Source 1
| What is the title of your source? |
| “Cooperative Criticism: When Criticism Enhances Creativity in Brainstorming and Negotiation” By Jared R. Curhan , Tatiana Labuzova , Aditi Mehta |
| Copy and Paste the Abstract of your source. If no abstract is available, summarize in your own words what the source is about. |
| “Long-standing wisdom holds that criticism is antithetical to effective brainstorming because it incites intragroup conflict. However, a number of recent studies have challenged this assumption, suggesting that criticism might actually enhance creativity in brainstorming by fostering divergent thinking. Our paper reconciles these perspectives with new theory and a multimethod investigation to explain when and why criticism promotes creativity in brainstorming. We propose that a cooperative social context allows criticism to be construed positively, spurring creativity without inciting intragroup conflict, whereas a competitive social context makes criticism more divisive, leading to intragroup conflict and a corresponding reduction in creativity. We found support for this theory from a field experiment involving 100 group brainstorming sessions with actual stakeholders in a controversial urban planning project. In a cooperative context, instructions encouraging criticism yielded more ideas and more creative ideas, whereas in a competitive context, encouraging criticism yielded fewer ideas and less creative ideas. We replicated this finding in a laboratory study involving brainstorming in the context of a union-management negotiation scenario, which allowed us to hold constant the nature of the criticism. Taken together, our findings suggest that the optimal context for creativity in brainstorming is a cooperative one in which criticism occurs but is interpreted constructively because the brainstorming parties perceive their goals as aligned.” |
| In your own words, what is the author’s thesis (position)? |
| Many believe criticism does not help motivate brainstorming abilities in people; however, the authors of this article argue that criticism can promote creativity as long as the environment in which a person is given the feedback is noncompetitive. |
| In your own words, what are the subclaims made by the author? In other words, how does the author substantiate or defend their position? |
| The author defended their position by providing a scientific study they conducted to prove their point. That was their main source of defense to back up their claim that criticism given in a noncompetitive environment helps promote more creativity in group settings. The experiment itself has specific percentages that supported the author’s claim. For example, the authors’ study found that groups that promoted criticism had 16% more ideas than groups that discouraged criticism; the ideas produced were also found to be 17% more creative when criticism was encouraged. The study also found that criticism given in a competitive context (prefacing that one solution must be chosen and presented to solve a given problem) produced less ideas and encouraged less creativity compared to criticism given in a noncompetitive context. Apart from that, the author also references other studies conducted to provide more credibility to the author’s work. If another study showed the same results, the authors would make note of that and bring attention to the fact that their results can be replicated. |
| Key quotes: list and cite (page ref.) at least three quotes from the source that you think may be useful for your essay. |
| “When brainstorming was conducted in a cooperative context, instructions encouraging criticism resulted in 16% more ideas and in ideas rated as 17% more creative than did instructions discouraging criticism. However, when brainstorming was conducted in a competitive context, encouraging criticism resulted in 16% fewer ideas and in ideas rated as 23% less creative”(1263). “Therefore, it was not possible for us to determine whether the divergent effects of criticism were due to differences in how criticism was conveyed or how it was construed. As detailed below, we address this shortcoming in Study 2 by holding constant the nature of the criticism” (1263). “Results of Study 2 yielded a replication of the interaction effect between criticism and goal interdependence and further showed that this effect extended into a negotiation setting with a different operationalization of goal interdependence as well as a different measure of creativity. As hypothesized, participants who imagined themselves to be brainstorming with a member of their own team (cooperative context) were approximately twice as likely to generate a creative contingent contract when they were criticized relative to when they were not criticized” (1266). “Thus, as in Study 1, the effect of criticism on creativity depended on the context in which brainstorming was taking place; criticism in a cooperative context was conducive to creativity, whereas criticism in a competitive context was not” (1266). |
| What key sources does the author rely upon? List at least three. (Useful for further research) |
