competency. 00:05:45.919 --> 00:05:48.020 Why This History Matters 00:05:48.020 --> 00:05:51.171 Here’s why this overview matters. 00:05:51.171 --> 00:05:57.171 If listening wasn’t historically emphasized, that explains why many people were never taught 00:05:57.171 --> 00:05:59.797 how to do it well. 00:05:59.797 --> 00:06:05.797 And if listening only became a formal academic focus in the last 60–70 years, that means the 00:06:05.797 --> 00:06:07.898 field is still evolving. 00:06:07.898 --> 00:06:13.675 We are studying something deeply human — and still discovering new layers. 00:06:13.675 --> 00:06:15.251 Big Takeaway 00:06:15.251 --> 00:06:19.452 Listening began as an overlooked component of rhetoric. 00:06:19.452 --> 00:06:25.452 It evolved into a cognitive skill studied in the mid-20th century. 00:06:25.452 --> 00:06:29.654 It became a structured subfield in the 1980s. 00:06:29.654 --> 00:06:34.906 And today, it integrates cognitive, emotional, relational, and cultural perspectives. 00:06:34.906 --> 00:06:37.007 Listening is not automatic. 00:06:37.007 --> 00:06:40.158 It is complex. It is layered. 00:06:40.158 --> 00:06:46.158 And it is one of the most powerful forces shaping human relationships. 00:06:46.158 --> 00:06:49.835 🎧 Before We Begin: A Realistic Listening Scenario 00:06:49.835 --> 00:06:55.835 Before we dive into theories, let’s create a scenario we’ll return to throughout the 00:06:55.835 --> 00:06:57.410 lecture: 00:06:57.410 --> 00:06:58.986 The Scenario: 00:06:58.986 --> 00:07:04.986 You and a coworker, Maya, are discussing a group project. She says: 00:07:04.986 --> 00:07:10.986 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:07:10.986 --> 00:07:14.662 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:07:14.662 --> 00:07:20.662 You weren’t expecting this. You feel defensive. You thought you were contributing. 00:07:20.662 --> 00:07:26.662 You’re also tired from a long day. Your mind starts racing: Is she blaming me? 00:07:26.662 --> 00:07:28.763 Did I miss something? 00:07:28.763 --> 00:07:34.763 This moment is emotionally loaded, ambiguous, evaluative, and relational—exactly the kind of 00:07:34.763 --> 00:07:37.389 conversation where listening theories help. 00:07:37.389 --> 00:07:43.389 We’ll apply each theory to this same scenario, so by the end, you’ll see how each one 00:07:43.389 --> 00:07:47.066 illuminates different parts of the listening process. 00:07:47.066 --> 00:07:52.318 [The HURIER Model: A Step-by-Step View of Listening] 00:07:52.318 --> 00:07:58.318 Before we dive in, let’s talk about where this model comes from. 00:07:58.318 --> 00:08:04.318 The HURIER Model was developed by communication scholar Judi Brownell in the 1980s. 00:08:04.318 --> 00:08:10.318 She created it to help explain listening as a learnable, skill-based process, especially in 00:08:10.318 --> 00:08:12.419 professional and organizational settings. 00:08:12.419 --> 00:08:18.419 At the time, listening was often treated as something passive—either you were “a good 00:08:18.419 --> 00:08:21.045 listener” or you weren’t. 00:08:21.045 --> 00:08:23.145 Brownell challenged that idea. 00:08:23.145 --> 00:08:29.145 She argued that listening is a structured, sequential process that can be improved with 00:08:29.145 --> 00:08:30.721 awareness and practice. 00:08:30.721 --> 00:08:36.721 That shift was important because it moved listening from a personality trait to a 00:08:36.721 --> 00:08:38.297 communication skill. 00:08:38.297 --> 00:08:44.297 Alright, so let’s talk about one of the most practical models of listening: the HURIER 00:08:44.297 --> 00:08:45.872 Model. 00:08:45.872 --> 00:08:51.872 If you’ve ever thought, “Wait… how did this conversation go so wrong?” — this model helps 00:08:51.872 --> 00:08:53.973 you figure that out. 00:08:53.973 --> 00:08:57.650 HURIER breaks listening into six clear stages. 00:08:57.650 --> 00:09:03.650 Think of it like a checklist your brain moves through—often in seconds. 00:09:03.650 --> 00:09:06.276 Here are the six stages: 00:09:06.276 --> 00:09:07.851 Hearing 00:09:07.851 --> 00:09:09.427 Understanding 00:09:09.427 --> 00:09:11.003 Remembering 00:09:11.003 --> 00:09:12.578 Interpreting 00:09:12.578 --> 00:09:14.154 Evaluating 00:09:14.154 --> 00:09:15.729 Responding 00:09:15.729 --> 00:09:20.981 Before we go deeper, I want to point something out. 00:09:20.981 --> 00:09:26.759 Some of the first stages may sound familiar. That’s intentional. 00:09:26.759 --> 00:09:32.759 We’ve already explored ideas like attention, perception, noise, and memory earlier in the 00:09:32.759 --> 00:09:34.334 course. 00:09:34.334 --> 00:09:40.334 What the HURIER model does is organize those concepts into a clear, structured listening 00:09:40.334 --> 00:09:41.910 framework. 00:09:41.910 --> 00:09:47.910 So think of this section not as brand-new material, but as integration — we’re connecting 00:09:47.910 --> 00:09:53.162 concepts you already know into a step-by-step process. 00:09:53.162 --> 00:09:59.162 Let’s slow this down and really unpack what’s happening at each stage. 00:09:59.162 --> 00:10:04.939 Brownell didn’t just list six steps — she described interrelated competencies. 00:10:04.939 --> 00:10:09.141 And later theories have added even more nuance. 00:10:09.141 --> 00:10:14.918 Now let’s walk through each stage with that in mind. 00:10:14.918 --> 00:10:16.494 1. Hearing 00:10:16.494 --> 00:10:21.746 At the most basic level, hearing is the physiological process. 00:10:21.746 --> 00:10:27.746 Sound waves travel through the ear canal, vibrate the eardrum, and get translated into 00:10:27.746 --> 00:10:29.322 neural signals. 00:10:29.322 --> 00:10:33.523 But Brownell emphasized something important: Hearing is selective. 00:10:33.523 --> 00:10:36.674 We don’t hear everything equally. 00:10:36.674 --> 00:10:42.674 Later research in attention theory and cognitive psychology shows that we filter sounds 00:10:42.674 --> 00:10:44.250 constantly. 00:10:44.250 --> 00:10:50.027 We engage in what’s called selective attention. That’s why: 00:10:50.027 --> 00:10:53.179 You can tune out traffic noise. 00:10:53.179 --> 00:10:57.380 But instantly hear your name across the room. 00:10:57.380 --> 00:11:03.158 So hearing isn’t just about ability — it’s about focus. 00:11:03.158 --> 00:11:05.258 Modern updates also highlight: 00:11:05.258 --> 00:11:07.884 Environmental noise (actual sound interference) 00:11:07.884 --> 00:11:10.510 Physiological noise (fatigue, hunger, illness) 00:11:10.510 --> 00:11:12.611 Psychological noise (stress, anxiety) 00:11:12.611 --> 00:11:18.611 So when students say, “I didn’t hear you,” it might not be literal deafness — it might be 00:11:18.611 --> 00:11:20.187 divided attention. 00:11:20.187 --> 00:11:26.187 And here’s the key: if attention fails here, the rest of the process never fully activates. 00:11:26.187 --> 00:11:27.763 2. Understanding 00:11:27.763 --> 00:11:33.540 Brownell described understanding as attaching meaning to the message. This involves: 00:11:33.540 --> 00:11:35.115 Language comprehension 00:11:35.115 --> 00:11:36.691 Vocabulary knowledge 00:11:36.691 --> 00:11:38.267 Context awareness 00:11:38.267 --> 00:11:39.842 Cultural background 00:11:39.842 --> 00:11:45.620 Understanding is heavily shaped by what communication scholars call schemas — mental 00:11:45.620 --> 00:11:48.771 frameworks that help us organize information. 00:11:48.771 --> 00:11:54.548 Later intercultural communication research shows that understanding can break down when: 00:11:54.548 --> 00:11:57.699 Words carry different connotations across cultures. 00:11:57.699 --> 00:11:59.800 Shared context is missing. 00:11:59.800 --> 00:12:01.376 Assumptions differ. 