critical thinking means we are listening to criticism

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4.5 Listening Critically

Learning objectives.

• Define and explain critical listening and its importance in the public speaking context.
• Understand six distinct ways to improve your ability to critically listen to speeches.
• Evaluate what it means to be an ethical listener.

Kizzzbeth – Good Listener – CC BY-SA 2.0.

As a student, you are exposed to many kinds of messages. You receive messages conveying academic information, institutional rules, instructions, and warnings; you also receive messages through political discourse, advertisements, gossip, jokes, song lyrics, text messages, invitations, web links, and all other manner of communication. You know it’s not all the same, but it isn’t always clear how to separate the truth from the messages that are misleading or even blatantly false. Nor is it always clear which messages are intended to help the listener and which ones are merely self-serving for the speaker. Part of being a good listener is to learn when to use caution in evaluating the messages we hear.

Critical listening in this context means using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence. Critical listening can be learned with practice but is not necessarily easy to do. Some people never learn this skill; instead, they take every message at face value even when those messages are in conflict with their knowledge. Problems occur when messages are repeated to others who have not yet developed the skills to discern the difference between a valid message and a mistaken one. Critical listening can be particularly difficult when the message is complex. Unfortunately, some speakers may make their messages intentionally complex to avoid critical scrutiny. For example, a city treasurer giving a budget presentation might use very large words and technical jargon, which make it difficult for listeners to understand the proposed budget and ask probing questions.

Six Ways to Improve Your Critical Listening

Critical listening is first and foremost a skill that can be learned and improved. In this section, we are going to explore six different techniques you can use to become a more critical listener.

Recognizing the Difference between Facts and Opinions

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited with saying, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts” (Wikiquote). Part of critical listening is learning to separate opinions from facts, and this works two ways: critical listeners are aware of whether a speaker is delivering a factual message or a message based on opinion, and they are also aware of the interplay between their own opinions and facts as they listen to messages.

In American politics, the issue of health care reform is heavily laden with both opinions and facts, and it is extremely difficult to sort some of them out. A clash of fact versus opinion happened on September 9, 2010, during President Obama’s nationally televised speech to a joint session of Congress outlining his health care reform plan. In this speech, President Obama responded to several rumors about the plan, including the claim “that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false—the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” At this point, one congressman yelled out, “You lie!” Clearly, this congressman did not have a very high opinion of either the health care reform plan or the president. However, when the nonpartisan watch group Factcheck.org examined the language of the proposed bill, they found that it had a section titled “No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens” (Factcheck.org, 2009).

Often when people have a negative opinion about a topic, they are unwilling to accept facts. Instead, they question all aspects of the speech and have a negative predisposition toward both the speech and the speaker.

This is not to say that speakers should not express their opinions. Many of the greatest speeches in history include personal opinions. Consider, for example, Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he expressed his personal wish for the future of American society. Critical listeners may agree or disagree with a speaker’s opinions, but the point is that they know when a message they are hearing is based on opinion and when it is factual.

Uncovering Assumptions

If something is factual, supporting evidence exists. However, we still need to be careful about what evidence does and does not mean. Assumptions are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate. When listening to a public speech, you may find yourself being asked to assume something is a fact when in reality many people question that fact. For example, suppose you’re listening to a speech on weight loss. The speaker talks about how people who are overweight are simply not motivated or lack the self-discipline to lose weight. The speaker has built the speech on the assumption that motivation and self-discipline are the only reasons why people can’t lose weight. You may think to yourself, what about genetics? By listening critically, you will be more likely to notice unwarranted assumptions in a speech, which may prompt you to question the speaker if questions are taken or to do further research to examine the validity of the speaker’s assumptions. If, however, you sit passively by and let the speaker’s assumptions go unchallenged, you may find yourself persuaded by information that is not factual.

When you listen critically to a speech, you might hear information that appears unsupported by evidence. You shouldn’t accept that information unconditionally. You would accept it under the condition that the speaker offers credible evidence that directly supports it.

