双赢,双赢,双赢:为更好的给予者和接受者的结果框架反馈

IF 2.3 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Elizabeth T. Welsh, Kevin E. Henderson
{"title":"双赢,双赢,双赢:为更好的给予者和接受者的结果框架反馈","authors":"Elizabeth T. Welsh,&nbsp;Kevin E. Henderson","doi":"10.1111/jasp.70016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>According to research, approximately one-third of the time constructive feedback is given, it is not successful—leading to a decline in performance. This is problematic because employees (and all humans) need feedback to develop and succeed. While many studies have examined options for making performance feedback more effective, there is a gap in simultaneously understanding the giver's and receiver's perspectives, including affective mechanisms at play. This study examines whether a simple addition to performance feedback—starting feedback with a statement that frames the feedback as helpful to the recipient can improve outcomes for both parties. To investigate this, student samples were used to understand the receiver's perspective, while an adult MTurk sample was used to understand the giver's perspective. For more subjective feedback, framing it in a performance-oriented, helping-focused way led to positive outcomes, including improved feedback perceptions, positive affect, and motivation to act upon the feedback for recipients; with givers reporting better perceived management fit, higher positive affect, and lower negative affect, effort, and perceived risk. Interestingly, givers preferred gain-focused framing, while recipients did not significantly favor gain over loss framing. For both parties, mediators were found. Theoretically, this study supports an affective events view of feedback. Practically, it suggests that framing feedback in a gain-focused, performance-oriented, cognitively positive way can improve outcomes for the giver, the receiver, and, ultimately, the organization. Win. Win. Win.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48404,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","volume":"55 10","pages":"817-831"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Win, Win, Win: Framing Feedback for Better Giver and Receiver Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth T. Welsh,&nbsp;Kevin E. Henderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jasp.70016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>According to research, approximately one-third of the time constructive feedback is given, it is not successful—leading to a decline in performance. This is problematic because employees (and all humans) need feedback to develop and succeed. While many studies have examined options for making performance feedback more effective, there is a gap in simultaneously understanding the giver's and receiver's perspectives, including affective mechanisms at play. This study examines whether a simple addition to performance feedback—starting feedback with a statement that frames the feedback as helpful to the recipient can improve outcomes for both parties. To investigate this, student samples were used to understand the receiver's perspective, while an adult MTurk sample was used to understand the giver's perspective. For more subjective feedback, framing it in a performance-oriented, helping-focused way led to positive outcomes, including improved feedback perceptions, positive affect, and motivation to act upon the feedback for recipients; with givers reporting better perceived management fit, higher positive affect, and lower negative affect, effort, and perceived risk. Interestingly, givers preferred gain-focused framing, while recipients did not significantly favor gain over loss framing. For both parties, mediators were found. Theoretically, this study supports an affective events view of feedback. Practically, it suggests that framing feedback in a gain-focused, performance-oriented, cognitively positive way can improve outcomes for the giver, the receiver, and, ultimately, the organization. Win. Win. Win.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"55 10\",\"pages\":\"817-831\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jasp.70016\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jasp.70016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据研究,大约有三分之一的建设性反馈是无效的,从而导致绩效下降。这是有问题的,因为员工(以及所有人)需要反馈来发展和成功。虽然许多研究都考察了使绩效反馈更有效的方法,但在同时理解给予者和接受者的观点方面存在差距,包括其中的情感机制。本研究考察的是,在绩效反馈的基础上添加一个简单的附加条件——在反馈开始时,先声明反馈对接受者有帮助——是否能改善双方的结果。为了调查这一点,学生样本被用来理解接收者的观点,而成人MTurk样本被用来理解给予者的观点。对于更主观的反馈,以绩效为导向,以帮助为中心的方式构建它会产生积极的结果,包括改善反馈感知,积极影响,以及为接受者采取行动的动机;与给予者报告更好的感知管理契合,更高的积极影响,和更低的消极影响,努力和感知风险。有趣的是,给予者更喜欢以收益为中心的框架,而接受者并没有明显地喜欢收益而不是损失框架。双方都找到了调解人。从理论上讲,本研究支持反馈的情感事件观。实际上,它表明,以收益为中心、绩效为导向、认知积极的方式来构建反馈,可以改善给予者、接受者以及最终组织的结果。赢了。赢了。赢了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Win, Win, Win: Framing Feedback for Better Giver and Receiver Outcomes

Win, Win, Win: Framing Feedback for Better Giver and Receiver Outcomes

According to research, approximately one-third of the time constructive feedback is given, it is not successful—leading to a decline in performance. This is problematic because employees (and all humans) need feedback to develop and succeed. While many studies have examined options for making performance feedback more effective, there is a gap in simultaneously understanding the giver's and receiver's perspectives, including affective mechanisms at play. This study examines whether a simple addition to performance feedback—starting feedback with a statement that frames the feedback as helpful to the recipient can improve outcomes for both parties. To investigate this, student samples were used to understand the receiver's perspective, while an adult MTurk sample was used to understand the giver's perspective. For more subjective feedback, framing it in a performance-oriented, helping-focused way led to positive outcomes, including improved feedback perceptions, positive affect, and motivation to act upon the feedback for recipients; with givers reporting better perceived management fit, higher positive affect, and lower negative affect, effort, and perceived risk. Interestingly, givers preferred gain-focused framing, while recipients did not significantly favor gain over loss framing. For both parties, mediators were found. Theoretically, this study supports an affective events view of feedback. Practically, it suggests that framing feedback in a gain-focused, performance-oriented, cognitively positive way can improve outcomes for the giver, the receiver, and, ultimately, the organization. Win. Win. Win.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Published since 1971, Journal of Applied Social Psychology is a monthly publication devoted to applications of experimental behavioral science research to problems of society (e.g., organizational and leadership psychology, safety, health, and gender issues; perceptions of war and natural hazards; jury deliberation; performance, AIDS, cancer, heart disease, exercise, and sports).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信