| “Consistent with past research on brainstorming (Bartis et al. 1988, Paulus et al. 2011), there was a significant correlation between measures of quantity and quality—that is, the number of ideas generated by a group was positively associated with the average creativity of the group’s ideas, r(99) = 0.49, p < 0.001” (1261). – Source: Bartis S, Szymanski K, Harkins SG (1988) Evaluation and performance: A two-edged knife. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 14(2): 242–251 – Source: Paulus PB, Kohn NW, Arditti LE (2011) Effects of quantity and quality instructions on brainstorming. J. Creative Behav. 45(1): 38–46. “For example, an early yet frequently cited study by Weisskopf-Joelson and Eliseo (1961) found that groups instructed to criticize generated fewer ideas than did groups instructed to remain noncritical (see also Parnes and Meadow 1959, D’Zurilla and Nezu 1980). By contrast, a more recent study by Nemeth and colleagues (2004, p. 369) showed that brainstorming groups generated more ideas when they were encouraged to “debate and even criticize each other’s ideas” than when they” (1257). – Source: Weisskopf-Joelson E, Eliseo TS (1961) An experimental study of the effectiveness of brainstorming. J. Appl. Psych. 45(1):45–49. – Source: Parnes SJ, Meadow A (1959) Effects of “brainstorming” instructions on creative problem solving by trained and untrained subjects. J. Ed. Psych. 50(4):171–176. – Source: D’Zurilla TJ, Nezu A (1980) A study of the generation-of-alternatives process in social problem solving. Cognitive Therapy Res. 4(1): 67–72. – Source: Nemeth CJ, Personnaz B, Personnaz M, Goncalo JA (2004) The liberating role of conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 34(4):365–374. |
Source 2
| What is the title of your source? |
| “Negative emotional reactions to criticism: Perceived criticism and source affects extent of hurt and relational distancing” By: Michelle Jin Yee Neoh, Jia Hui Teng, Albert Lee, Peipei Setoh, Claudio Mulatti, Gianluca Esposito |
| Copy and Paste the Abstract of your source. If no abstract is available, summarize in your own words what the source is about. |
| “Criticism is commonly perceived as hurtful and individuals may respond differently to criticism originating from different sources. However, the influence of an individual’s perception of criticism in their social relationships on negative emotional reactions to criticism has not been examined across different relational contexts. The present study investigated the influence of perceived criticism and relational contexts–mother, father, romantic partner, and workplace supervisor–on the feelings of hurt and relational distancing experienced upon receiving criticism. Participants (N = 178) completed the Perceived Criticism Measure and read vignettes describing scenarios of personally directed criticism in the four relational contexts. Significant main effects of perceived criticism and source were found on levels of relational distancing. Participants who perceived their relational partner to be more critical experienced greater distancing upon receiving criticism from them. Greater relational distancing was experienced for criticism received from workplace supervisors compared to mothers, fathers and romantic partners. Results indicate that emotional reactions and relationship outcomes in response to criticism can differ based on individual differences and relational context, suggesting their role in relationship maintenance and development of psychopathology.” |
| In your own words, what is the author’s thesis (position)? |
| The authors claim that those who are repeatedly hurt by close family members and believe their family members are critical would experience heightened levels of emotional pain while receiving criticism compared to people who do not perceive their family members to be critical. The authors also claim that, in comparison to a relationship between two non-familial people, a relationship between two family members will experience larger levels of hurt by each other but smaller chances of both people drifting apart. |
| In your own words, what are the subclaims made by the author? In other words, how does the author substantiate or defend their position? |
| The authors’ thesis was less of a thesis but more of a hypothesis. Going into their experiment, the authors’ believed that those who viewed their family as very critical would feel more hurt and distance themselves from the family member giving the criticism. However, the author provides the results of her study to show how her original hypothesis is flawed. Unlike her original hypothesis, she found that the people who viewed others as heavily critical did distance themselves from those who criticized them, but they did not feel heightened levels of hurt. The authors interpreted these results and claimed that people may have developed a coping mechanism against the continued cycle of criticism from people. The authors are transparent about their test results. This in turn makes their work more credible. As they begin to provide more support for the parts of the hypothesis that is correct, it makes their stance more believable, and as the authors provide explanations as to why their initial hypothesis was inaccurate, their arguments remain credible sounding as they are transparent with their results. |
| Key quotes: list and cite (page ref.) at least three quotes from the source that you think may be useful for your essay. |