Table 4.1 Facts vs. Assumptions

Be Open to New Ideas

Sometimes people are so fully invested in their perceptions of the world that they are unable to listen receptively to messages that make sense and would be of great benefit to them. Human progress has been possible, sometimes against great odds, because of the mental curiosity and discernment of a few people. In the late 1700s when the technique of vaccination to prevent smallpox was introduced, it was opposed by both medical professionals and everyday citizens who staged public protests (Edward Jenner Museum). More than two centuries later, vaccinations against smallpox, diphtheria, polio, and other infectious diseases have saved countless lives, yet popular opposition continues.

In the world of public speaking, we must be open to new ideas. Let’s face it, people have a tendency to filter out information they disagree with and to filter in information that supports what they already believe. Nicolaus Copernicus was a sixteenth-century astronomer who dared to publish a treatise explaining that the earth revolves around the sun, which was a violation of Catholic doctrine. Copernicus’s astronomical findings were labeled heretical and his treatise banned because a group of people at the time were not open to new ideas. In May of 2010, almost five hundred years after his death, the Roman Catholic Church admitted its error and reburied his remains with the full rites of Catholic burial (Owen, 2010).

While the Copernicus case is a fairly dramatic reversal, listeners should always be open to new ideas. We are not suggesting that you have to agree with every idea that you are faced with in life; rather, we are suggesting that you at least listen to the message and then evaluate the message.

Rely on Reason and Common Sense

If you are listening to a speech and your common sense tells you that the message is illogical, you very well might be right. You should be thinking about whether the speech seems credible and coherent. In this way, your use of common sense can act as a warning system for you.

One of our coauthors once heard a speech on the environmental hazards of fireworks. The speaker argued that fireworks (the public kind, not the personal kind people buy and set off in their backyards) were environmentally hazardous because of litter. Although there is certainly some paper that makes it to the ground before burning up, the amount of litter created by fireworks displays is relatively small compared to other sources of litter, including trash left behind by all the spectators watching fireworks at public parks and other venues. It just does not make sense to identify a few bits of charred paper as a major environmental hazard.

If the message is inconsistent with things you already know, if the argument is illogical, or if the language is exaggerated, you should investigate the issues before accepting or rejecting the message. Often, you will not be able to take this step during the presentation of the message; it may take longer to collect enough knowledge to make that decision for yourself.

However, when you are the speaker, you should not substitute common sense for evidence. That’s why during a speech it’s necessary to cite the authority of scholars whose research is irrefutable, or at least highly credible. It is all too easy to make a mistake in reasoning, sometimes called fallacy, in stating your case. We will discuss these fallacies in more detail in Chapter 8 “Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments” . One of the most common fallacies is post hoc, ergo propter hoc , a “common sense” form of logic that translates roughly as “after the fact, therefore because of the fact.” The argument says that if A happened first, followed by B, then A caused B. We know the outcome cannot occur earlier than the cause, but we also know that the two events might be related indirectly or that causality works in a different direction. For instance, imagine a speaker arguing that because the sun rises after a rooster’s crow, the rooster caused the sun to rise. This argument is clearly illogical because roosters crow many times each day, and the sun’s rising and setting do not change according to crowing or lack thereof. But the two events are related in a different way. Roosters tend to wake up and begin crowing at first light, about forty-five minutes before sunrise. Thus it is the impending sunrise that causes the predawn crowing.

In Chapter 2 “Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking” , we pointed out that what is “common sense” for people of one generation or culture may be quite the opposite for people of a different generation or culture. Thus it is important not to assume that your audience shares the beliefs that are, for you, common sense. Likewise, if the message of your speech is complex or controversial, you should consider the needs of your audience and do your best to explain its complexities factually and logically, not intuitively.

Relate New Ideas to Old Ones

As both a speaker and a listener, one of the most important things you can do to understand a message is to relate new ideas to previously held ideas. Imagine you’re giving a speech about biological systems and you need to use the term “homeostasis,” which refers to the ability of an organism to maintain stability by making constant adjustments. To help your audience understand homeostasis, you could show how homeostasis is similar to adjustments made by the thermostats that keep our homes at a more or less even temperature. If you set your thermostat for seventy degrees and it gets hotter, the central cooling will kick in and cool your house down. If your house gets below seventy degrees, your heater will kick in and heat your house up. Notice that in both cases your thermostat is making constant adjustments to stay at seventy degrees. Explaining that the body’s homeostasis works in a similar way will make it more relevant to your listeners and will likely help them both understand and remember the idea because it links to something they have already experienced.

