Why criticism lasts longer than praise

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220624-why-criticism-lasts-longer-than-praise

by rntn • 4 years ago

85 72 4 years ago

bbc.com

darkerside• 4 years ago

And this is why downvotes on Twitter may be such a key step in human macroevolution

mrwnmonm• 4 years ago

You mean because you get to have a reaction to negative comments?

rr888• 4 years ago

I think people change though. I've been online so long I know not to take downvotes personally. I can now recognize sometimes I'm wrong, sometimes I'm not clear, sometimes I'm in an echo chamber.

Dudeman112• 4 years ago

And sometimes people are actual morons

Not always, but definitely something to keep in mind when dealing with popularity metrics

cntainer7• 4 years ago

I'm curious how this applies to employee performance reviews. Could feedback about what an employee needs to improve be perceived as criticism no matter how you try to frame it?

What I noticed is that, when I have to review someone in my team and I gather feedback from other members of the team, I rarely get any critical input, even if the feedback is anonymous. Many avoid giving what they perceive as negative feedback even if it's framed as an opportunity to help the other person improve.

dgb23• 4 years ago

I can think of possible reasons.

For one there might be a power structure, where employees feel they will harm their colleagues by revealing criticism. For example if performance is used to determine further compensation and job security. If instead there is a healthy error culture, while improvement and ownership is incentivized, then people might want to share more.

Secondly it is bad form to criticize others indirectly, good form to own up your own mistakes or to personally and directly ask for criticism. If there is a middleman, then providing criticism can come off as weak and finger pointing. It might be easier and more healthy to give people an opportunity to ask others about their opinion.

Third, they might be many other social reasons like being timid or not thinking all too much about other people's performance. They might just like each other, be indifferent or afraid or what have you. Some might not even know very well how to give constructive, useful criticism. To get people to care and share their opinions freely you need regular practice. Face to face. And again, it should typically start with self-criticism, because that invites ownership and openness instead of a you vs me kind of deal.

curiousllama• 4 years ago

1 and 2 are def reasons I hesitate.

I’d add: what possible good could come from criticizing someone to their boss? If I have feedback for someone that’s substantive enough to bring up, then I’ll just tell them. If the relationship isn’t strong enough to just tell them directly, then it’s probably not going to be improved by criticism, even anonymously (however constructive & well meaning).

BlargMcLarg• 4 years ago

Most places here have a ritual to "say something bad and say something good", which mostly brings out a half-assed response from one side or even both sides.

Criticizing others or even just things has been stamped out during upbringing due to it generally being a really bad move socially, whereas praising others is much easier. I'd extrapolate that and say most people don't think of things that could be criticized too much as a result, and don't have enough experience criticizing, which in turn creates little critical feedback.

lotsofpulp3• 4 years ago

even if the feedback is anonymous.

There is usually good reason for an employee to believe that anonymous feedback is not truly anonymous. Assuming it actually is anonymous would be all downside and no upside for the employee.

Majestic121• 4 years ago

The upside is that your manager gets constructive feedback and improves from it, making your life as an employee better.

Not all managers respond well to feedback, but if you have a good one and you're constructive it can produce real improvements

cntainer7• 4 years ago

The way I'm sharing it with the person being reviewed is: "This is all the feedback you got from people you work with", without attaching names to it.

If I have reasons to think the person will take it personally or the way it's written is too negative I refrain from sharing it raw and I prepare a tl;dr.

What's important is to extract the main points from the feedback.

Assuming it actually is anonymous would be all downside and no upside for the employee.

Not sure I understand why.

PuppyTailWags• 4 years ago

I will always hesitate to give negative feedback in the format of an official review at work. These things are attached to someone's ability to keep a roof over their head, directly and indirectly.

yodsanklai• 4 years ago

I think it depends on what we mean be "negative". Constructive, easily actionable feedback can also be an opportunity for an employee to improve, which may help with next evaluation.

cntainer7• 4 years ago

I think that's a matter of trust between the manager and his team. If the team culture is set for continuous improvement this kind of feedback should be considered normal. If an employee is at risk for termination that won't be determined just by some peer feedback.

ARandomerDude• 4 years ago

I never give negative feedback unless I think (1) it's necessary, and (2) the other person is open to hearing it. If either of those elements is missing, I'm wasting my time and potentially harming myself later.

geodel• 4 years ago

Interesting. I have given frank feedback in case a team member is just coasting for long time and not doing their share. In fact many places I worked people feel free to offer their feedback even without being asked.

mytailorisrich• 4 years ago

My view is that feedback, especially negative feedback, should be timely.

