Whether you are getting feedback from an advisor or mentor, a colleague or friend, or from a peer review, you are likely to end up with some piece of feedback that doesn’t make sense to you. I’m talking about the feedback to which you think “But I did that on page 10!” or “Why would they think that?” Now this could be the result of someone reading quickly as all of us are forced to do at times to keep up on feedback requests that we receive, but I find it shortsighted to blame the reader without further investigation. Here are 3 strategies I use when I have this reaction to feedback.
1. I reread the piece looking for anywhere I may have been less explicit about a point. Sometimes I think I’ve been clear when I’ve used vague language (e.g., the results are different (different how???)) or some kind of insider lingo (e.g., using a term with no definition). By identifying where that could have happened, I can make my point more explicit and hopefully avoid confusion with the next reader.
2. I look for places where I may need to repeat information so that readers remember important guiding points. For example, the empirical articles I write always have a data and methods section where I explain the data source, how I used it, and how I conducted analysis. Sometimes that section describes information that won’t be relevant for another 10-15 pages from when it was introduced. Thus a reader might get to that part of an analysis and not remember how I selected a subsample or defined a code or even what kind of model I ran. Briefly repeating the information when it’s relevant (or moving the relevant section) can make it easier for the reader.
3. If I do these things and am still baffled by the feedback, I turn to a second opinion. I ask a trusted colleague or mentor if they can give me fresh eyes on a problem and send them the comment along with either the full piece or the relevant sections to take a look and see if they can identify the issue. If they come back similarly puzzled, I feel more comfortable assuming the reader simply missed something reading quickly.
practical phd 