If you can make effective comparisons while you are listening, it can deepen your understanding of the message. If you can provide those comparisons for your listeners, you make it easier for them to give consideration to your ideas.

Note-taking is a skill that improves with practice. You already know that it’s nearly impossible to write down everything a speaker says. In fact, in your attempt to record everything, you might fall behind and wish you had divided your attention differently between writing and listening.

Careful, selective note-taking is important because we want an accurate record that reflects the meanings of the message. However much you might concentrate on the notes, you could inadvertently leave out an important word, such as not , and undermine the reliability of your otherwise carefully written notes. Instead, if you give the same care and attention to listening, you are less likely to make that kind of a mistake.

It’s important to find a balance between listening well and taking good notes. Many people struggle with this balance for a long time. For example, if you try to write down only key phrases instead of full sentences, you might find that you can’t remember how two ideas were related. In that case, too few notes were taken. At the opposite end, extensive note-taking can result in a loss of emphasis on the most important ideas.

To increase your critical listening skills, continue developing your ability to identify the central issues in messages so that you can take accurate notes that represent the meanings intended by the speaker.

Listening Ethically

Ben Smith – String telephone – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Ethical listening rests heavily on honest intentions. We should extend to speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak. We should be facing the speaker with our eyes open. We should not be checking our cell phones. We should avoid any behavior that belittles the speaker or the message.

Scholars Stephanie Coopman and James Lull emphasize the creation of a climate of caring and mutual understanding, observing that “respecting others’ perspectives is one hallmark of the effective listener” (Coopman & Lull, 2008). Respect, or unconditional positive regard for others, means that you treat others with consideration and decency whether you agree with them or not. Professors Sprague, Stuart, and Bodary (Sprague, et al., 2010). also urge us to treat the speaker with respect even when we disagree, don’t understand the message, or find the speech boring.

Doug Lippman (1998) (Lippman, 1998), a storytelling coach, wrote powerfully and sensitively about listening in his book:

Like so many of us, I used to take listening for granted, glossing over this step as I rushed into the more active, visible ways of being helpful. Now, I am convinced that listening is the single most important element of any helping relationship. Listening has great power. It draws thoughts and feelings out of people as nothing else can. When someone listens to you well, you become aware of feelings you may not have realized that you felt. You have ideas you may have never thought before. You become more eloquent, more insightful.… As a helpful listener, I do not interrupt you. I do not give advice. I do not do something else while listening to you. I do not convey distraction through nervous mannerisms. I do not finish your sentences for you. In spite of all my attempts to understand you, I do not assume I know what you mean. I do not convey disapproval, impatience, or condescension. If I am confused, I show a desire for clarification, not dislike for your obtuseness. I do not act vindicated when you misspeak or correct yourself. I do not sit impassively, withholding participation. Instead, I project affection, approval, interest, and enthusiasm. I am your partner in communication. I am eager for your imminent success, fascinated by your struggles, forgiving of your mistakes, always expecting the best. I am your delighted listener (Lippman, 1998).

This excerpt expresses the decency with which people should treat each other. It doesn’t mean we must accept everything we hear, but ethically, we should refrain from trivializing each other’s concerns. We have all had the painful experience of being ignored or misunderstood. This is how we know that one of the greatest gifts one human can give to another is listening.

Key Takeaways

• Critical listening is the process a listener goes through using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a speaker’s message makes sense in light of factual evidence. When listeners are not critical of the messages they are attending to, they are more likely to be persuaded by illogical arguments based on opinions and not facts.
• Critical listening can be improved by employing one or more strategies to help the listener analyze the message: recognize the difference between facts and opinions, uncover assumptions given by the speaker, be open to new ideas, use both reason and common sense when analyzing messages, relate new ideas to old ones, and take useful notes.
• Being an ethical listener means giving respectful attention to the ideas of a speaker, even though you may not agree with or accept those ideas.
• Think of a time when you were too tired or distracted to give your full attention to the ideas in a speech. What did you do? What should you have done?
• Give an example of a mistake in reasoning that involved the speaker mistaking an assumption for fact.

Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2008). Public speaking: The evolving art . Cengage Learning, p. 60.

Edward Jenner Museum. (n.d.). Vaccination. Retrieved from http://www.jennermuseum.com/Jenner/vaccination.html

Factcheck.org, a Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. (2009, September 10). Obama’s health care speech. Retrieved from http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech

Lippman, D. (1998). The storytelling coach: How to listen, praise, and bring out people’s best . Little Rock, AR: August House.

Owen, R. (2010, May 23). Catholic church reburies “heretic” Nicolaus Copernicus with honour. Times Online . Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7134341.ece

Sprague, J., Stuart, D., & Bodary, D. (2010). The speaker’s handbook (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage.

Wikiquote. (n.d.). Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Retrieved from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan

Stand up, Speak out Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Mental Health

9 Ways to Combat Self-Criticism

A greatest-hits soundtrack produced by self-criticism would sound something like this: You should have done better on that project. Why isn’t the house cleaner? You tanked the whole soccer game! You’re a bad parent, an even worse colleague, and a sorry excuse for a friend. And you’re wasting so much time right now that you’ll be late—again.

The tendency to engage in negative self-evaluation afflicts almost everyone, sometimes profoundly. “People treat their self-criticism as though it’s part of themselves, like their eye color,” says Rachel Turow, a Seattle-based clinical psychologist and author of The Self-Talk Workout . “They say, ‘Oh, I’ve just always been my own worst critic.’ And a lot of people don’t realize how damaging it is.”

Listening to your loud inner critic is a habit—not a fixed personality trait, Turow clarifies—often exacerbated by childhood trauma, emotional abuse, bullying, sexism, homophobia, and social-media use. It can also be a form of self-protection: If you’re mean to yourself, “then nobody else can hurt you as bad as you’re going to hurt yourself,” Turow says.

But there’s good reason to work on silencing self-criticism, which has been found to worsen depression , anxiety , disordered eating , juvenile delinquency , self-harm , and suicidal behavior and ideation . (In some cases, it’s a reciprocal relationship: depression also triggers self-criticism , an effect researchers have found is particularly pronounced for teen girls.) People with higher levels of self-compassion, on the other hand, are less likely to experience mental-health challenges.

There are two broad types of self-criticism, notes Lakeasha Sullivan, a clinical psychologist based in Atlanta. Some of these thoughts are first-person “I statements,” like: “I’m so lazy.” Others use second-person language: “You didn’t go to the gym all week.” The latter tend to be particularly insidious. “Our brains process those thoughts as if someone in a position of authority is talking to us,” she says. “They know all our flaws, and they pretend like they can predict the future.”

Fortunately, plenty of tools can help us speak more kindly to ourselves. We asked experts to share their favorite ways to overcome critical self-talk.

Investigate the origins

The first step to thwarting self-criticism is understanding where the thoughts originated, says Tiffany Green, a psychotherapist in Chicago. When her clients say negative things about themselves, she often asks them, “Where did this come from? Who was the first person you heard say this about you?” The response tends to be revealing: maybe their mom called them lazy, or their grandmother told them they needed to lose weight.

“It starts to feel like a lightbulb,” Green says. “It allows them to say, ‘Maybe this doesn’t need to continue.’” The experience is a helpful way to separate yourself from critical thoughts, she adds, rather than accepting them as your own.

Change the language around it

Sullivan likes to remind her clients that we are not our thoughts—we’re people who access those thoughts. That language helps create powerful distance. For example, we can respond to a hurtful thought by saying, “My inner critic says I’m lazy,” vs. “I’m being lazy.”’ “That makes a world of difference in how it feels,” she says. “We can talk back to the critic. We can ignore the critic. We can see if there’s something there that’s valuable from the critic, instead of seeing it as some kind of self-condemnation.”

Set up a self-criticism jar

Every time you catch yourself engaging in a critical thought, throw a coin or piece of paper into a jar. Green recommends displaying it somewhere that’s ultra-visible. The goal in the beginning is to fill the jar with lots of coins, because that’s a sign that you’ve increased your awareness of your thought patterns—and the impact they have on your emotions and behaviors. Over the next three to six months, however, you should notice that you’re adding to it less frequently. Having a visual way to monitor your progress can be motivating and rewarding, she says.