If an employee 'discovers' negative feedback at performance review time it is not good, and the person may get the additional feeling that their manager withheld telling them in time only to 'frame' them on record at review time (I say that because I was on the receiving end once).

So I think that negative feedback in formal performance reviews is particularly sensitive.

cntainer7• 4 years ago

I completely agree. From my perspective there's the day to day operational kind of feedback: "X, your latest change broke production the 2nd time this week, let's see what we can do to prevent that". This needs to be addressed as part of the daily work. Business as usual for someone leading/managing a team.

And then there is the periodic performance review were we want to take a high-level look at changes in impact, outcomes, behavior over longer periods of time.

WhitneyLand• 4 years ago

Is it disingenuous to tell kids sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me?

Or, what other people think of you doesn’t matter?

As the article points out it can be damaging at any age. Maybe a better approach is to tell them, yes it can hurt, but here are some ways to process that and work on resilience.

lotsofpulp3• 4 years ago

The purpose of the sticks and stones saying is to prevent disproportionate physical responses to verbal insults.

You are justified in needing to use violence to stop someone from attacking you with sticks and stones because those cannot be mentally shrugged off, but it is better to walk away from words being said to you, since you can mentally shrug them off.

9887472• 4 years ago

Which brings me to probably most misunderstood of Jesus teachings: "turning the other cheek". People usually interpret it as a call to pacifism - do not respond to violence with more violence. What people miss is that for Jesus contemporaries being slapped in the face hardly counted as violence (if it happens between two adult men it is really hard to cause any lasting damage this way). Instead, slap in the face would be considered an insult, and the meaning of "turn the other cheek" phrase is pretty similar to "stick and stones" saying - don't unnecessarily escalate from insult to violence.

tut-urut-utut• 4 years ago

One has to be careful here. Sometimes physical violence is the only effective answer to stop bullying.

People often underestimate how much constant mobbing can hurt. Ignore? It gets worse. Fight back verbally? Usually doesn't work, since verbal harassers are much more versed at insulting and hurting mentally. You just can't be so good as someone who practices insults and mockery day in day out.

What choice do you have? Move the battle to the playground where, even if you can't win, you at least may have a chance to cause some harm to the enemy.

Kick the bastard with the fist? In most of the cases it works[1]. If the bully is physically weaker, he won't bully your child again. If the bully is stronger, he kicks too, there's a fight, but still, next time bully will think about consequences of insulting again.

[1] of course, physical force only in a very limited way. Overuse of physical force to actually injure someone, or use weapons and tools, is of course not a way to go.

EDIT: Physical violence doesn't always work. Frequently is not even a good, let alone the best option. But still, there are situations when it can be an adequate response, and this option shouldn't be a priori dismissed.

inanutshellus• 4 years ago

Is it disingenuous to tell kids sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me?

That phrase's famous usage is as a way to portray self-respect and non-violent defense of oneself after being verbally attacked.

In that context, it still has value and is not disingenuous to provide to children.

wahnfrieden4• 4 years ago

the question for you making that statement is whether children usually understand that to be the point. Or whether there are more effective approaches without harmful misunderstandings

themitigating2• 4 years ago

Does it? Only if the other person stops and since they are aware of the phrase would they?

watwut4• 4 years ago

It does not portray self respect. It says that if you feel hurt by words you are in the wrong. The phrase makes it harder to actually truthfully talk about whatever is going on.

themitigating2• 4 years ago

I agree. If someone is feeling a certain way bascially telling them "you shouldn't care" doesn't make sense. Emotions are powerful and difficult to control, especially for young people

atwood224• 4 years ago

I think it is disingenuous to tell kids that. Learning to disregard others’ opinions of you is a skill learned with time. The best way to teach that skill is to instill a sense of self worth and high self esteem in kids. Words very obviously do hurt kids, so to tell them that words don’t hurt is to disregard their feelings at best and call them a liar at worst. Understanding the complex web of emotions felt in response to stimuli is a central part of growing up and not something you can shortcut with platitudes.

s1artibartfast9• 4 years ago

The obvious intent is forward moving, not retrospective. Nothing can change the past hurt. However, you can control your future emotions. Sticks and stones is not a full instruction set, but an introduction to the concept.

vlovich123• 4 years ago

It’s a mantra a child can use to express to others and help steel themselves in the face of a verbal assault. Is it actually harmful? I don’t know but it could be harmful to some and helpful to others. I remember a moment when during lunch at elementary school someone retired insulting my mom. My response was to just ignore it because this taunt changed nothing in the world. The moment that sticks for me though is when the adult lunch monitor asked me why I wasn’t defending my mother.

watwut4• 4 years ago

I think it IS disingenuous and also lie. What people tell about you and to you affects your experience and possibilities a lot.