| “One possible interpretation of these findings could be that participants with high PC employed relational distancing as a coping mechanism by disengaging themselves from the hurt and social pain associated with criticism” (7). “Hence, it is possible that participants in the high PC group tended to distance themselves from the relationship and in doing so, “distanced” their emotions from the situation and did not show significantly higher levels of hurt feelings compared to participants in the low PC group” (7). “Another possible interpretation is that participants who tend to perceive higher levels of criticism in a relationship showed emotional habituation towards the experience of hurt arising from criticism, such that the more a participant perceives a relationship counterpart to be critical of them, the more accustomed they were to criticism from these relational partners” (8). |
| What key sources does the author rely upon? List at least three. (Useful for further research) |
| “When messages are perceived to be a continuing pattern of hurtful communication, they resulted in increased relational distancing and more intense social pain experienced [11].” – Source: Vangelisti AL, Young SL. When words hurt: The effects of perceived intentionality on interpersonal relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2000 Jun; 17(3):393–424. “Similarly, individuals have been observed to get used to emotional pain and become less sensitive to their own hurt feelings with repeated, ongoing exposure to certain hurtful behaviours [17].” – Source: Vangelisti AL, Maguire KC, Alexander AL, Clark G. Hurtful family environments: Links with individual, relationship, and perceptual variables. Communication Monographs. 2007 Sep 1; 74(3):357–85. “Previous studies have found that hurtful behaviour by family members tend to elicit greater emotional pain than hurtful behaviour by others in non-familial and non-romantic relationships, while a lower distancing effect on the relationship was observed by people who reported hurt feelings by a family member compared to other relational partners [24].” – Source: Vangelisti AL, Crumley LP. Reactions to messages that hurt: The influence of relational contexts. Communications Monographs. 1998 Sep 1; 65(3):173–96. |
Source 3
| What is the title of your source? |
| “The relationship between self-criticism and suicide probability” By Catherine O’Neill, Daniel Pratt, Meryl Kilshaw, Kate Ward, James Kelly, Gillian Haddock |
| Copy and Paste the Abstract of your source. If no abstract is available, summarize in your own words what the source is about. |
| “The relationship of self-to-self relating and suicide has received attention in explanatory models of suicide. However, exploration of specific types of self-relationships, namely feelings of inadequacy (associated with perfectionism), self-attacking and the ability to be kind and nurturing towards the self has received limited attention in a suicidal population. The present study assessed the relative contribution of selfcriticism to suicide probability, alongside established predictors of suicidal ideation; hopelessness, depression, defeat and entrapment. Participants completed measures of inadequacy, self-attacking, self-reassurance, defeat, entrapment, depression and hopelessness (N = 101). A correlation, regression and mediation analysis was undertaken. Results demonstrated that self-attacking has a direct relationship with suicide probability, alongside established predictors; entrapment and hopelessness. Depressive symptomology was not found to be a significant predictor of suicide probability in this population. Addressing particularly hostile forms of self-criticism may be a promising area in terms of future research and clinical practice. Entrapment continues to be a significant predictor of suicide risk and interventions that target this experience should be explored.” |
| In your own words, what is the author’s thesis (position)? |
| The author claims self-criticism indicates high probability of suicide in individuals, and, in order to proactively promote suicide prevention, the topic of self criticism should be studied more. |
| In your own words, what are the subclaims made by the author? In other words, how does the author substantiate or defend their position? |
| To defend their position, the authors address the aspects of self criticism they believe are leading people to commit suicide. The authors talk about a type of self-criticism that has instilled a perfectionist mindset for some and a type of self-criticism that eats at people’s confidence in terms of status. By providing these types of self-criticism, readers are more likely to believe the author’s thesis because many people have experienced issues with being a perfectionist or being subconscious about one’s status. The authors provides the results of their own study to defend their thesis. After conducting their experiment, the authors found out that self criticism in terms of self-attacking was heavily correlated with suicide probability, and the authors mainly depend on this source to support their position. Apart from that, the authors also reference the works of other scientists to show how their results can be replicated or provide plausible analysis of their results. |
| Key quotes: list and cite (page ref.) at least three quotes from the source that you think may be useful for your essay. |
