skip to main content
research-article

Better Feedback from Nicer People: Narrative Empathy and Ingroup Framing Improve Feedback Exchange

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 January 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Online feedback exchange platforms enable content creators to collect a diverse set of design feedback quickly. However, creators can experience low quality and harsh feedback when using such platforms. In this paper, we leverage the empathy of the feedback provider to address both these issues. Specifically, we tested two narrative-based empathy arousal interventions: a negative experience and a design process narrative. We also examined whether ingroup framing further enhances the effects of empathy arousal. In a 3x2 online experiment, participants (n=205) wrote feedback on a poster design after experiencing one of the intervention conditions or a control condition. Our results show both the design process narrative and ingroup framing conditions significantly increased the feedback quality and effort invested in the task. The negative experience narrative condition had similar effects and participants reported significantly increased disapproval towards harsh feedback. We discuss the implications of our results for the design of feedback exchange platforms.

References

  1. Judd Antin and Elizabeth F. Churchill. 2011. Badges in social media: A social psychological perspective. Chi 2011 (2011), 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur Aron, Elaine N. Aron, and Danny Smollan. 1992. Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 63, 4 (1992), 596--612. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Richard P. Bagozzi and David J. Moore. 1994. Public Service Advertisements: Emotions and Empathy Guide Prosocial Behavior. J. Mark. 58, 1 (January 1994), 56. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2307/1252251Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Paul Baker. 2006. Moral panic and alternative identity construction in Usenet. J. Comput. Commun. 7, 1 (June 2006), 0-0. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00136.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. C. Daniel Batson, Johee Chang, Ryan Orr, and Jennifer Rowland. 2002. Empathy, Attitudes, and Action: Can Feeling for a Member of a Stigmatized Group Motivate One to Help the Group? Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28, 12 (December 2002), 1656--1666. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702237647Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. C. Daniel Batson, Shannon Early, and Giovanni Salvarani. 1997. Perspective Taking: Imagining How Another Feels Versus Imaging How You Would Feel. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23, 7 (July 1997), 751--758. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297237008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. C Daniel Batson and Nadia Ahmad. 2001. Empathy induced altruism in a prisoner?s dilemma: What if the target of empathy has defected? Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 36, January 2000 (2001), 25--36. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.26/fullGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Aditya Bharadwaj, Pao Siangliulue, Adam Marcus, and Kurt Luther. 2019. Critter. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '19, 1--12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300769Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Marisa Bortolussi and Peter Dixon. 2002. Psychonarratology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511500107Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Lisa M. Brown, Margaret M. Bradley, and Peter J. Lang. 2006. Affective reactions to pictures of ingroup and outgroup members. Biol. Psychol. 71, 3 (March 2006), 303--311. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.06.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Tad T. Brunyé, Tali Ditman, Caroline R Mahoney, Jason S Augustyn, and Holly a Taylor. 2009. When You and I Share Perspectives. Psychol. Sci. 20, 1 (January 2009), 27--32. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02249.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Erin E. Buckels, Paul D. Trapnell, and Delroy L. Paulhus. 2014. Trolls just want to have fun. Pers. Individ. Dif. 67, (September 2014), 97--102. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.01.016Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Mattia Samory, Anirudh Srinivasan, and Eric Gilbert. 2017. The Bag of Communities. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17, 3175--3187. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3026018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Justin Cheng, Michael Bernstein, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Anyone Can Become a Troll. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing - CSCW '17, 1217--1230. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998213Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Mina Cikara, Emile G. Bruneau, and Rebecca R. Saxe. 2011. Us and Them: Intergroup Failures of Empathy. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 20, 3 (June 2011), 149--153. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411408713Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Jonathan Cohen. 2001. Defining Identification: A Theoretical Look at the Identification of Audiences With Media Characters. Mass Commun. Soc. 4, 3 (2001), 245--264. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Amy Cook, Jessica Hammer, Salma Elsayed-Ali, and Steven Dow. 2019. How guiding questions facilitate feedback exchange in project-based learning. Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. - Proc. (2019), 1--12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300368Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Mark H. Davis. 1983. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 44, 1 (1983), 113--126. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Mark H. Davis. 1995. Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. Westview Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Maja Djikic, Keith Oatley, and Mihnea C. Moldoveanu. 