00:12:01.376 --> 00:12:07.376 For example: “We need to talk” In one context = neutral project update. 00:12:07.376 --> 00:12:10.527 In another context = impending relationship doom. 00:12:10.527 --> 00:12:13.153 Same words. Different perceived meaning. 00:12:13.153 --> 00:12:18.930 So understanding is not just dictionary definition — it’s socially constructed. 00:12:18.930 --> 00:12:20.506 3. Remembering 00:12:20.506 --> 00:12:25.758 Brownell emphasized that listening requires memory — especially in professional settings. 00:12:25.758 --> 00:12:31.758 You can’t respond appropriately if you can’t retain the information. 00:12:31.758 --> 00:12:34.909 Cognitive psychology expands this by explaining: 00:12:34.909 --> 00:12:38.061 Short-term memory holds information briefly. 00:12:38.061 --> 00:12:40.687 Working memory actively processes it. 00:12:40.687 --> 00:12:45.413 Long-term memory stores it through rehearsal and association. 00:12:45.413 --> 00:12:47.514 Later listening research highlights: 00:12:47.514 --> 00:12:50.666 We remember what feels emotionally relevant. 00:12:50.666 --> 00:12:53.817 We remember what confirms our beliefs. 00:12:53.817 --> 00:12:57.493 We forget what doesn’t seem important. 00:12:57.493 --> 00:13:00.644 That’s confirmation bias at work. 00:13:00.644 --> 00:13:06.644 This is why two people can attend the same meeting and remember completely different 00:13:06.644 --> 00:13:08.220 details. 00:13:08.220 --> 00:13:12.947 Remembering is not passive storage — it’s selective reconstruction. 00:13:12.947 --> 00:13:14.523 4. Interpreting 00:13:14.523 --> 00:13:18.199 This is where things get really interesting. 00:13:18.199 --> 00:13:23.451 Brownell identified interpreting as assigning meaning beyond words — tone, facial 00:13:23.451 --> 00:13:25.027 expression, pacing, posture. 00:13:25.027 --> 00:13:29.228 Later interpersonal communication theories expanded this stage dramatically. 00:13:29.228 --> 00:13:31.329 Interpreting is influenced by: 00:13:31.329 --> 00:13:32.905 Perception 00:13:32.905 --> 00:13:34.480 Emotional intelligence 00:13:34.480 --> 00:13:36.056 Relational history 00:13:36.056 --> 00:13:37.632 Attribution theory 00:13:37.632 --> 00:13:42.359 We don’t just interpret tone. We interpret intent. 00:13:42.359 --> 00:13:48.359 “Why did she say it that way?” “Is he annoyed?” “Is she disrespecting me?” 00:13:48.359 --> 00:13:53.085 Modern updates emphasize that this stage is deeply emotional. 00:13:53.085 --> 00:13:58.863 Neuroscience research shows that emotional processing can happen faster than rational 00:13:58.863 --> 00:14:00.438 thought. 00:14:00.438 --> 00:14:05.690 So sometimes you feel offended before you consciously evaluate why. 00:14:05.690 --> 00:14:11.690 Interpreting is where misunderstandings most often occur — because we are filling in gaps 00:14:11.690 --> 00:14:13.791 with our own assumptions. 00:14:13.791 --> 00:14:15.367 5. Evaluating 00:14:15.367 --> 00:14:21.367 In Brownell’s model, evaluating is where we assess the message’s credibility, logic, and 00:14:21.367 --> 00:14:22.942 relevance. 00:14:22.942 --> 00:14:26.094 Questions at this stage might include: 00:14:26.094 --> 00:14:27.669 Is this accurate? 00:14:27.669 --> 00:14:29.245 Is this supported? 00:14:29.245 --> 00:14:30.821 Is this reasonable? 00:14:30.821 --> 00:14:32.396 Is this fair? 00:14:32.396 --> 00:14:36.598 Critical listening research builds on this stage, emphasizing: 00:14:36.598 --> 00:14:38.174 Bias detection 00:14:38.174 --> 00:14:39.749 Evidence evaluation 00:14:39.749 --> 00:14:41.325 Logical reasoning 00:14:41.325 --> 00:14:45.526 But later relational theories point out something important: 00:14:45.526 --> 00:14:48.152 Evaluation is rarely purely logical. 00:14:48.152 --> 00:14:49.728 We evaluate through: 00:14:49.728 --> 00:14:51.304 Personal values 00:14:51.304 --> 00:14:52.879 Identity 00:14:52.879 --> 00:14:54.455 Emotional state 00:14:54.455 --> 00:14:56.031 Power dynamics 00:14:56.031 --> 00:15:01.808 If someone challenges something connected to your identity, evaluation becomes emotional 00:15:01.808 --> 00:15:03.383 very quickly. 00:15:03.383 --> 00:15:06.535 This is where defensiveness is born. 00:15:06.535 --> 00:15:08.110 6. Responding 00:15:08.110 --> 00:15:14.110 Brownell saw responding as feedback — verbal and nonverbal signals that show engagement. 00:15:14.110 --> 00:15:15.686 Responses can include: 00:15:15.686 --> 00:15:17.262 Nodding 00:15:17.262 --> 00:15:18.837 Paraphrasing 00:15:18.837 --> 00:15:20.413 Asking clarifying questions 00:15:20.413 --> 00:15:21.988 Offering support 00:15:21.988 --> 00:15:23.564 Challenging ideas 00:15:23.564 --> 00:15:28.816 Later listening scholarship emphasizes that responding shapes the relational climate. 00:15:28.816 --> 00:15:33.018 Supportive responses build trust. Defensive responses escalate conflict. 00:15:33.018 --> 00:15:37.219 And importantly — responding feeds back into the process. 00:15:37.219 --> 00:15:42.472 Once you respond, the other person begins their HURIER cycle. 00:15:42.472 --> 00:15:47.198 Listening is not linear. It’s dynamic and recursive. 00:15:47.198 --> 00:15:50.350 The Big Update from Later Theories 00:15:50.350 --> 00:15:56.350 If we zoom out, here’s what newer research has added to Brownell’s original structure: 00:15:56.350 --> 00:16:00.551 Listening is influenced by emotion at every stage. 00:16:00.551 --> 00:16:04.228 Power and identity shape interpretation and evaluation. 00:16:04.228 --> 00:16:06.854 Memory is biased and selective. 00:16:06.854 --> 00:16:10.005 Listening is relational, not just cognitive. 00:16:10.005 --> 00:16:15.782 The stages overlap and interact rather than occurring in perfect sequence. 00:16:15.782 --> 00:16:18.408 Brownell gave us the structure. 00:16:18.408 --> 00:16:24.186 Later theories added depth — especially around emotion, perception, and relational dynamics. 00:16:24.186 --> 00:16:27.337 🔍 Applying HURIER to the Maya Scenario 00:16:27.337 --> 00:16:33.337 You and a coworker, Maya, are discussing a group project. She says: 00:16:33.337 --> 00:16:39.337 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:16:39.337 --> 00:16:43.013 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:16:43.013 --> 00:16:45.639 Where might the breakdown happen? 00:16:45.639 --> 00:16:49.316 Hearing: You hear her words just fine. 00:16:49.316 --> 00:16:52.467 Understanding: You understand the literal meaning. 00:16:52.467 --> 00:16:58.467 Interpreting: But here’s the issue—you interpret her tone as criticism. 00:16:58.467 --> 00:17:03.194 Evaluating: Your evaluation (“She’s being unfair”) triggers defensiveness. 00:17:03.194 --> 00:17:06.870 Responding: You respond defensively instead of collaboratively. 00:17:06.870 --> 00:17:11.597 HURIER helps us locate the breakdown: interpreting and evaluating. 00:17:11.597 --> 00:17:16.324 Let's look at each step in more detail: 00:17:16.324 --> 00:17:17.900 Hearing 00:17:17.900 --> 00:17:20.526 You hear her words clearly. 00:17:20.526 --> 00:17:26.526 There’s no confusion about what she said. You’re not distracted. 00:17:26.526 --> 00:17:30.727 You don’t mishear “initiative” as something else. 00:17:30.727 --> 00:17:35.979 So the breakdown probably isn’t at the hearing stage. 00:17:35.979 --> 00:17:37.555 Understanding 00:17:37.555 --> 00:17:40.181 You understand the literal meaning. 00:17:40.181 --> 00:17:45.958 She feels overwhelmed. She believes she’s doing more than you. 00:17:45.958 --> 00:17:49.635 She wants you to contribute more actively. 00:17:49.635 --> 00:17:54.362 On a basic semantic level, the message is clear. 