Простой сложный разговор. Модель легкого и эффективного общения - Элисон Вуд Брукс


Простой сложный разговор. Модель легкого и эффективного общения читать книгу онлайн
Эта книга предлагает научно обоснованный подход к общению. Автор — профессор Гарвардской школы бизнеса Элисон Брукс — более десяти лет занимается исследованием коммуникации, ведет флагманский курс по переговорам и консультирует организации и лидеров. На основе наблюдений за реальными разговорами Элисон Брукс разработала систему TALK — модель, в которой общение представлено как управляемая структура из четырех элементов (темы, вопросы, легкость, доброта), делающих любой разговор понятнее и ценнее. После этой книги вам будет легче говорить. О важном, о сложном, о личном — с кем угодно.
Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence, 10th ed. (New York: Bantam Books, 2007).
236
Trevor Foulk, Andrew Woolum, and Amir Erez, “Catching Rudeness Is Like Catching a Cold: The Contagion Effects of Low-Intensity Negative Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 101, no. 1 (2016): 50; Andrew Woolum, Trevor Foulk, and Amir Erez, “A Review of the Short-Term Implications of Discrete, Episodic Incivility,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 18, no. 1 (2024): e12918.
237
Olga Stavrova, Daniel Ehlebracht, and Kathleen D. Vohs, “Victims, Perpetrators, or Both? The Vicious Cycle of Disrespect and Cynical Beliefs About Human Nature,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 149, no. 9 (2020): 1736.
238
Carl R. Rogers and Richard Evans Farson, Active Listening (Connecticut: Martino Fine Books, 2015).
239
Avraham N. Kluger et al., “A Meta-Analytic Systematic Review and Theory of the Effects of Perceived Listening on Work Outcomes,” Journal of Business and Psychology 39, no. 2 (2024): 295–344.
240
Hanne K. Collins et al., “Conveying and Detecting Listening During Live Conversation,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General (2023); Hanne K. Collins, “When Listening Is Spoken,” Current Opinion in Psychology 47 (2022): 101402.
241
Harry T. Reis and Shelly L. Gable, “Responsiveness,” Current Opinion in Psychology 1 (2015): 67–71.
242
Malia F. Mason et al., “Wandering Minds: The Default Network and Stimulus-Independent Thought,” Science 315, no. 5810 (2007): 393–95.
243
Bruno Galantucci, Simon Garrod, and Gareth Roberts, “Experimental Semiotics,” Language and Linguistics Compass 6, no. 8 (2012): 477–93.
244
Gareth Roberts, Benjamin Langstein, and Bruno Galantucci, “(In) Sensitivity to Incoherence in Human Communication,” Language and Communication 47 (2016): 15–22.
245
Эту грамматически правильную, но бессмысленную фразу сформулировал лингвист Ноам Хомский.
246
Collins et al., “Conveying and Detecting Listening.” the collaborative process of grounding: Herbert H. Clark and Susan E. Brennan, “Grounding in Communication,” in L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, and S. D. Teasley, eds., Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, 127–49 (New York: American Psychological Association, 1991).
247
Janet B. Bavelas et al., “The Theoretical and Research Basis of Co-Constructing Meaning in Dialogue,” Journal of Solution Focused Practices 1, no. 2 (2014): 3.
248
Janet B. Bavelas, Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson, “Listeners as Co-narrators,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79, no. 6 (2000): 941.
249
Michael Yeomans et al., “Conversational Receptiveness: Improving Engagement with Opposing Views,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 160 (2020): 131–48.
250
Collins, “When Listening Is Spoken.” “this little glittery cloud”: Wesley Morris, “Taylor Swift: Miss Americana’ Review: A Star, Surprisingly Alone,” New York Times, January 30, 2020.
251
Bitterly, Wood Brooks, Schweitzer, and Aaker, “Gender and Laughter” (в работе).
252
Gus Cooney et al., “The Many Minds Problem: Disclosure in Dyadic Versus Group Conversation,” Current Opinion in Psychology 31 (2020): 22–27.
253
R = [N·(N — 1)]/2, где N — количество людей в группе, а R — количество уникальных связей между ними.
254
Emma M. Templeton et al., “Fast Response Times Signal Social Connection in Conversation,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, no. 4 (2022): e2116915119.
255
Elizabeth Stokoe et al., “When Delayed Responses Are Productive: Being Persuaded Following Resistance in Conversation,” Journal of Pragmatics 155 (2020): 70–82.
256
So-Hyeon Shim et al., “The Impact of Leader Eye Gaze on Disparity in Member Influence: Implications for Process and Performance in Diverse Groups,” Academy of Management Journal 64, no. 6 (2021): 1873–900; Sophie Wohltjen and Thalia Wheatley, “Eye Contact Marks the Rise and Fall of Shared Attention in Conversation,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, no. 37 (2021): e2106645118.
257
Lynn Smith-Lovin and Charles Brody, “Interruptions in Group Discussions: The Effects of Gender and Group Composition,” American Sociological Review (1989): 424–35.
258
Cooney et al., “Many Minds Problem.” status as the respect and prestige: J. Stuart Bunderson and Ray E. Reagans, “Power, Status, and Learning in Organizations,” Organization Science 22, no. 5 (2011): 1182–94.
259
Статус (уважение и престиж в глазах окружающих) заметно отличается от власти (контроля над ресурсами). В этой главе мы обсуждаем статус, но многие из перечисленных особенностей применимы и к разным уровням власти. Статус и власть коррелируют друг с другом, но не на 100 процентов. Например, большинство из нас знает людей, обладающих практически безграничным контролем над ресурсами (властью), но лишенных уважения и престижа в глазах окружающих (статуса), и наоборот.
260
Joey T. Cheng et al., “Two Ways to the Top: Evidence That Dominance and Prestige Are Distinct Yet Viable Avenues to Social Rank and Influence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104, no. 1 (2013): 103; Dana R. Carney, “The Nonverbal Expression of Power, Status, and Dominance,” Current Opinion in Psychology 33 (2020): 256–64.
261
Elad N. Sherf et al., “Centralization of Member Voice in Teams: Its Effects on Expertise Utilization and Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 103, no. 8 (2018): 813.
262
Victoria L. Brescoll, “Who Takes the Floor and Why: Gender, Power, and Volubility in Organizations,” Administrative Science Quarterly 56, no. 4 (2011): 622–41.
263
Katherine Coffman et al., “Gender Stereotypes in Deliberation and Team Decisions,” Games and Economic Behavior 129 (2021): 329–49.
264