2013. Reading other minds: Effects of literature on empathy. Sci. Study Lit. 3, 1 (2013), 28--47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.3.1.06djiGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Steven P Dow, Elizabeth M Gerber, and Audris Wong. 2013. A pilot study of using crowds in the classroom. CHI (2013), 227. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470686Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Nancy Eisenberg and Richard A Fabes. 1990. Empathy: Conceptualization, measurement, and relation to prosocial behavior. Motiv. Emot. 14, 2 (June 1990), 131--149. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991640Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. John D. Foubert and Bradford C. Perry. 2007. Creating Lasting Attitude and Behavior Change in Fraternity Members and Male Student Athletes. Violence Against Women 13, 1 (January 2007), 70--86. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206295125Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. C. Ailie Fraser, Joy O. Kim, Hijung Valentina Shin, Joel Brandt, and Mira Dontcheva. 2020. Temporal Segmentation of Creative Live Streams. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1--12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376437Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Susan Gair. 2013. Inducing Empathy: Pondering Students? (In)Ability to Empathize With an Aboriginal Man?s Lament and What Might Be Done About It. J. Soc. Work Educ. 49, 1 (January 2013), 136--149. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2013.755399Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Sarah Gielen, Elien Peeters, Filip Dochy, Patrick Onghena, and Katrien Struyven. 2010. Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learn. Instr. 20, 4 (August 2010), 304--315. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. William G. Graziano, Meara M. Habashi, Brad E. Sheese, and Renée M. Tobin. 2007. Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person × situation perspective. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93, 4 (2007), 583--599. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022--3514.93.4.583Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Michael D Greenberg, Matthew W Easterday, and Elizabeth M Gerber. 2015. Critiki. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition - C&C '15, 235--244. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2757226.2757249Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Jennifer N. Gutsell and Michael Inzlicht. 2012. Intergroup differences in the sharing of emotive states: Neural evidence of an empathy gap. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 7, 5 (2012), 596--603. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsr035Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Tyler Hamby and Wyn Taylor. 2016. Survey Satisficing Inflates Reliability and Validity Measures. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 76, 6 (December 2016), 912--932. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164415627349Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Christian Happ, André Melzer, and Georges Steffgen. 2011. Bringing Empathy into Play: On the Effects of Empathy in Violent and Nonviolent Video Games. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). 371--374. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24500-8_44Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Grit Hein, Giorgia Silani, Kerstin Preuschoff, C. Daniel Batson, and Tania Singer. 2010. Neural responses to ingroup and outgroup members? suffering predict individual differences in costly helping. Neuron 68, 1 (2010), 149--160. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.09.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Fernanda Herrera, Jeremy Bailenson, Erika Weisz, Elise Ogle, and Jamil Zaki. 2018. Building long-term empathy: A large-scale comparison of traditional and virtual reality perspective-taking. PLoS One 13, 10 (October 2018), e0204494. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204494Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Julie S Hui, Darren Gergle, and Elizabeth M Gerber. 2018. IntroAssist. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '18, 1--13. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173596Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Suzanne Keen. 2006. A Theory of Narrative Empathy. Narrative 14, 3 (2006), 207--236. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1353/nar.2006.0015Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Peter Kollock and Marc Smith. 1996. Managing the virtual commons.. 109. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.39.10kolGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Markus Krause, Tom Garncarz, JiaoJiao Song, Elizabeth M Gerber, Brian P Bailey, and Steven P Dow. 2017. Critique Style Guide. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17, 4627--4639. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025883Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Claus Lamm, C. Daniel Batson, and Jean Decety. 2007. The Neural Substrate of Human Empathy: Effects of Perspective-taking and Cognitive Appraisal. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 1 (January 2007), 42--58. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.1.42Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Cliff Lampe and Paul Resnick. 2004. Slash(dot) and burn. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '04, 543--550. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/985692.985761Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Zipeng Liu, Zhicheng Liu, and Tamara Munzner. 2020. Data-driven Multi-level Segmentation of Image Editing Logs. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1--12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376152Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Peter John Loewen, Greg Lyle, and Jennifer S. Nachshen. 2010. An eight-item form of the Empathy Quotient (EQ) and an application to charitable giving. (2010), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Kurt Luther, Jari-lee Tolentino, Wei Wu, Amy Pavel, Brian P Bailey, Maneesh Agrawala, Björn Hartmann, and Steven P Dow. 2015. Structuring, Aggregating, and Evaluating Crowdsourced Design Critique. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW '15, 473--485. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675283Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Xiaojuan Ma, Yu Li, Jodi Forlizzi, and Steven Dow. 2015. Exiting the design studio: Leveraging online participants for early-stage design feedback. Proc. ACM Conf. Comput. Support. Coop. Work. CSCW 2015-Janua, (2015), 676--685. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675174Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Clifford Nass, B.J. Fogg, and Youngme Moon. 1996. Can computers be teammates? Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 45, 6 (December 1996), 669--678. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1996.0073Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Tricia J Ngoon, C Ailie Fraser, Ariel S Weingarten, Mira Dontcheva, and Scott Klemmer. 2018. Interactive Guidance Techniques for Improving Creative Feedback. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '18, 1--11. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173629Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Thi Thao Duyen T. Nguyen, Thomas Garncarz, Felicia Ng, Laura A. Dabbish, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. Fruitful Feedback. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing - CSCW '17, 1024--1034. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998319Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Amanda B. Nickerson, Ariel M. Aloe, Jennifer A. Livingston, and Thomas Hugh Feeley. 2014. Measurement of the bystander intervention model for bullying and sexual harassment. J. Adolesc. 37, 4 (June 2014), 391--400. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2014.03.003Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Keith Oatley. 1995. A taxonomy of the emotions of literary response and a theory of identification in fictional narrative. Poetics 23, 1--2 (1995), 53--74. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-422X(94)P4296-SGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Patricia A. Oswald. 1996. The Effects of Cognitive and Affective Perspective Taking on Empathic Concern and Altruistic Helping. J. Soc. Psychol. 136, 5 (October 1996), 613--623. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1996.9714045Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. James W Pennebaker, Ryan L Boyd, Kayla Jordan, and Kate Blackburn. 2015. The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX Univ. Texas Austin (2015), 1--22. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15781/T29G6ZGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Irene Rae, Leila Takayama, and Bilge Mutlu. 2012. One of the gang. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '12, 3091. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208723Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Renate L.E.P. Reniers, Rhiannon Corcoran, Richard Drake, Nick M. Shryane, and Birgit A. Völlm. 2011. The QCAE: A questionnaire of cognitive and affective empathy. J. Pers. Assess. 93, 1 (2011), 84--95. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.528484Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Paul Resnick and Richard Zeckhauser. 2002. Trust among strangers in internet transactions: Empirical analysis of eBay?s reputation system. Adv. Appl. Microeconomics 11, (2002), 127--157. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-0984(02)11030-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Daniela Retelny, Sébastien Robaszkiewicz, Alexandra To, Walter S. Lasecki, Jay Patel, Negar Rahmati, Tulsee Doshi, Melissa Valentine, and Michael S. Bernstein. 2014. Expert crowdsourcing with flash teams. In Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology - UIST '14, 75--85. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647409Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Annika Richterich. 2013. 'Karma, Precious Karma'!? Karmawhoring on Reddit and the Front Page's Econometrisation. J. Peer Prod. May (2013), 1--12. Retrieved from http://peerproduction.netGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Jeffrey Rzeszotarski and Aniket Kittur. 2012. CrowdScape. In Proceedings of the 25th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology - UIST '12, 55. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2380116.2380125Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Jeffrey M Rzeszotarski and Aniket Kittur. 2011. Instrumenting the crowd. In Proceedings of the 24th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology - UIST '11, 13. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2047196.2047199Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. D. Royce Sadler. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instr. Sci. 18, 2 (June 1989), 119--144. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. D. Royce Sadler. 1998. Formative Assessment: revisiting the territory. Assess. Educ. Princ. Policy Pract. 5, 1 (March 1998), 77--84. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050104Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Joseph Seering, Tianmi Fang, Luca Damasco, Mianhong Cherie Chen, Likang Sun, and Geoff Kaufman. 2019. Designing User Interface Elements to Improve the Quality and Civility of Discourse in Online Commenting Behaviors. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '19, 1--14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300836Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Joseph Seering, Tianmi Fang, Luca Damasco, Mianhong Cherie Chen, Likang Sun, and Geoff Kaufman. 2019. Designing User Interface Elements to Improve the Quality and Civility of Discourse in Online Commenting Behaviors. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '19, 1--14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300836Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Jellie Sierksma, Jochem Thijs, and Maykel Verkuyten. 2015. Ingroup bias in children's intention to help can be overpowered by inducing empathy. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 33, 1 (March 2015), 45--56. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12065Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Edgar A. Smith and J. Peter Kincaid. 1970. Derivation and Validation of the Automated Readability Index for Use with Technical Materials. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 12, 5 (October 1970), 457--564. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/001872087001200505Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Walter G. Stephan and Krystina Finlay. 1999. The Role of Empathy in Improving Intergroup Relations. J. Soc. Issues 55, 4 (January 1999), 729--743. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00144Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Stefan Stürmer, Mark Snyder, Alexandra Kropp, and Birte Siem. 2006. Empathy-Motivated Helping: The Moderating Role of Group Membership. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 32, 7 (July 2006), 943--956. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206287363Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. Mark Tarrant, Sarah Dazeley, and Tom Cottom. 2009. Social categorization and empathy for outgroup members. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 48, 3 (September 2009), 427--446. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X373589Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. Yla R. Tausczik and James W. Pennebaker. 2010. The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 29, 1 (March 2010), 24--54. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Matthew J. Traxler and Morton Ann Gernsbacher. 1993. Improving written communication through perspective-taking. Lang. Cogn. Process. 8, 3 (August 1993), 311--334. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969308406958Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Theresa K. Vescio, Gretchen B. Sechrist, and Matthew P. Paolucci. 2003. Perspective taking and prejudice reduction: the mediational role of empathy arousal and situational attributions. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 33, 4 (July 2003), 455--472. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.163Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Helen Wauck, Yu-Chun (Grace) Yen, Wai-Tat Fu, Elizabeth Gerber, Steven P. Dow, and Brian P. Bailey. 2017. From in the Class or in the Wild? In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '17, 5580--5591. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025477Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Drika Weller and Kristin Hansen Lagattuta. 2013. Helping the In-Group Feels Better: Children?s Judgments and Emotion Attributions in Response to Prosocial Dilemmas. Child Dev. 84, 1 (January 2013), 253--268. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01837.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Y. Wayne Wu and Brian P. Bailey. 2018. Soften the Pain, Increase the Gain. Proc. ACM Human-Computer Interact. 2, CSCW (November 2018), 1--20. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3274455Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Y Wayne Wu and Brian P Bailey. 2016. Novices Who Focused or Experts Who Didn't' In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '16, 4086--4097. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858330Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Y Wayne Wu and Brian P Bailey. 2017. Bitter Sweet or Sweet Bitter? In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition - C&C '17, 137--147. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3059454.3059458Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. W Xiong, D. Litman, and C. Schunn. 2012. Natural Language Processing techniques for researching and improving peer feedback. J. Writ. Res. 4, 2 (November 2012), 155--176. DOI:https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2012.04.02.3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  76. Anbang Xu, Shih-wen Huang, and Brian Bailey. 2014. Voyant. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing - CSCW '14, 1433--1444. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2531602.2531604Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Anbang Xu, Huaming Rao, Steven P. Dow, and Brian P. Bailey. 2015. A Classroom Study of Using Crowd Feedback in the Iterative Design Process. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW '15, 1637--1648. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675140Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Koji Yatani, Michael Novati, Andrew Trusty, and Khai N. Truong. 2011. Review spotlight. In Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '11, 1541. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979167Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Yu-Chun Grace Yen, Steven P. Dow, Elizabeth Gerber, and Brian P. Bailey. 2016. Social Network, Web Forum, or Task Market? In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '16, 773--784. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901820Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Alvin Yuan, Kurt Luther, Markus Krause, Sophie Isabel Vennix, Steven P Dow, and Björn Hartmann. 2016. Almost an Expert: The Effects of Rubrics and Expertise on Perceived Value of Crowdsourced Design Critiques. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing - CSCW '16, 1003--1015. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819953Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. Holm's Sequential Bonferroni Procedure. In Encyclopedia of Research Design. SAGE Publications, Inc., 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288.n178Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Better Feedback from Nicer People: Narrative Empathy and Ingroup Framing Improve Feedback Exchange

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
      Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 4, Issue CSCW3
      CSCW
      December 2020
      1822 pages
      EISSN:2573-0142
      DOI:10.1145/3446568
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2021 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 January 2021
      Published in pacmhci Volume 4, Issue CSCW3

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!