00:17:54.362 --> 00:17:57.513 So again, no major breakdown yet. 00:17:57.513 --> 00:18:02.240 But this is where things start to become layered. 00:18:02.240 --> 00:18:07.492 Because this message isn’t just informational — it’s emotional. 00:18:07.492 --> 00:18:09.068 Interpreting 00:18:09.068 --> 00:18:14.845 Now your brain starts filling in meaning beyond the literal words. 00:18:14.845 --> 00:18:17.996 You may interpret her statement as: 00:18:17.996 --> 00:18:20.622 “She thinks I’m lazy.” 00:18:20.622 --> 00:18:23.773 “She doesn’t respect my effort.” 00:18:23.773 --> 00:18:25.874 “She’s accusing me.” 00:18:25.874 --> 00:18:29.025 “She’s attacking my work ethic.” 00:18:29.025 --> 00:18:35.025 But notice — she said: “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight.” 00:18:35.025 --> 00:18:37.651 That’s a feeling statement. 00:18:37.651 --> 00:18:42.378 Yet you might interpret it as a character judgment. 00:18:42.378 --> 00:18:48.156 This is where perception, insecurity, and relational history enter the picture. 00:18:48.156 --> 00:18:54.156 If you already felt unsure about your contributions, or if you’ve been criticized in group 00:18:54.156 --> 00:18:58.882 settings before, your interpretation may tilt negative very quickly. 00:18:58.882 --> 00:19:03.609 And interpretation feels factual — even when it’s assumption. 00:19:03.609 --> 00:19:07.811 This is often the first real breakdown point. 00:19:07.811 --> 00:19:09.387 Evaluating 00:19:09.387 --> 00:19:12.538 Now your mind moves into judgment. 00:19:12.538 --> 00:19:16.740 Based on your interpretation, you evaluate the situation: 00:19:16.740 --> 00:19:18.315 “That’s unfair.” 00:19:18.315 --> 00:19:22.517 “She doesn’t see what I’ve done.” 00:19:22.517 --> 00:19:24.092 “She’s exaggerating.” 00:19:24.092 --> 00:19:26.193 “She’s being dramatic.” 00:19:26.193 --> 00:19:28.819 And here’s the shift: 00:19:28.819 --> 00:19:30.395 Evaluation activates emotion. 00:19:30.395 --> 00:19:31.971 You might feel: 00:19:31.971 --> 00:19:33.546 Defensive 00:19:33.546 --> 00:19:35.122 Hurt 00:19:35.122 --> 00:19:36.697 Angry 00:19:36.697 --> 00:19:38.273 Embarrassed 00:19:38.273 --> 00:19:43.000 Maybe your heart rate increases. Maybe your posture tightens. 00:19:43.000 --> 00:19:47.202 Maybe your tone shifts without you realizing it. 00:19:47.202 --> 00:19:52.454 Now we’re no longer in a neutral cognitive space. 00:19:52.454 --> 00:19:55.605 We’re in an emotional one. 00:19:55.605 --> 00:19:58.756 This is often where conflict escalates. 00:19:58.756 --> 00:20:00.332 Responding 00:20:00.332 --> 00:20:01.907 Now you respond. 00:20:01.907 --> 00:20:07.907 Instead of: “I didn’t realize you felt that way. Can we look at how we’re dividing tasks?” 00:20:07.907 --> 00:20:13.907 You might say: “I’ve been doing my part.” Or, “That’s not true.” 00:20:13.907 --> 00:20:19.907 Or you might respond indirectly: “Fine. I’ll do more.” (short tone, minimal eye contact) 00:20:19.907 --> 00:20:22.533 Even silence can communicate defensiveness. 00:20:22.533 --> 00:20:26.735 And now Maya begins her own listening cycle. 00:20:26.735 --> 00:20:31.987 She interprets your tone. She evaluates your reaction. She responds. 00:20:31.987 --> 00:20:37.987 And what started as an expression of frustration becomes a relational rupture. 00:20:37.987 --> 00:20:40.088 Where Was the Breakdown? 00:20:40.088 --> 00:20:43.239 It likely wasn’t at hearing. 00:20:43.239 --> 00:20:46.390 It likely wasn’t at understanding. 00:20:46.390 --> 00:20:49.542 The breakdown most likely occurred at: 00:20:49.542 --> 00:20:51.643 Interpreting (assigning negative intent) 00:20:51.643 --> 00:20:55.844 Evaluating (judging her statement as unfair or accusatory) 00:20:55.844 --> 00:20:58.995 That’s what makes HURIER powerful. 00:20:58.995 --> 00:21:03.722 It helps us slow down the moment and pinpoint: 00:21:03.722 --> 00:21:09.500 “I may have interpreted her emotional expression as a personal attack.” 00:21:09.500 --> 00:21:12.651 That insight creates room for adjustment. 00:21:12.651 --> 00:21:15.802 Strengths of HURIER in This Scenario 00:21:15.802 --> 00:21:17.378 HURIER helps us: 00:21:17.378 --> 00:21:20.529 Separate literal meaning from perceived intent 00:21:20.529 --> 00:21:23.155 Identify exactly where defensiveness enters 00:21:23.155 --> 00:21:26.306 Recognize how quickly interpretation shapes emotion 00:21:26.306 --> 00:21:28.407 Diagnose breakdowns with precision 00:21:28.407 --> 00:21:32.083 Instead of saying: “She came at me.” 00:21:32.083 --> 00:21:38.083 We can say: “I interpreted her feeling statement as a character judgment.” 00:21:38.083 --> 00:21:41.235 That’s a very different conclusion. 00:21:41.235 --> 00:21:42.810 Limitations of HURIER 00:21:42.810 --> 00:21:45.436 But here’s the limitation. 00:21:45.436 --> 00:21:49.113 HURIER shows us where the breakdown happened. 00:21:49.113 --> 00:21:55.113 It doesn’t fully explain why the interpretation went negative so quickly. 00:21:55.113 --> 00:21:56.688 For example: 00:21:56.688 --> 00:22:00.890 Maybe you strongly identify as responsible and hardworking. 00:22:00.890 --> 00:22:04.567 Maybe you grew up being criticized frequently. 00:22:04.567 --> 00:22:07.193 Maybe you were already stressed. 00:22:07.193 --> 00:22:12.445 Maybe there’s an underlying power imbalance in the group. 00:22:12.445 --> 00:22:18.445 Those deeper emotional triggers, identity concerns, and relational histories aren’t fully 00:22:18.445 --> 00:22:22.646 explained by a step-by-step cognitive model. 00:22:22.646 --> 00:22:24.747 HURIER maps the process. 00:22:24.747 --> 00:22:29.999 It doesn’t fully map the emotional depth beneath it. 00:22:29.999 --> 00:22:35.999 And that’s why later listening theories — especially those focused on empathy, relational 00:22:35.999 --> 00:22:39.676 dynamics, and emotional intelligence — become so important. 00:22:39.676 --> 00:22:44.403 The Transactional Model & Listening Fidelity: Meaning Is Co-Created 00:22:44.403 --> 00:22:50.403 Before we apply this model, let’s talk about where it comes from. 00:22:50.403 --> 00:22:56.403 The Transactional Model of Communication emerged in the 1960s and 1970s as communication 00:22:56.403 --> 00:22:59.554 scholars began challenging earlier linear models. 00:22:59.554 --> 00:23:05.554 Early models treated communication like a one-way delivery system: a sender sends a message, 00:23:05.554 --> 00:23:07.655 a receiver receives it. 00:23:07.655 --> 00:23:12.907 But researchers noticed something that didn’t fit that framework: 00:23:12.907 --> 00:23:16.583 Communication doesn’t move in straight lines. 00:23:16.583 --> 00:23:22.583 Scholars such as Dean Barnlund proposed a different view — that communication is 00:23:22.583 --> 00:23:24.684 simultaneous, dynamic, and continuous. 00:23:24.684 --> 00:23:30.461 Both people are sending and receiving messages at the same time. 00:23:30.461 --> 00:23:34.138 This became known as the transactional perspective. 00:23:34.138 --> 00:23:37.814 Unlike linear models, the Transactional Model emphasizes: 00:23:37.814 --> 00:23:39.390 Simultaneous communication 00:23:39.390 --> 00:23:40.965 Continuous feedback loops 00:23:40.965 --> 00:23:43.066 Context and relational history 00:23:43.066 --> 00:23:45.167 Internal and external noise 00:23:45.167 --> 00:23:47.268 Co-creation of meaning 00:23:47.268 --> 00:23:53.045 In later decades, interpersonal and relational communication research expanded the model 00:23:53.045 --> 00:23:54.621 further. 