Exploring content vs writer focus in written student feedback: Perceived impact on student emotional response, attention, and usefulness

Emotional reaction to negative academic feedback can be a barrier to students’ engagement with feedback. One factor that may impact students’ emotional response is whether feedback addresses the student (e.g., “Your writing”) or the content (e.g., “The writing”). This exploratory study investigated how form of address in feedback impacts emotional reaction. Student participants (N=106) read simulated feedback statements that varied according to reference type (pronominal “your”, neutral “the”) and feedback polarity (positive, negative) and provided ratings for emotional response, as well as attention paid to, and usefulness. An open response question queried participants’ perceptions regarding personal or neutral address in feedback. There was no significant effect of reference type on quantitative feedback ratings for emotion, attention, or usefulness, but qualitative content analysis revealed that half the sample preferred neutral address, largely to mitigate the emotional impact of negative feedback. Feedback polarity had a consistent significant effect where students perceived positive feedback as higher in happy emotion and usefulness compared to negative feedback. A more nuanced pattern for attention showed a small decrease in attention for positive compared to negative feedback for neutral references. Our results inform practice in terms of how written feedback can be framed to facilitate engagement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Published
2025-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56230/osotl.130
Primary Topic
Education and Critical Thinking Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring content vs writer focus in written student feedback: Perceived impact on student emotional response, attention, and usefulness

Linda M. Moxey, James E. Bartlett, Kalliopi Mavromati, Eugene J. Dawydiak et al.
Open Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Education and Critical Thinking Development
article

Exploring content vs writer focus in written student feedback: Perceived impact on student emotional response, attention, and usefulness

Linda M. Moxey, James E. Bartlett, Kalliopi Mavromati, Eugene J. Dawydiak, Judith L. Stevenson, Lorna Morrow
article en

Abstract

Emotional reaction to negative academic feedback can be a barrier to students’ engagement with feedback. One factor that may impact students’ emotional response is whether feedback addresses the student (e.g., “Your writing”) or the content (e.g., “The writing”). This exploratory study investigated how form of address in feedback impacts emotional reaction. Student participants (N=106) read simulated feedback statements that varied according to reference type (pronominal “your”, neutral “the”) and feedback polarity (positive, negative) and provided ratings for emotional response, as well as attention paid to, and usefulness. An open response question queried participants’ perceptions regarding personal or neutral address in feedback. There was no significant effect of reference type on quantitative feedback ratings for emotion, attention, or usefulness, but qualitative content analysis revealed that half the sample preferred neutral address, largely to mitigate the emotional impact of negative feedback. Feedback polarity had a consistent significant effect where students perceived positive feedback as higher in happy emotion and usefulness compared to negative feedback. A more nuanced pattern for attention showed a small decrease in attention for positive compared to negative feedback for neutral references. Our results inform practice in terms of how written feedback can be framed to facilitate engagement.

Open Scholarship of Teaching and LearningVol. 4(1)
University of Glasgow (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Education and Critical Thinking Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.