| “Results suggest that self-attacking is a significant independent predictor of suicide probability, alongside established predictors of suicide; entrapment and hopelessness” (7). “Research suggests that for highly self-critical individuals, adverse childhood experiences such as emotional and sexual abuse, physical neglect and perceived overprotectiveness of the early primary caregiver, increase levels of internalized self-criticism and shame” (7). “It has been suggested that increased levels of internalized selfcriticism and social perfectionism lead ultimately to social disconnection and experiences of thwarted belongingness (O’Connor & Noyce, 2008). Thwarted belongingness is a well evidenced construct in the interpersonal theory of suicide (Joiner et al., 2009) and involves the experience of alienation from family, friends or other valued groups” (8). |
| What key sources does the author rely upon? List at least three. (Useful for further research) |
| “This study’s findings support recent work by O’Connor and Portzky (2018), which suggests that entrapment is an important factor in the progression from mental distress to suicidal behaviour.” – Source: O’Connor, R. C., & Portzky, G. (2018). The relationship between entrapment and suicidal behavior through the lens of the integrated motivational–volitional model of suicidal behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 22(Supplement C, 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. copsyc.2017.07.021 “This internalized self-criticism and self-attacking may lead to increased feelings of entrapment as an individual is unable to escape the persecutory aspects of the self (Baumeister, 1990; Gilbert & Irons, 2005).” – Source: Baumeister, R. F. (1990). Suicide as escape from self. Psychological Review, 97(1), 90–113. – Source: Gilbert, P., Broomhead, C., Irons, C., McEwan, K., Bellew, R., Mills, A., … Knibb, R. (2007). Development of a striving to avoid inferiority scale. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 46(Pt 3), 633–648. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466606X157789 “A number of explanatory models of suicide incorporate ideas that relate to negative evaluations of the self (Johnson et al., 2008), escape from aversive self-awareness (Baumeister, 1990) and their relationship to increased levels of suicidality.” – Source: Johnson, J., Gooding, P., & Tarrier, N. (2008). Suicide probability in schizophrenia: Explanatory models and clinical implications, The Schematic Appraisal Model of Suicide (SAMS). Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 81(1), 55–77. https://doi.org/10.1348/147608307X244996 |
Source 4
| What is the title of your source? |
| “Negative Effects of Destructive Criticism: Impact on Conflict, Self-Efficacy, and Task Performance” By Robert A, Baron |
| Copy and Paste the Abstract of your source. If no abstract is available, summarize in your own words what the source is about. |
| “In Study I, 83 undergraduates received either constructive criticism (feedback that was specific, considerate, and did not attribute poor performance to intemal causes) or destructive criticism (feedback that violated these basic principles) of their work. Those who received destructive criticism reported greater anger and tension and indicated that they would be more likely to handle future disagreements with the source through resistance or avoidance and less likely to handle disagreements through collaboration or compromise. In Study 2, 106 undergraduates who received destructive criticism of their work on an initial task set lower goals and reported lower self-efficacy on two additional tasks than did subjects who received constructive criticism or no feedback. In Study 3, 108 employees of a large food-processing company rated the importance of 14 potential causes of conflict in their organization. Poor use of criticism was perceived as a more important cause of conflict and received higher ratings than did competition over resources or disputes over jurisdiction.” |
| In your own words, what is the author’s thesis (position)? |
| The author claims that people subjected to destructive criticism will perform worse than those who received constructive criticism. |
| In your own words, what are the subclaims made by the author? In other words, how does the author substantiate or defend their position? |
| The author mainly supports his stance by providing evidence from their self conducted experiments. They introduce the method and procedure of the experiment to ensure the readers understand how they are testing their hypothesis. Afterwards, the author analyzed his results, and claimed they support his hypothesis/stance. He highlights all the aspects of his experiment which showed people were angrier after receiving destructive criticism, and they were more eager to distance themselves from the person who provided the criticism. |
| Key quotes: list and cite (page ref.) at least three quotes from the source that you think may be useful for your essay. |
| “First, subjects reported feeling angrier and more tense after receiving destructive than constructive criticism” (4). “In particular, they suggest that individuals who are exposed to destructive criticism may seek to lessen conflict with the source of such feedback by avoiding further contact with such persons” (7). “Considered together, the results of the three studies reported here suggest that destructive criticism can affect several important processes in work settings…destructive criticism appears to reduce recipients’ preference for handling future disagreements with the source of such feedback through conciliatory means” (8). |