00:23:54.621 --> 00:23:56.722 Scholars added insights about: 00:23:56.722 --> 00:23:58.822 Identity and power dynamics 00:23:58.822 --> 00:24:00.398 Emotional regulation 00:24:00.398 --> 00:24:01.974 Cultural context 00:24:01.974 --> 00:24:03.549 Implicit bias 00:24:03.549 --> 00:24:05.125 Psychological safety 00:24:05.125 --> 00:24:10.902 More recent research even integrates neuroscience, suggesting that emotional responses and 00:24:10.902 --> 00:24:14.579 stress reactions shape communication moment by moment. 00:24:14.579 --> 00:24:20.579 So while the original model shifted us away from one-way thinking, later updates deepened it 00:24:20.579 --> 00:24:26.356 — showing that communication is shaped by emotion, history, identity, and context. 00:24:26.356 --> 00:24:30.558 Now let’s break down what this means. 00:24:30.558 --> 00:24:35.810 Core Principles of the Transactional Model 1. Communication Is Simultaneous 00:24:35.810 --> 00:24:38.436 You are never “just listening.” 00:24:38.436 --> 00:24:42.637 Even while someone else is speaking, you are: 00:24:42.637 --> 00:24:44.213 Sending facial expressions 00:24:44.213 --> 00:24:45.789 Adjusting posture 00:24:45.789 --> 00:24:47.364 Regulating tone 00:24:47.364 --> 00:24:49.465 Signaling agreement or resistance 00:24:49.465 --> 00:24:51.041 Communication overlaps. 00:24:51.041 --> 00:24:55.768 It is not turn-taking. It is ongoing exchange. 00:24:55.768 --> 00:24:58.394 2. Feedback Loops Shape Meaning 00:24:58.394 --> 00:25:01.545 Every message influences the next one. 00:25:01.545 --> 00:25:04.171 Your reaction affects their reaction. 00:25:04.171 --> 00:25:06.797 Their tone affects your tone. 00:25:06.797 --> 00:25:09.423 Meaning evolves in real time. 00:25:09.423 --> 00:25:12.049 Communication is iterative — not fixed. 00:25:12.049 --> 00:25:13.625 3. Context Matters 00:25:13.625 --> 00:25:16.251 No conversation happens in isolation. 00:25:16.251 --> 00:25:17.826 Context includes: 00:25:17.826 --> 00:25:19.402 Relational history 00:25:19.402 --> 00:25:20.978 Cultural background 00:25:20.978 --> 00:25:22.553 Power dynamics 00:25:22.553 --> 00:25:24.129 Environment 00:25:24.129 --> 00:25:25.704 Timing 00:25:25.704 --> 00:25:28.856 All of these factors shape interpretation. 00:25:28.856 --> 00:25:31.482 4. Noise Is Always Present 00:25:31.482 --> 00:25:34.633 Noise isn’t just loud sounds. 00:25:34.633 --> 00:25:36.209 It includes: 00:25:36.209 --> 00:25:37.784 Stress 00:25:37.784 --> 00:25:39.360 Fatigue 00:25:39.360 --> 00:25:40.935 Insecurity 00:25:40.935 --> 00:25:42.511 Emotional triggers 00:25:42.511 --> 00:25:44.087 Distractions 00:25:44.087 --> 00:25:48.288 Both participants bring internal noise into the exchange. 00:25:48.288 --> 00:25:50.914 5. Meaning Is Co-Created 00:25:50.914 --> 00:25:53.540 Perhaps the most important idea: 00:25:53.540 --> 00:25:59.318 Meaning does not belong solely to the speaker or the listener. 00:25:59.318 --> 00:26:01.418 It emerges between them. 00:26:01.418 --> 00:26:04.570 It is negotiated — moment by moment. 00:26:04.570 --> 00:26:08.771 🔍 Applying the Transactional Model to the Maya Scenario 00:26:08.771 --> 00:26:14.023 Now let’s apply this perspective to the same situation. 00:26:14.023 --> 00:26:15.599 Maya says: 00:26:15.599 --> 00:26:21.599 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:26:21.599 --> 00:26:25.276 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:26:25.276 --> 00:26:31.276 Instead of analyzing internal stages like we did with HURIER, we now observe the interaction 00:26:31.276 --> 00:26:32.851 unfolding between you. 00:26:32.851 --> 00:26:34.427 Simultaneous Communication 00:26:34.427 --> 00:26:39.154 The moment Maya speaks, you’re already responding nonverbally. 00:26:39.154 --> 00:26:40.729 Maybe: 00:26:40.729 --> 00:26:42.305 Your arms cross. 00:26:42.305 --> 00:26:43.881 You lean back. 00:26:43.881 --> 00:26:45.981 Your facial expression tightens. 00:26:45.981 --> 00:26:48.082 You avoid eye contact. 00:26:48.082 --> 00:26:52.809 Even if you say nothing, those signals communicate something. 00:26:52.809 --> 00:26:54.385 Maya sees them. 00:26:54.385 --> 00:26:57.536 She begins interpreting your reaction immediately. 00:26:57.536 --> 00:27:01.212 Communication is already happening in both directions. 00:27:01.212 --> 00:27:03.313 Feedback Loop in Action 00:27:03.313 --> 00:27:05.939 Let’s say you respond: 00:27:05.939 --> 00:27:09.090 “I’ve been doing my part.” 00:27:09.090 --> 00:27:11.191 Your tone is clipped. 00:27:11.191 --> 00:27:13.292 Maya hears the defensiveness. 00:27:13.292 --> 00:27:15.393 Her next statement shifts: 00:27:15.393 --> 00:27:19.069 “Well, it doesn’t seem like it.” 00:27:19.069 --> 00:27:21.695 Now your tone sharpens further. 00:27:21.695 --> 00:27:23.796 Notice what’s happening. 00:27:23.796 --> 00:27:26.422 Each message reshapes the next. 00:27:26.422 --> 00:27:32.200 The meaning of the conversation is evolving based on mutual reaction. 00:27:32.200 --> 00:27:34.826 This is a feedback loop. 00:27:34.826 --> 00:27:36.926 Context and Relational History 00:27:36.926 --> 00:27:38.502 Ask yourself: 00:27:38.502 --> 00:27:41.653 Have you and Maya disagreed before? 00:27:41.653 --> 00:27:45.855 Is she usually more dominant in group work? 00:27:45.855 --> 00:27:48.481 Do you already feel underappreciated? 00:27:48.481 --> 00:27:52.157 Relational history influences how her statement lands. 00:27:52.157 --> 00:27:57.935 If you’ve felt micromanaged, her comment may feel like confirmation. 00:27:57.935 --> 00:28:03.935 If you’ve trusted her judgment in the past, it may feel constructive. 00:28:03.935 --> 00:28:05.510 Context shapes perception. 00:28:05.510 --> 00:28:07.086 Internal Noise 00:28:07.086 --> 00:28:08.662 Maybe you’re: 00:28:08.662 --> 00:28:10.762 Exhausted from another class. 00:28:10.762 --> 00:28:12.863 Stressed about an exam. 00:28:12.863 --> 00:28:15.489 Feeling insecure about your contribution. 00:28:15.489 --> 00:28:18.641 That internal state intensifies your reaction. 00:28:18.641 --> 00:28:24.641 Maybe on a different day, the same comment wouldn’t feel as threatening. 00:28:24.641 --> 00:28:26.741 Internal noise alters meaning. 00:28:26.741 --> 00:28:28.317 Listening Fidelity Applied 00:28:28.317 --> 00:28:31.993 Now let’s talk about listening fidelity. 00:28:31.993 --> 00:28:33.569 Listening fidelity asks: 00:28:33.569 --> 00:28:38.821 Did the meaning you constructed match the meaning Maya intended? 00:28:38.821 --> 00:28:40.397 Maybe Maya intended: 00:28:40.397 --> 00:28:43.548 “I’m overwhelmed and need support.” 00:28:43.548 --> 00:28:45.124 But you heard: 00:28:45.124 --> 00:28:48.275 “You’re not pulling your weight.” 00:28:48.275 --> 00:28:52.477 If those don’t match, fidelity is low. 00:28:52.477 --> 00:28:56.678 And here’s where the transactional dynamic matters: 00:28:56.678 --> 00:29:02.678 If you respond defensively, Maya may interpret that as avoidance or guilt. 00:29:02.678 --> 00:29:04.779 Now she becomes firmer. 00:29:04.779 --> 00:29:07.405 The loop reinforces the misunderstanding. 00:29:07.405 --> 00:29:13.182 Without clarification, both of you are reacting to interpretations — not intentions. 00:29:13.182 --> 00:29:16.859 High fidelity listening requires checking the gap: 00:29:16.859 --> 00:29:22.859 “When you say you’re carrying most of the weight, can you help me understand what feels 00:29:22.859 --> 00:29:24.434 uneven?” 00:29:24.434 --> 00:29:28.111 That question can interrupt the escalation loop. 00:29:28.111 --> 00:29:31.787 Where Is the Breakdown in This Model? 00:29:31.787 --> 00:29:37.565 Unlike HURIER, the breakdown isn’t isolated to one internal stage. 00:29:37.565 --> 00:29:39.140 It may involve: 00:29:39.140 --> 00:29:40.716 Escalating nonverbal signals 00:29:40.716 --> 00:29:42.291 Tone shifts 00:29:42.291 --> 00:29:43.867 Emotional contagion 00:29:43.867 --> 00:29:45.443 Relational history 00:29:45.443 --> 00:29:47.018 Internal stress 00:29:47.018 --> 00:29:48.594 Lack of clarification 00:29:48.594 --> 00:29:50.695 The breakdown is relational. 