The Psychology of Feedback: Understanding Perspective and Maintaining Creative Control

In the latest episode of Before Breakfast, host Laura Vanderkam explores the often overwhelming nature of criticism and praise, offering a refreshing framework for how to process input from others. Drawing inspiration from Tara Moore’s book Playing Big, Vanderkam argues that feedback is not an objective truth about your work, but rather a reflection of the person providing it.

The Core Premise: Feedback as a Mirror

The central thesis of the episode is that "feedback is about the person giving it." While some input can be "incredibly helpful," particularly when it comes from your "target audience," much of the commentary we receive is merely a projection of the critic’s own preferences and worldview. Vanderkam emphasizes that feedback is "simply telling you about the person who is giving it. Nothing more."

The Amazon Review Experiment

To illustrate this concept, Vanderkam suggests a practical exercise: visit Amazon and read reviews for a book you enjoyed. You will inevitably find "polar opposite reviews" for the same piece of work. One reader might praise characters as "wildly inventive," while another dismisses them as "unbelievable."

This discrepancy does not mean one reader is right and the other is wrong. Instead, it reveals that the first reader values imagination and escapism, while the second prefers characters that feel familiar. The takeaway is profound: "All that feedback really tells you is that the first person likes characters who require a little more imagination... The second likes characters that you feel you already know."

Navigating the Feedback Landscape

How should one handle this information? Vanderkam suggests a three-tiered approach:

1. Filter by Resonance: If you receive a specific kind of feedback frequently and it "resonates with you," then incorporate it into your work.
2. Evaluate the Source: If the feedback does not resonate and the critics "aren't in your target market" or are not "decision makers" for your project, you should feel empowered to "thank people for their feedback and move on."
3. Maintain Your Sense of Self: Vanderkam warns against the tendency to "adjust your entire style based on, say, one review left on a podcast" or to "wither based on one critical comment."

The Shift from In-Person to Online Discourse

Reflecting on the changing nature of communication, Vanderkam notes that in the past, feedback was largely delivered face-to-face, which naturally "tempered the comments a bit." Once people pass the age of eight, they rarely insult someone to their face. However, the online world has allowed some to become "playground tyrants" again, leading to a deluge of unfiltered and often unhelpful commentary.

Conclusion: Keeping Perspective

Ultimately, the goal is to distinguish between constructive critique and noise. While "incredibly helpful" editors or readers can provide insights that "changed my whole insight on something," one must be wary of "really horrible suggestions" that masquerade as objective truth.

By realizing that feedback "doesn't fundamentally say whether your work is good or not," you gain the freedom to "incorporate what is helpful, but keep your sense of self and control over your work when it isn't helpful." In a world filled with critics, maintaining this mindset is essential for protecting your creative integrity and staying true to your original vision.