| What key sources does the author rely upon? List at least three. (Useful for further research) |
| “Such reactions, too, may decrease the probability of effective conflict resolution”(cf Lewicki & Litterer, 1985). –Source: Lewicid, R. J.. & Utterer, J, A. (198S). Negotiation. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin “These results confirm those of Study 1, and thus provide additional evidence that destructive criticism can exert negative effects on interpersonal relations, and so, perhaps, on organizational conflict (cf Baron, 1984; Pruitt & Rubin, 1986).” – Source: Baron. R. A. (1984). Reducing organizational conflict: An incompatible response approach. Journal of Applied Psychology. 69, 272-279. – Source: Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z, (1986). Social conflict. New York: Random House. |
Source 5
| What is the title of your source? |
| “Impact of Unsolicited Negative Feedback in Academic Settings” By Shazia Sheikh, Fauzia Nausheen, Joel Arvizo-Zavala, Sherif S. Hassan |
| Copy and Paste the Abstract of your source. If no abstract is available, summarize in your own words what the source is about. |
| “Introduction: Appropriate feedback is crucial for quality improvement, productivity, and growth. There is a scarcity of information on the effect of unsolicited negative feedback (USNF). Our current study aimed to investigate the impact of USNF on motivation, performance, and mental well-being. Methods: Data was collected on a 5-point Likert scale by a survey of 10 validated questions asking the impact of USNF around three themes: 1. “Mental Health,” 2. “Motivation,” and 3. “Performance.” The rationale of the questions was to investigate the negative emotional state and its impact on confidence, motivation, and performance of similar activities after getting USNF. Additionally, it impacts the mental state of anger, sadness, and self-criticism. Results: A total of 38 participants completed the questionnaire. The agreement after USNF was 57.8% to develop harsh or critical self-talk, 76.3% for mood changes, 57.8% helps to learn, and 63% helps to fix things received on positive feedback. A total of 86.8% need time to reflect, 76.3% need time to process, 65.78% try to avoid USNF, 31.57% start to avoid people who give USNF, and 23.68% try to prove themselves to those who give USNF. The results showed a strong correlation between a person’s need for time to process emotions and demand for space to process emotions and forecasting memories after the USNF. Conclusion: The psychological implications of USNF can be profound, leading to long-term negative effects on mental health, motivation, and performance. Training individuals to deliver negative feedback in a more constructive and positive manner is essential to mitigate these detrimental consequences.” |
| In your own words, what is the author’s thesis (position)? |
| The author claims unsolicited negative feedback can negatively impact someone’s motivation, work ethic, and feelings by inducing anxiety. |
| In your own words, what are the subclaims made by the author? In other words, how does the author substantiate or defend their position? |
| The authors support their claim by providing research evidence conducted by themselves. Once again, the authors provide a clear set of instructions to ensure readers understand how their experiment accurately makes an assumption about the impacts of unsolicited negative feedback. Apart from that, the authors provide various charts and tables summarizing their research results to allow readers to see how the results correlate with their hypothesis that unsolicited negative feedback causes negative implications on people mood and work ethic. Lastly the authors analyze their work in their discussions portion, and even reference the work of other authors to make their analysis and stance more credible. |
| Key quotes: list and cite (page ref.) at least three quotes from the source that you think may be useful for your essay. |
| “The findings of our study are consistent with several studies that concentrate on providing and receiving feedback regarding someone’s performance, abilities, or goal-achieving. Negative feedback, especially when it is unsolicited, might have a detrimental influence on performance in the future”(6). “Given the negatively correlated associations between USNF, learning tools, and feedback avoidance observed in this study, it’s critical that participants receive training on how to express their negative feedback constructively”(6). “It highlights the negative repercussions of USNF on motivation, mental well-being, and performance. The importance of providing constructive feedback as a valuable teaching tool is emphasized, focusing on improvement rather than criticism”(7). |
| What key sources does the author rely upon? List at least three. (Useful for further research) |