00:29:50.695 --> 00:29:52.796 It is co-created. 00:29:52.796 --> 00:29:55.422 Strengths of the Transactional Model 00:29:55.422 --> 00:29:56.997 This model: 00:29:56.997 --> 00:29:59.623 Captures relational and contextual dynamics 00:29:59.623 --> 00:30:02.249 Explains the “dance” between participants 00:30:02.249 --> 00:30:03.825 Highlights feedback loops 00:30:03.825 --> 00:30:05.401 Recognizes emotional influence 00:30:05.401 --> 00:30:09.077 Shows how meaning evolves in real time 00:30:09.077 --> 00:30:14.854 It helps us move away from blame and toward shared responsibility. 00:30:14.854 --> 00:30:17.480 Limitations of the Transactional Model 00:30:17.480 --> 00:30:21.682 However, it does not detail internal cognitive processing. 00:30:21.682 --> 00:30:26.409 It does not break listening into structured competencies like: 00:30:26.409 --> 00:30:27.985 Hearing 00:30:27.985 --> 00:30:29.560 Understanding 00:30:29.560 --> 00:30:31.136 Remembering 00:30:31.136 --> 00:30:32.711 Interpreting 00:30:32.711 --> 00:30:34.287 Evaluating 00:30:34.287 --> 00:30:40.287 It shows the interaction pattern — but not the step-by-step mental process inside each 00:30:40.287 --> 00:30:41.863 participant. 00:30:41.863 --> 00:30:46.064 That’s where models like HURIER are helpful. 00:30:46.064 --> 00:30:47.640 Big Picture 00:30:47.640 --> 00:30:51.316 HURIER helps us diagnose internal listening breakdowns. 00:30:51.316 --> 00:30:57.316 The Transactional Model helps us understand relational escalation and co-created meaning. 00:30:57.316 --> 00:31:03.094 One focuses on cognitive structure. The other focuses on dynamic interaction. 00:31:03.094 --> 00:31:08.346 Together, they give us a more complete understanding of listening. 00:31:08.346 --> 00:31:12.547 Listening is not just something happening inside you. 00:31:12.547 --> 00:31:15.173 It’s happening between you. 00:31:15.173 --> 00:31:19.375 Mindful & Empathic Listening: The Emotional and Cognitive Layer 00:31:19.375 --> 00:31:25.375 Now let’s move into a model that shifts our focus again. 00:31:25.375 --> 00:31:31.375 If HURIER zooms in on cognitive stages, and the Transactional Model zooms out to relational 00:31:31.375 --> 00:31:32.951 dynamics, 00:31:32.951 --> 00:31:38.728 Mindful and Empathic Listening zoom inward to emotional awareness and regulation. 00:31:38.728 --> 00:31:44.728 Before we apply it, let’s look at where these ideas come from. 00:31:44.728 --> 00:31:46.304 Origins and Development 00:31:46.304 --> 00:31:52.081 Mindful listening draws heavily from mindfulness research in psychology and contemplative 00:31:52.081 --> 00:31:58.081 traditions, particularly the work popularized in Western psychology in the late 20th 00:31:58.081 --> 00:31:59.656 century. 00:31:59.656 --> 00:32:05.434 Scholars studying attention regulation and stress reduction found that present-moment 00:32:05.434 --> 00:32:09.635 awareness significantly improves emotional regulation and cognitive clarity. 00:32:09.635 --> 00:32:15.635 As mindfulness entered communication and leadership research in the 1990s and 2000s, 00:32:15.635 --> 00:32:18.787 scholars began applying it to listening. 00:32:18.787 --> 00:32:21.938 The idea was simple but powerful: 00:32:21.938 --> 00:32:27.938 Many listening breakdowns happen not because we lack skill — but because we are not fully 00:32:27.938 --> 00:32:29.514 present. 00:32:29.514 --> 00:32:35.514 At the same time, empathic listening has roots in humanistic psychology, especially the work 00:32:35.514 --> 00:32:39.715 of Carl Rogers in the mid-20th century. 00:32:39.715 --> 00:32:44.967 Rogers emphasized unconditional positive regard and reflective listening in therapeutic 00:32:44.967 --> 00:32:46.543 settings. 00:32:46.543 --> 00:32:51.270 Later interpersonal communication research expanded empathic listening beyond counseling 00:32:51.270 --> 00:32:52.845 contexts into: 00:32:52.845 --> 00:32:54.421 Leadership 00:32:54.421 --> 00:32:55.997 Conflict resolution 00:32:55.997 --> 00:32:57.572 Healthcare 00:32:57.572 --> 00:32:59.148 Education 00:32:59.148 --> 00:33:00.723 Organizational communication 00:33:00.723 --> 00:33:06.501 More recent updates integrate emotional intelligence research, showing that recognizing and 00:33:06.501 --> 00:33:10.702 regulating emotional responses is central to effective listening. 00:33:10.702 --> 00:33:16.702 So while earlier models focused on structure and interaction, mindful and empathic listening 00:33:16.702 --> 00:33:18.278 focus on: 00:33:18.278 --> 00:33:19.854 Emotional awareness 00:33:19.854 --> 00:33:21.429 Attention control 00:33:21.429 --> 00:33:23.005 Perspective-taking 00:33:23.005 --> 00:33:24.581 Psychological safety 00:33:24.581 --> 00:33:28.782 Now let’s break down what that means. 00:33:28.782 --> 00:33:32.984 Core Principles 1. Mindful Listening: Present-Moment Awareness 00:33:32.984 --> 00:33:36.135 Mindful listening focuses on regulating attention. 00:33:36.135 --> 00:33:37.711 It asks: 00:33:37.711 --> 00:33:39.812 Am I fully present? 00:33:39.812 --> 00:33:42.438 Or am I reacting internally? 00:33:42.438 --> 00:33:47.690 Am I preparing my defense instead of hearing the message? 00:33:47.690 --> 00:33:49.265 Mindful listening requires: 00:33:49.265 --> 00:33:51.366 Awareness of internal thoughts 00:33:51.366 --> 00:33:53.467 Awareness of emotional shifts 00:33:53.467 --> 00:33:56.093 Intentional refocusing on the speaker 00:33:56.093 --> 00:33:58.719 It does not eliminate emotion. 00:33:58.719 --> 00:34:03.971 It helps you notice emotion without being controlled by it. 00:34:03.971 --> 00:34:07.122 2. Empathic Listening: Understanding Emotional Meaning 00:34:07.122 --> 00:34:10.274 Empathic listening goes one layer deeper. 00:34:10.274 --> 00:34:11.849 It asks: 00:34:11.849 --> 00:34:14.475 What is this person feeling? 00:34:14.475 --> 00:34:18.152 What need might be underneath this message? 00:34:18.152 --> 00:34:22.879 What does this situation feel like from their perspective? 00:34:22.879 --> 00:34:26.555 Empathic listening shifts from evaluation to curiosity. 00:34:26.555 --> 00:34:29.706 Instead of asking: “Is she right?” 00:34:29.706 --> 00:34:33.383 It asks: “What might she be experiencing?” 00:34:33.383 --> 00:34:36.009 This doesn’t mean agreement. 00:34:36.009 --> 00:34:38.635 It means understanding emotional meaning. 00:34:38.635 --> 00:34:42.836 🔍 Applying Mindful & Empathic Listening to the Maya Scenario 00:34:42.836 --> 00:34:46.513 Let’s return to the same moment. 00:34:46.513 --> 00:34:48.088 Maya says: 00:34:48.088 --> 00:34:54.088 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:34:54.088 --> 00:34:57.765 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:34:57.765 --> 00:35:00.391 Now we apply this model. 00:35:00.391 --> 00:35:02.492 Mindful Listening in Action 00:35:02.492 --> 00:35:07.219 The first thing you notice is your internal reaction. 00:35:07.219 --> 00:35:08.794 Maybe you feel: 00:35:08.794 --> 00:35:10.895 A surge of defensiveness 00:35:10.895 --> 00:35:12.996 Tightness in your chest 00:35:12.996 --> 00:35:16.672 A rush of “That’s not fair” 00:35:16.672 --> 00:35:19.824 Mindful listening asks you to pause. 00:35:19.824 --> 00:35:22.975 Instead of immediately responding, you notice: 00:35:22.975 --> 00:35:26.126 “I’m feeling defensive right now.” 00:35:26.126 --> 00:35:28.227 That awareness creates space. 00:35:28.227 --> 00:35:34.004 You refocus your attention on her words instead of your reaction. 