The above phrase is told to bullied kids so that they shut up and so that adults don't have to deal with situation. Teaching the kid how to defend from bullies, how to avoid them or addressing bullies themselves is much harder. If the kid is not pickes on but kid complains for wrong reasons, then explaining the situation to the kid is also harder.

wvh• 4 years ago

There's a large difference between personal offence and genuine threat, and hence in optimal response. Please teach them that difference; we don't seem to be doing a good job at the moment.

pixl97• 4 years ago

Pain lasts longer than pleasure, death lasts longer than life.

slfnflctd• 4 years ago

I have a sibling who is constantly reminding me to 'appreciate the wins' and give myself credit for accomplishments. I need this reminder, because as soon as I complete a task these days, I immediately forget about it and begin compulsively obsessing over everything else that needs attention. My to-do list will never, ever be finished. I will never, ever be good enough. I see far more that is wrong/bad about my situation than what is right/good.

It wasn't always this way. I used to be able to bask in the glory of an achievement for at least a little while. But after going through some rough times, my mind has somehow been trained to be constantly looking ahead to the next problem, always fearing the worst. I'm not sure how to turn it off beyond heavy self medication and sleeping.

cupofpython2• 4 years ago

If you are currently living paycheck to paycheck this is understandable.

Something that helped me out was filling out a dedicated digital calendar with actions actually done. First entry each day is usually the hours i slept, for example. I'll lump things together to try to make entries fit at least half an hour, preferably an hour+, so im not tediously filling out a calendar all day.

A little backwards to how calendars usually get used, but being able to open it up and see where all my time went helped me feel better about the never ending to-do list. I started seeing the sea of to-dos as an opportunity landscape that I could mine in order to improve the things i see marked down on my "actual" calendar. when i make an entry i am proud of, i see it every time i make a new entry for a little bit. i am able to continue being productive with a clear head most of the time; while compounding that good feeling each time i make an entry; which is almost always between tasks and a good time to bask in it a little bit.

bediger4000• 4 years ago

Circa 1985 I worked with a guy who told me that "It takes two 'attaboys' to make up for one 'dumb shit'".

em-bee• 4 years ago

i keep repeating this when people feel they have a right to complain when FOSS developers don't fix their problems: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31953881

feoren• 4 years ago

Surely an additional factor is that criticism is actionable, and praise is not? If someone tells me they like my shirt, it feels good, but there's nothing to be done about it. If someone tells me there's a hole in my shirt, then I actually have a new thing I need to deal with. Why would our brains remember comments that are not actionable over ones that are?

I'm not disagreeing with the article, but I suspect this multiplies with the psychological factor.

watwut4• 4 years ago

Not all criticism is actionable. Most of it is not. Like "this is boring", "this is ugly", "that color is too sad".

If someone tells you they like the shirt, you can wear shirt more often or buy similar one.

acoard• 4 years ago

I'd disagree that's intrinsic to criticism or praise (the phrase "constructive criticism" is distinct from just normal criticism). Consider:

Constructive praise: "I like when you wear different t-shirt colours than you usually do."

Non-constructive criticism: "I don't like your shirt."

We might find the non-constructive criticism to have more force to effect change than the constructive praise. I know I would be more reactive to the latter comment even though there is less constructive detail in it. But I think that's just because we're hardwired to be more sensitive to criticism, as per the article.

apozem• 4 years ago

Light spoilers, but there is a memorable section in The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe about criticism outweighing praise. The creator actually put negative Steam reviews for his previous game into Ultra Deluxe.

The game's narrator, speaking for the creator, briefly acknowledges overwhelmingly positive legacy of his previous work. He then devolves into an extremely long and funny rant about random Steam reviewers who "didn't get it." The creator knows he should not give this much thought to specks of negativity in a sea of praise, but he cannot help it. He knows they are wrong. It's funny, but also fascinating to see an artist grapple with his audience.

Highly recommend Ultra Deluxe, even if you've never played the original Stanley Parable.

havblue• 4 years ago

One thing that the article doesn't appear to discuss is how small issues can escalate quickly if they keep happening over and over. That is, I think a lot of severe criticism happens because communication over the minor issues was never resolved in the first place.

arolihas• 4 years ago

I think it's just loss aversion. Losing $100 hurts worse than gaining $100.

Why criticism lasts longer than praise

Related Stories