| “According to Oktaria and Soemantri’s research, [8] positive feedback improves performance more than negative feedback, especially when it comes from an unexpected source.” – Source: Oktaria D, Soemantri D: Undergraduate medical students’ perceptions on feedback-seeking behavior . Malays J Med Sci. 2018, 25:75-83. 10.21315/mjms2018.25.1.9 “. A person’s ability to complete a task and evaluate their own performance can both be improved with feedback” [11]. – Source: Fotheringham D: The role of expert judgement and feedback in sustainable assessment: a discussion paper . Nurse Educ Today. 2011, 31:e47-50. 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.12.008 “The impact, however, differs depending on the feedback given, as evidenced by the fact that constructive criticism was discovered to be useful in improving certain talents that required corrective comments rather than merely positive compliments” [14,15]. –Source: Boehler ML, Rogers DA, Schwind CJ, Mayforth R, Quin J, Williams RG, Dunnington G: An investigation of medical student reactions to feedback: a randomised controlled trial. Med Educ. 2006, 40:746-9.10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02503.x –Source: Rafiq A, Tamariz F, Boanca C, Lavrentyev V, Merrell RC: Objective assessment of training surgical skills using simulated tissue interface with real-time feedback. J Surg Educ. 2008, 65:270-4. 10.1016/j.jsurg.2008.05.012 |
Developing your Research Question
| What is your research subject? |
| My research topic is on criticism and specifically the implications of criticism on the people receiving the criticism. |
| List the resources you have so far (at least 5): |
| “Cooperative Criticism: When Criticism Enhances Creativity in Brainstorming and Negotiation” by Jared R. Curhan , Tatiana Labuzova , Aditi Mehta “Negative emotional reactions to criticism: Perceived criticism and source affects extent of hurt and relational distancing” by: Michelle Jin Yee Neoh, Jia Hui Teng, Albert Lee, Peipei Setoh, Claudio Mulatti, Gianluca Esposito “The relationship between self-criticism and suicide probability” by Catherine O’Neill, Daniel Pratt, Meryl Kilshaw, Kate Ward, James Kelly, Gillian Haddock “Does Constructive Performance Feedback Improve Citizenship Intentions and Job Satisfaction? The Roles of Perceived Opportunities for Advancement, Respect, and Mood” by Kristin L. Sommer, Mukta Kulkarni “Impact of Unsolicited Negative Feedback in Academic Settings” by Shazia Sheikh, Fauzia Nausheen, Joel Arvizo-Zavala, Sherif S. Hassan |
| In your own words, how would you characterize the present controversy of your research area? Another way to look at it: why is this research area important? |
| My research area is important because it concerns children who are easily impressionable and vulnerable to criticism. As children are essentially the ones who are going to carry the future generations, it is important that we as a society are determining the best approach of raising them. The topic of providing criticism is important to discuss when we think about children’s upbringing. Apart from that, suicide is a leading cause of death in the US. Studies have shown that a lot of self-criticism contributes to people taking their lives, so there needs to be a greater discussion about self-criticism and peer criticism/pressure to prevent the number of suicides that occur. |
| What are the possible outcomes/resolutions? Are outcomes binary (yes/no e.g. should we ban the death penalty) or relative (e.g. how much should the annual state budget be allocated towards education)? |
| The outcomes can be binary with the two answers being criticism is necessary to support character development and criticism is not necessary in terms of supporting character development. I can see how the outcomes can also be relative if people were to ask how much criticism is required to help provide character development. In this case it depends on what people intend as character development for the person receiving criticism. |
| (If any) What are the conditions, qualifications, externalities, contingencies that may affect outcome (i.e. is there a legislative bill down the pipeline?) |
| There are no conditions, qualifications, externalities, contingencies that may affect outcome. Even if a large number of studies show that criticism causes an overwhelming negative impact (which I don’t think it will), I don’t think a law can be created to ban criticism. This is because that law would essentially clash with pre-existing laws that protect the right to free speech. |
| What is your preferred outcome? (Your position) |
| I believe criticism is necessary in a child’s upbringing. There is history of criticism inducing negative impacts, but I believe those scenarios can be limited if people provide feedback in a specific way that helps people rather than tear them down. This means the environment must be supportive, and the language of the criticism must be supportive and constructive |
| Why? |
| Of the articles I have read, many suggest how important and helpful criticism is in terms of helping people grow. A lot of times criticism is only associated with negative outcomes if the environment which the criticism is given in is negative. That goes to show that criticism itself can be a powerful and helpful tool if people are able to effectively provide it in a way which boosts peoples self-esteem and does not tear it down. |
| Who is your intended audience? |
| While there are many groups of people who are tasked with providing criticism, I am choosing to hone in on parents tasked with providing feedback to their kids. |
| What is your research question? (Try to state this as simply as possible) |
| To what extent is criticism necessary in improving people’s abilities in the workforce. |
| Notes/Things to look into which may improve the overall clarity, focus, complexity of your question |
| – The positive AND negative implications of criticism ^ to emphasize the nuance of this research question |