00:35:34.004 --> 00:35:35.580 You think: 00:35:35.580 --> 00:35:38.206 “What exactly did she say?” 00:35:38.206 --> 00:35:44.206 She said: “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight.” 00:35:44.206 --> 00:35:46.832 That’s a feeling statement. 00:35:46.832 --> 00:35:48.933 Mindfulness helps you separate: 00:35:48.933 --> 00:35:52.084 Her words from your emotional response. 00:35:52.084 --> 00:35:54.710 That pause can interrupt escalation. 00:35:54.710 --> 00:35:56.811 Empathic Listening in Action 00:35:56.811 --> 00:35:58.912 Now you shift perspective. 00:35:58.912 --> 00:36:02.063 Instead of: “She’s criticizing me.” 00:36:02.063 --> 00:36:08.063 You consider: “She might be overwhelmed.” “She might be stressed.” “She might be asking for 00:36:08.063 --> 00:36:09.639 help.” 00:36:09.639 --> 00:36:12.265 Empathic listening reframes the message. 00:36:12.265 --> 00:36:14.365 You begin to hear: 00:36:14.365 --> 00:36:15.941 “I’m struggling.” 00:36:15.941 --> 00:36:17.517 instead of 00:36:17.517 --> 00:36:19.092 “You’re failing.” 00:36:19.092 --> 00:36:22.244 That shift changes your response options. 00:36:22.244 --> 00:36:25.395 Instead of defending, you might say: 00:36:25.395 --> 00:36:31.395 “It sounds like you’re feeling overloaded. Can we look at how we’re dividing tasks?” 00:36:31.395 --> 00:36:36.122 Now the conversation moves toward collaboration instead of conflict. 00:36:36.122 --> 00:36:38.223 What This Model Reveals 00:36:38.223 --> 00:36:40.849 Mindful listening manages internal noise. 00:36:40.849 --> 00:36:43.475 Empathic listening manages relational meaning. 00:36:43.475 --> 00:36:48.201 Together, they help prevent emotional escalation before it happens. 00:36:48.201 --> 00:36:54.201 Unlike HURIER, which diagnoses breakdown after it occurs, mindful and empathic listening aim 00:36:54.201 --> 00:36:57.353 to interrupt breakdown in real time. 00:36:57.353 --> 00:36:59.979 Strengths of Mindful & Empathic Listening 00:36:59.979 --> 00:37:01.554 This model: 00:37:01.554 --> 00:37:03.655 Addresses emotional noise directly 00:37:03.655 --> 00:37:05.231 Improves emotional regulation 00:37:05.231 --> 00:37:06.806 Reduces defensiveness 00:37:06.806 --> 00:37:08.382 Builds psychological safety 00:37:08.382 --> 00:37:09.958 Increases trust 00:37:09.958 --> 00:37:11.533 Encourages perspective-taking 00:37:11.533 --> 00:37:15.210 It is especially powerful in conflict situations. 00:37:15.210 --> 00:37:20.987 Because many conflicts escalate not from misunderstanding facts — but from unmanaged 00:37:20.987 --> 00:37:22.563 emotional reactions. 00:37:22.563 --> 00:37:24.138 Limitations 00:37:24.138 --> 00:37:26.764 However, this approach has limits. 00:37:26.764 --> 00:37:29.390 Mindful listening requires emotional discipline. 00:37:29.390 --> 00:37:33.592 Empathic listening requires cognitive effort and perspective-taking. 00:37:33.592 --> 00:37:36.743 In fast-paced, high-stress environments: 00:37:36.743 --> 00:37:38.844 People may not pause. 00:37:38.844 --> 00:37:41.470 Emotional reactivity may override awareness. 00:37:41.470 --> 00:37:44.621 Time pressure may reduce reflective space. 00:37:44.621 --> 00:37:50.621 It is easier to practice in calm settings than in heated moments. 00:37:50.621 --> 00:37:56.621 And it does not provide the structured cognitive roadmap that HURIER offers. 00:37:56.621 --> 00:37:58.197 Big Picture 00:37:58.197 --> 00:38:01.873 HURIER helps us understand internal listening stages. 00:38:01.873 --> 00:38:06.075 The Transactional Model helps us understand relational dynamics. 00:38:06.075 --> 00:38:11.852 Mindful and Empathic Listening help us regulate emotion and increase connection. 00:38:11.852 --> 00:38:15.004 Each model highlights a different layer: 00:38:15.004 --> 00:38:16.579 Cognitive Relational Emotional 00:38:16.579 --> 00:38:21.831 Together, they show that listening is not just hearing words. 00:38:21.831 --> 00:38:27.831 It is attention regulation. It is emotional management. It is relational awareness. 00:38:27.831 --> 00:38:33.083 And when all three layers work together, listening becomes transformative. 00:38:33.083 --> 00:38:36.235 Constructivist Listening: How We Build Meaning 00:38:36.235 --> 00:38:42.235 Now let’s move to a model that focuses on something deeper than stages, interaction 00:38:42.235 --> 00:38:44.335 patterns, or emotional regulation. 00:38:44.335 --> 00:38:50.335 If HURIER focuses on internal processing, and the Transactional Model focuses on relational 00:38:50.335 --> 00:38:55.062 exchange, and Mindful/Empathic Listening focuses on emotional awareness, 00:38:55.062 --> 00:38:59.789 Constructivist Listening focuses on how we build reality itself. 00:38:59.789 --> 00:39:05.789 Before we apply it, let’s look at where it comes from. 00:39:05.789 --> 00:39:07.365 Origins and Development 00:39:07.365 --> 00:39:13.142 Constructivist theory has roots in cognitive psychology and educational theory, particularly 00:39:13.142 --> 00:39:19.142 the work of scholars like Jean Piaget, who argued that humans actively construct knowledge 00:39:19.142 --> 00:39:21.768 rather than passively absorb it. 00:39:21.768 --> 00:39:26.495 Later communication scholars applied this idea to interpersonal communication. 00:39:26.495 --> 00:39:28.596 The core assumption became: 00:39:28.596 --> 00:39:31.747 We don’t simply receive messages. 00:39:31.747 --> 00:39:34.898 We interpret them through mental frameworks. 00:39:34.898 --> 00:39:37.524 These frameworks are called schemas. 00:39:37.524 --> 00:39:40.676 Schemas are cognitive structures built from: 00:39:40.676 --> 00:39:42.251 Past experiences 00:39:42.251 --> 00:39:43.827 Cultural background 00:39:43.827 --> 00:39:45.402 Family norms 00:39:45.402 --> 00:39:46.978 Personal beliefs 00:39:46.978 --> 00:39:48.554 Expectations about relationships 00:39:48.554 --> 00:39:54.554 In the 1980s and 1990s, communication scholars expanded constructivism to explain why two 00:39:54.554 --> 00:40:00.554 people can experience the same interaction but walk away with completely different 00:40:00.554 --> 00:40:02.129 interpretations. 00:40:02.129 --> 00:40:06.856 More recent research integrates constructivism with intercultural communication, identity 00:40:06.856 --> 00:40:12.856 theory, and social cognition — emphasizing that our social identities and cultural norms 00:40:12.856 --> 00:40:16.007 strongly shape how we interpret meaning. 00:40:16.007 --> 00:40:17.583 Constructivist listening suggests: 00:40:17.583 --> 00:40:20.734 Listening is not just processing words. 00:40:20.734 --> 00:40:26.734 It is filtering them through mental models we’ve built over time. 00:40:26.734 --> 00:40:32.512 Core Principles of Constructivist Listening 1. Meaning Is Constructed, Not Discovered 00:40:32.512 --> 00:40:36.713 We often assume meaning is “in” the message. 00:40:36.713 --> 00:40:40.915 Constructivism says meaning is created by the listener. 00:40:40.915 --> 00:40:43.016 The speaker provides words. 00:40:43.016 --> 00:40:45.117 The listener supplies interpretation. 00:40:45.117 --> 00:40:48.268 Those interpretations are shaped by schemas. 00:40:48.268 --> 00:40:50.369 2. Schemas Shape Perception 00:40:50.369 --> 00:40:52.469 Schemas are mental shortcuts. 00:40:52.469 --> 00:40:57.196 They help us make sense of the world quickly. 00:40:57.196 --> 00:40:59.822 But they also bias interpretation. 00:40:59.822 --> 00:41:01.398 For example: 00:41:01.398 --> 00:41:07.398 If you have a schema that “criticism equals rejection,” you may interpret feedback as a 00:41:07.398 --> 00:41:09.499 threat to the relationship. 00:41:09.499 --> 00:41:15.499 If you have a schema that “directness equals efficiency,” you may interpret blunt feedback 00:41:15.499 --> 00:41:17.600 as normal and productive. 