Now listen to this! Evidence from a cross-spliced experimental design contrasting pressuring and supportive communications

Abstract

Motivating communications are a frequent experience within daily life. Recently, it has been found that two types of motivations are spoken with distinct tones of voices: control (pressure) is spoken with a low pitched, loud tone of voice, fast speech rate, and harsh sounding voice quality; autonomy (support) is spoken with a higher pitched, quieter tone of voice and a slower speech rate. These two motivational tones of voice also differentially impact listeners' well-being. Yet, little is known about the brain mechanisms linked to motivational communications. Here, participants were asked to listen to semantically identical sentences spoken in controlling, neutral, or autonomy-supportive prosody. We also presented cross-spliced versions of these sentences for maximum control over information presentation across time. Findings showed listeners quickly detected whether a speaker was providing support, being pressuring, or not using motivating tones at all. Also, listeners who are pressured do not seem to respond anew when a supportive motivational context arises, but those who had been supported are affected by a newly pressuring environment. Findings are discussed in light of motivational and prosody literatures, and in terms of significance for the role of motivational communications on behavior.

Teachers' motivational prosody: A pre‐registered experimental test of children's reactions to tone of voice used by teachers

“…When children heard teachers use controlling tones of voice that were pressuring or demanding, they expected to feel lower psychologi cal need satisfaction, lower well-being in terms of affect and self-esteem, and less intention to disclose personal information to those teachers in the future. These findings are consistent with past electrophysiological work that shows that controlling voices, more so than autonomy-supportive voices, command immediate attention when compared to neutral-sounding voices (Paulmann et al, 2019;Zougkou et al, 2017). Here, any attentional preferences to demanding sounding voices observed in previous research were detrimental, not beneficial, to our participants.…”

A Gamified Experiential Learning Intervention for Engaging Students Through Satisfying Needs

“…However, there are other ways that need-supportive teaching is conveyed. For example, some work suggests that a motivational tone of voice may play a role in students’ experience (Paulmann et al, 2019; Weinstein et al, 2018). Studying this, and other strategies, can help to build a deeper understanding of what need-supportive technology use looks like in the classroom.…”

Strengthening the assessment of self‐talk in sports through a multi‐method approach

“…One possible explanatory factor is the tone of voice in which positive self‐talk is expressed, which might alter the observed relationships. That is, when positive self‐talk is expressed through a controlling tone of voice, it may equally come with elevated pressure, while a more informational tone of voice may help athletes to put off the pressure. Future research may additionally map the tone of voice accompanying self‐talk, such that both its content and the way of expressing self‐talk can be studied in combination.…”

“…Indeed, the limited available past research is inconclusive with respect to this issue. While positive self‐talk, such as anxiety control, may help to put off some of the pressure, if the tone of voice underlying positive self‐talk is more controlling, it will likely eliciting a greater sense of pressure.…”