As I thought about what to write for the subject of feedback, I started chatting with my roommates about what came to mind when they thought about the topic. One of my roommates had an immediate negative reaction to the notion of feedback that I was surprised by. He mentioned two things that are particularly relevant to the concepts we’ve discussed in class: feedback in groups and positive versus negative feedback.
1) Feedback in groups
What is the difference between giving a person feedback in a group setting as opposed to in an individual setting? My roommate described an experience in which he received feedback in class, surrounded by peers. For him, this experience was incredibly anxiety inducing and relatively ineffective as he was more focused on the impressions of his peers than on the specific feedback he was receiving. To me, this sounds like an issue of directed attention. The distraction of his classmates’ perceived judgement was too overwhelming and left minimal capacity to focus his attention on the comments of his professor. Feedback in a group setting can also interact in interesting ways with norms, as feedback that is similar to that of your peers may feel more desirable than unique feedback. I’m curious if anybody has any examples of times when they received feedback in group settings, and how effective it was?
2) Positive versus negative feedback.
The second point that my roommate raised was the issue of negative feedback. He mentioned an experience in which he had received negative feedback, which, rather than incentivizing a change in behavior, caused him to disengage and shut down. His reaction sounded a lot like psychological reactance in that rather than take the feedback and adjust his behavior, he ignored it and instead adopted a generally negative opinion of the entire process of receiving feedback at all. We’ve talked a lot in this class about the power of positivity and the danger of using negative emotions to affect behavior change, and his experience seemed to reinforce what we’ve learned. When it comes to environmentally responsible behaviors, then, what is the best way to deliver negative feedback about a person’s actions? Is it to always focus on the positive, or is there a way to effectively deliver negative feedback that doesn’t elicit reactance. I’ve heard of the idea of “sandwiching” negative feedback, meaning leading with something positive, ending with something positive, and delivering the negative feedback in between. Are there any other ways to do it effectively? Is it possible to provide negative feedback in more subtle ways, or is any negative response to a person’s behavior going to risk all of the potential dangers associated with negative emotions?
I have also noticed similar thoughts about feedback. I have personally reacted so strongly to negative feedback in the past that I have historically tried very, very hard to avoid doing anything wrong. Ever. This is not always a productive way to live, so I have tried to get better about it. But learning about it more in this class has made me wonder why early childhood negative feedback experiences scarred me so much (as simple as getting yelled at by my first grade teacher for coloring instead of reading). I think it is mostly for the reasons you cited through your roommate's examples--I associate the negative experience with the feedback and want to avoid that experience, especially when it is paired with being viewed negatively by my peers or going against any of their social norms.
ReplyDeleteI do, however, believe that people need to know when they're doing something wrong. I have thought a lot about this specifically in the context of national park law enforcement (my boyfriend's job). I continually fear that law enforcement rangers might, through giving people citations, get people to stop loving their parks. Now I understand why I had that worry--I'm afraid people will associate that negative feedback with the park and their appreciation of natural resources overall. This would be bad, since we want people to appreciate nature, just in the right way. This all has led me to the importance of a term we all know well: constructive criticism. Now I feel like I understand why this is a common feedback method--it conveys "negative" information, but does it in a more positive light by focusing on how the person can be better and further their own goals. This has to do with appropriately framing the feedback and the issue, and focusing on future behavior more than past behavior. Instead of simply saying "it was very bad for you to feed that bear," it could be better to explain the positive outcomes of not feeding the bear (protecting the bear, protecting you, making sure the park stays safe to visit, making sure you have a good visit to the park). It wouldn't hurt to emphasize that the person is on the path to the right environmental behaviors, and should continue them with some suggested edits.
This discussion has made me think of feedback and how it relates to short vs. long-term behavior change. I do think it is natural for many of us to dislike getting negative feedback or avoid it (especially if it is done in a harsh, rather than softer way). However, even negative feedback or constructive criticism might evoke a kind of negative reactance in the short-term, I wonder if it ultimately works to help us improve ourselves and change our behavior? As long as the feedback is not given in such a harsh manner as to emotionally scar us, is it ultimately worth it? For example, I know that some Opower customers asked to opt out of the feedback messages because they didn't like them, but I wonder if they were to be followed up with, if they have actually improved their energy use in the long-term after having received that feedback even once?
ReplyDeleteLauren, do you think people who opt out of the OPower reports do it because they don't like the negative feedback that they aren't as efficient as their neighbors? If so, what about this feedback might be effective for prompting long-term change? OR, might there be another reason people opt out of receiving the OPower reports?
DeleteNegative feedback is definitely a tricky thing to navigate. I think with the "sandwiching" negative feedback approach, there may be a risk of diluting the negative feedback with too much positive feedback in a way that the original message is no longer strong enough. Something I think may work better is to start with positive feedback and end with negative feedback. Starting with positive feedback, you are acknowledging what someone does well, and makes it more likely they will be more receptive to listening to the negative feedback. I think that overall, though, how to best administer negative feedback will largely depend on the person. Some people may not like negative responses of any kind, so negative feedback should be provided in a more subtle manner. Others may be just fine with negative responses to behavior, so negative feedback can be said in a more direct manner.
ReplyDelete