00:41:17.600 --> 00:41:19.175 Schemas operate automatically. 00:41:19.175 --> 00:41:23.902 Often, we don’t realize they’re influencing us. 00:41:23.902 --> 00:41:27.053 3. Identity and Culture Influence Schemas 00:41:27.053 --> 00:41:29.154 Constructivist listening also emphasizes: 00:41:29.154 --> 00:41:30.730 Cultural norms 00:41:30.730 --> 00:41:32.305 Family communication styles 00:41:32.305 --> 00:41:33.881 Power dynamics 00:41:33.881 --> 00:41:35.457 Gender expectations 00:41:35.457 --> 00:41:37.032 Social identity 00:41:37.032 --> 00:41:42.810 All of these shape the frameworks we use to interpret messages. 00:41:42.810 --> 00:41:48.810 Two people can hear the same sentence — and construct entirely different meanings. 00:41:48.810 --> 00:41:52.486 🔍 Applying Constructivist Listening to the Maya Scenario 00:41:52.486 --> 00:41:56.688 Let’s return again to Maya’s statement: 00:41:56.688 --> 00:42:02.688 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:42:02.688 --> 00:42:06.364 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:42:06.364 --> 00:42:07.940 Now we ask: 00:42:07.940 --> 00:42:10.566 What schemas are at play? 00:42:10.566 --> 00:42:12.141 Your Schema 00:42:12.141 --> 00:42:18.141 Imagine you grew up in a household where feedback felt harsh or critical. 00:42:18.141 --> 00:42:21.818 Maybe mistakes were highlighted more than effort. 00:42:21.818 --> 00:42:24.969 Over time, you developed a schema: 00:42:24.969 --> 00:42:27.595 “Feedback means I’ve failed.” 00:42:27.595 --> 00:42:31.272 When Maya speaks, that schema activates automatically. 00:42:31.272 --> 00:42:34.423 You may construct the message as: 00:42:34.423 --> 00:42:40.423 “She thinks I’m incompetent.” “She’s disappointed in me.” “This is about my character.” 00:42:40.423 --> 00:42:46.423 Even if Maya’s intention was about workload, your schema filters it through a threat lens. 00:42:46.423 --> 00:42:47.998 Maya’s Schema 00:42:47.998 --> 00:42:50.625 Now consider Maya’s background. 00:42:50.625 --> 00:42:56.402 Maybe she grew up in an environment where directness was normal. 00:42:56.402 --> 00:43:01.654 Maybe in her family or culture, being straightforward signals trust. 00:43:01.654 --> 00:43:03.755 Her schema might be: 00:43:03.755 --> 00:43:09.755 “If I don’t speak directly, the problem won’t get solved.” 00:43:09.755 --> 00:43:15.532 So when she says: “I need you to take more initiative,” 00:43:15.532 --> 00:43:19.734 She may mean: “We need to rebalance tasks.” 00:43:19.734 --> 00:43:24.986 She may not perceive her tone as harsh at all. 00:43:24.986 --> 00:43:29.713 From her perspective, she is being clear and efficient. 00:43:29.713 --> 00:43:31.288 Two Different Constructions 00:43:31.288 --> 00:43:32.864 Same words. 00:43:32.864 --> 00:43:34.965 Two different mental constructions. 00:43:34.965 --> 00:43:40.217 Constructivist listening shows us that the breakdown may not be: 00:43:40.217 --> 00:43:41.792 Mishearing 00:43:41.792 --> 00:43:43.368 Misunderstanding vocabulary 00:43:43.368 --> 00:43:44.944 Even emotional escalation 00:43:44.944 --> 00:43:47.570 It may be schema collision. 00:43:47.570 --> 00:43:51.771 Your framework and her framework are not aligned. 00:43:51.771 --> 00:43:55.973 Meaning diverges before either of you realize it. 00:43:55.973 --> 00:43:58.074 What This Model Reveals 00:43:58.074 --> 00:43:59.649 Constructivism explains why: 00:43:59.649 --> 00:44:03.326 Good intentions don’t guarantee good outcomes 00:44:03.326 --> 00:44:04.901 Cultural misunderstandings occur 00:44:04.901 --> 00:44:09.628 Feedback feels personal to some but neutral to others 00:44:09.628 --> 00:44:12.780 Conflict can arise even without hostility 00:44:12.780 --> 00:44:15.406 It shifts the question from: 00:44:15.406 --> 00:44:16.981 “Who is right?” 00:44:16.981 --> 00:44:18.557 to 00:44:18.557 --> 00:44:21.708 “How are we constructing this differently?” 00:44:21.708 --> 00:44:25.385 That shift reduces blame and increases curiosity. 00:44:25.385 --> 00:44:27.485 Strengths of Constructivist Listening 00:44:27.485 --> 00:44:29.061 This model: 00:44:29.061 --> 00:44:31.162 Explains perception differences clearly 00:44:31.162 --> 00:44:34.313 Is powerful for intercultural communication analysis 00:44:34.313 --> 00:44:36.414 Helps uncover hidden assumptions 00:44:36.414 --> 00:44:39.040 Encourages self-awareness about bias 00:44:39.040 --> 00:44:41.666 Highlights identity and social influence 00:44:41.666 --> 00:44:47.443 It is especially useful in diverse teams or cross-cultural environments. 00:44:47.443 --> 00:44:53.221 Because many misunderstandings are not about intent — they’re about interpretation 00:44:53.221 --> 00:44:54.796 frameworks. 00:44:54.796 --> 00:44:56.372 Limitations 00:44:56.372 --> 00:44:58.998 However, constructivism can feel abstract. 00:44:58.998 --> 00:45:04.998 It explains why interpretations differ, but it does not always provide concrete behavioral 00:45:04.998 --> 00:45:06.573 steps for change. 00:45:06.573 --> 00:45:11.300 It doesn’t break listening into stages like HURIER. 00:45:11.300 --> 00:45:17.078 It doesn’t map relational feedback loops like the Transactional Model. 00:45:17.078 --> 00:45:22.330 It doesn’t explicitly guide emotional regulation like Mindful Listening. 00:45:22.330 --> 00:45:26.531 It focuses on cognitive frameworks — not specific skills. 00:45:26.531 --> 00:45:28.107 Big Picture 00:45:28.107 --> 00:45:31.258 HURIER shows us internal processing stages. 00:45:31.258 --> 00:45:35.985 The Transactional Model shows us co-created relational dynamics. 00:45:35.985 --> 00:45:41.762 Mindful and Empathic Listening show us emotional regulation and perspective-taking. 00:45:41.762 --> 00:45:46.489 Constructivist Listening shows us the mental frameworks shaping interpretation. 00:45:46.489 --> 00:45:49.640 Each model answers a different question: 00:45:49.640 --> 00:45:53.317 HURIER: Where did the breakdown occur internally? 00:45:53.317 --> 00:45:56.993 Transactional: How are we shaping meaning together? 00:45:56.993 --> 00:46:02.245 Mindful/Empathic: How do we regulate emotion and build connection? 00:46:02.245 --> 00:46:05.922 Constructivist: What schemas are shaping our interpretation? 00:46:05.922 --> 00:46:10.124 Together, they reveal that listening is not passive. 00:46:10.124 --> 00:46:15.376 It is cognitive construction, emotional regulation, relational exchange, and identity 00:46:15.376 --> 00:46:17.476 negotiation — all at once. 00:46:17.476 --> 00:46:20.628 Revisiting the Scenario: Theory-by-Theory 00:46:20.628 --> 00:46:24.829 Now let’s zoom out one more time. 00:46:24.829 --> 00:46:30.081 We’ve analyzed Maya’s statement through multiple theoretical lenses. 00:46:30.081 --> 00:46:33.758 Let’s bring them all back together. 00:46:33.758 --> 00:46:35.333 Maya says: 00:46:35.333 --> 00:46:41.333 “I feel like I’m carrying most of the weight on this project. 00:46:41.333 --> 00:46:45.010 I need you to take more initiative.” 00:46:45.010 --> 00:46:46.586 Same moment. 00:46:46.586 --> 00:46:48.161 Different theories. 00:46:48.161 --> 00:46:54.161 Watch how each one highlights a different layer of what’s happening. 00:46:54.161 --> 00:46:55.737 HURIER Model 00:46:55.737 --> 00:46:57.312 HURIER asks: 00:46:57.312 --> 00:47:00.464 Where did the internal breakdown occur? 00:47:00.464 --> 00:47:04.665 In this scenario, the likely breakdown happened at: 00:47:04.665 --> 00:47:09.392 Interpreting — assigning negative intent to Maya’s emotional statement 00:47:09.392 --> 00:47:13.594 Evaluating — judging her comment as unfair or accusatory 00:47:13.594 --> 00:47:17.796 The issue wasn’t hearing or understanding vocabulary. 00:47:17.796 --> 00:47:22.522 It was how meaning was interpreted and judged internally. 00:47:22.522 --> 00:47:25.148 HURIER gives us cognitive precision. 00:47:25.148 --> 00:47:26.724 Transactional Model 00:47:26.724 --> 00:47:28.825 The Transactional Model asks: 00:47:28.825 --> 00:47:34.077 How are we co-creating this interaction in real time? 00:47:34.077 --> 00:47:38.279 Here, meaning wasn’t just inside your head. 00:47:38.279 --> 00:47:40.905 It was shaped between you. 00:47:40.905 --> 00:47:44.056 Your crossed arms influenced her tone. 00:47:44.056 --> 00:47:46.682 Her tone influenced your defensiveness. 00:47:46.682 --> 00:47:50.358 Internal and external noise intensified the exchange. 00:47:50.358 --> 00:47:52.459 Relational history shaped expectations. 00:47:52.459 --> 00:47:55.610 The breakdown was relational and dynamic. 00:47:55.610 --> 00:47:58.236 Meaning evolved moment by moment. 00:47:58.236 --> 00:47:59.812 Listening Fidelity 00:47:59.812 --> 00:48:01.388 Listening Fidelity asks: 00:48:01.388 --> 00:48:05.589 Did your constructed meaning match her intended meaning? 00:48:05.589 --> 00:48:07.165 Maybe Maya meant: 00:48:07.165 --> 00:48:10.316 “I’m overwhelmed and need help.” 00:48:10.316 --> 00:48:11.892 But you heard: 00:48:11.892 --> 00:48:14.518 “You’re not doing enough.” 00:48:14.518 --> 00:48:17.144 That gap represents low fidelity. 00:48:17.144 --> 00:48:21.871 The mismatch between intent and interpretation fueled the tension. 00:48:21.871 --> 00:48:25.022 This theory helps us measure alignment. 00:48:25.022 --> 00:48:26.598 Mindful Listening 00:48:26.598 --> 00:48:28.173 Mindful Listening asks: 00:48:28.173 --> 00:48:31.850 Were you aware of your internal reaction? 00:48:31.850 --> 00:48:35.001 You may have felt defensiveness rising. 00:48:35.001 --> 00:48:37.102 Mindfulness would involve noticing: 00:48:37.102 --> 00:48:40.253 “I’m reacting strongly right now.” 00:48:40.253 --> 00:48:43.930 That pause could create space before escalation. 00:48:43.930 --> 00:48:47.081 This model helps regulate internal noise. 00:48:47.081 --> 00:48:48.656 Empathic Listening 00:48:48.656 --> 00:48:50.232 Empathic Listening asks: 00:48:50.232 --> 00:48:52.333 What is Maya feeling? 00:48:52.333 --> 00:48:58.333 Instead of focusing on whether she was right or wrong, you might ask: 00:48:58.333 --> 00:49:00.959 “What might she be experiencing?” 00:49:00.959 --> 00:49:06.959 If you interpret her statement as stress rather than accusation, your response shifts. 00:49:06.959 --> 00:49:10.635 Empathy reduces defensiveness by reframing emotional meaning. 00:49:10.635 --> 00:49:12.211 Constructivist Listening 00:49:12.211 --> 00:49:13.787 Constructivist Listening asks: 00:49:13.787 --> 00:49:16.413 What schemas shaped this interpretation? 00:49:16.413 --> 00:49:22.413 If you associate feedback with personal criticism, your schema filters her message as 00:49:22.413 --> 00:49:23.988 attack. 00:49:23.988 --> 00:49:29.988 If Maya associates directness with efficiency, her schema frames her message as practical 00:49:29.988 --> 00:49:31.564 problem-solving. 00:49:31.564 --> 00:49:35.240 The breakdown may not be about intent. 00:49:35.240 --> 00:49:38.392 It may be about schema collision. 00:49:38.392 --> 00:49:44.169 This theory explains why the same words can produce different realities. 00:49:44.169 --> 00:49:46.270 Social Cognitive Listening Theory 00:49:46.270 --> 00:49:48.370 Social Cognitive theory asks: 00:49:48.370 --> 00:49:51.522 What mental processes shaped your response? 00:49:51.522 --> 00:49:55.723 Your attribution of intent (“She’s accusing me.”) 00:49:55.723 --> 00:49:58.875 Your emotional appraisal (“This feels unfair.”) 00:49:58.875 --> 00:50:01.501 Your expectations about group roles 00:50:01.501 --> 00:50:04.127 All influenced your behavioral response. 00:50:04.127 --> 00:50:08.328 This model connects thought patterns to listening behavior. 00:50:08.328 --> 00:50:09.904 Supportive Listening 00:50:09.904 --> 00:50:11.480 Supportive Listening asks: 00:50:11.480 --> 00:50:15.681 Did your response provide emotional or informational support? 00:50:15.681 --> 00:50:18.832 Instead of defending, you might say: 00:50:18.832 --> 00:50:22.509 “It sounds like you’re feeling overwhelmed.” 00:50:22.509 --> 00:50:26.185 That validation could help Maya feel heard. 00:50:26.185 --> 00:50:30.912 Supportive listening strengthens relational satisfaction, especially in stress contexts. 00:50:30.912 --> 00:50:32.488 The Big Insight 00:50:32.488 --> 00:50:34.064 Same sentence. 00:50:34.064 --> 00:50:35.639 Same people. 00:50:35.639 --> 00:50:37.215 Same moment. 00:50:37.215 --> 00:50:40.891 But each theory reveals a different layer: 00:50:40.891 --> 00:50:42.467 Cognitive processing 00:50:42.467 --> 00:50:44.042 Relational feedback loops 00:50:44.042 --> 00:50:45.618 Meaning alignment 00:50:45.618 --> 00:50:47.194 Emotional regulation 00:50:47.194 --> 00:50:48.769 Perspective-taking 00:50:48.769 --> 00:50:50.345 Schema construction 00:50:50.345 --> 00:50:51.921 Attribution patterns 00:50:51.921 --> 00:50:53.496 Support behaviors 00:50:53.496 --> 00:50:56.122 No single theory explains everything. 00:50:56.122 --> 00:50:59.799 But together, they show us something powerful: 00:50:59.799 --> 00:51:01.899 Listening is multi-layered. 00:51:01.899 --> 00:51:07.899 It is cognitive. It is emotional. It is relational. It is interpretive. It is behavioral. 00:51:07.899 --> 00:51:13.677 And that’s why improving listening requires more than one tool. 00:51:13.677 --> 00:51:15.252 Closing 00:51:15.252 --> 00:51:21.252 As we wrap up Unit 3, here’s what I want you to carry with you: 00:51:21.252 --> 00:51:24.404 Listening is not a single skill. 00:51:24.404 --> 00:51:25.979 It’s layered. 00:51:25.979 --> 00:51:28.605 Cognitive. Relational. Emotional. Interpretive. Behavioral. 00:51:28.605 --> 00:51:34.605 Each theory we explored reveals something different happening beneath the surface of a 00:51:34.605 --> 00:51:36.181 conversation. 00:51:36.181 --> 00:51:39.857 HURIER helps you diagnose internal processing breakdowns. 00:51:39.857 --> 00:51:45.857 The Transactional Model shows how meaning is co-created in real time. 00:51:45.857 --> 00:51:51.109 Listening Fidelity helps you measure alignment between intention and interpretation. 00:51:51.109 --> 00:51:56.362 Mindful and Empathic Listening help regulate emotion and build connection. 00:51:56.362 --> 00:52:00.038 Constructivist theory explains how schemas shape interpretation. 00:52:00.038 --> 00:52:06.038 The other models deepen our understanding of support, attribution, and behavioral response. 00:52:06.038 --> 00:52:08.664 No single theory explains everything. 00:52:08.664 --> 00:52:12.340 But together, they give you analytical power. 00:52:12.340 --> 00:52:16.542 And that’s your task in this unit: 00:52:16.542 --> 00:52:19.693 Not just to describe the theories. 00:52:19.693 --> 00:52:22.319 Not just to define terms. 00:52:22.319 --> 00:52:28.319 But to analyze them. Compare them. Apply them. Evaluate their strengths and limitations. 00:52:28.319 --> 00:52:34.319 When you can take a real conversation — like the Maya scenario — and examine it through 00:52:34.319 --> 00:52:39.046 multiple theoretical lenses, you begin to see communication differently. 00:52:39.046 --> 00:52:45.046 You begin to see how meaning is constructed, negotiated, escalated, or repaired. 00:52:45.046 --> 00:52:48.723 That’s when listening stops being automatic. 00:52:48.723 --> 00:52:50.824 And starts becoming intentional. 00:52:50.824 --> 00:52:54.500 Thanks for engaging deeply with Unit 3. 00:52:54.500 --> 00:53:00.500 I’m excited to see how you apply these theories to your own listening scenarios.