Enlist support

Sometimes, critical thoughts become like elevator music you don’t even notice playing in the background. Green suggests asking a partner, friend, or therapist to gently point out when you’re speaking negatively about yourself. Choose wisely, because “it can be very off-putting to have someone say, ‘You just criticized yourself,’” she acknowledges. “It feels like more criticism.” A trusted confidante, however, can help you notice patterns that otherwise wouldn’t have been on your radar.

Practice loving-kindness meditation

Research suggests that a type of mindfulness called loving-kindness meditation can improve emotional well-being. It can also help change up your self-talk, Turow says. The practice involves repeating phrases to yourself, like “May I be safe, may I be happy, may I be healthy, may I live with ease.” “You silently repeat these for, say, 5 minutes,” Green explains. “A lot of people say it seems corny, but after they do it for a few weeks, they notice some differences.”

It’s helpful to have an alternative to the default criticisms typically running through your mind, she adds. When that hurtful noise in your brain gets loud, you’ll know exactly what to say to yourself.

Try a breathing exercise

If adopting a meditation routine sounds daunting , Turow suggests starting with a super-short exercise that only requires one breath. Simply say “inhale, my friend” as you breathe in, and “exhale, my friend” as you breathe out. “Notice the feeling of breathing in, and referring to yourself as a friend,” she says—an act of kindness that can help transform your default self-criticism into self-love.

Celebrate your wins

One of Turow’s go-to self-talk strategies is called “spot the success.” “It’s sort of the opposite of a to-do list,” she says. “It’s like a done list.”

Every night before you go to bed, write down 10 things you did that day that benefited you, somebody else, or the world at large. “No item is too small. You texted your friend, you got out of bed, you took your vitamin,” she notes. “It generates this sense in your brain, like, ‘I am doing these good things.’” That can be a powerful antidote to self-criticism: and the all-too-familiar feeling that you didn’t get enough done that day.

Replace your inner critic with a neutral voice

Correcting negative thoughts isn’t easy, and it doesn’t happen overnight. Green suggests first countering them with neutral thoughts ; you can work your way up to the positive ones later.

Imagine, for example, that you routinely criticize your hair. Instead of telling yourself it’s lush and gorgeous, try this: “What if I’m wrong? What if my hair is fine?” That delivers you to a place where you can question the negative thought—and it’s more realistic (and genuine) than forcing yourself to embrace a positive attitude.

Look for the (gentle) lessons

Self-criticism can sometimes contain important information and even prove helpful, Turow says. You might, for instance, be hard on yourself for not keeping in good touch with your friends. “That’s valuable information,” she says. “I think it’s ultimately coming from this place inside that does want to nourish your friendships.” Or, if you’re upset with yourself for not making it to the gym, that could signal a desire for a healthier lifestyle.

Turow advises noticing the criticism gently, and then learning from it. Shift how you talk to yourself, and reframe the message. Instead of “You suck at keeping in touch,” try “This is really important to me. I wonder how I can make it happen more often.”

More Must-Reads from TIME

• Heman Bekele Is TIME’s 2024 Kid of the Year
• The Reintroduction of Kamala Harris
• The 7 States That Will Decide the Election
• Why China Won’t Allow Single Women to Freeze Their Eggs
• Is the U.S. Ready for Psychedelics?
• The Rise of a New Kind of Parenting Guru
• The 50 Best Romance Novels to Read Right Now
• Can Food Really Change Your Hormones?

Write to Video by Andrew. D Johnson at [email protected]

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Critical Thinking Is About Asking Better Questions

• John Coleman

Six practices to sharpen your inquiry.

Critical thinking is the ability to analyze and effectively break down an issue in order to make a decision or find a solution. At the heart of critical thinking is the ability to formulate deep, different, and effective questions. For effective questioning, start by holding your hypotheses loosely. Be willing to fundamentally reconsider your initial conclusions — and do so without defensiveness. Second, listen more than you talk through active listening. Third, leave your queries open-ended, and avoid yes-or-no questions. Fourth, consider the counterintuitive to avoid falling into groupthink. Fifth, take the time to stew in a problem, rather than making decisions unnecessarily quickly. Last, ask thoughtful, even difficult, follow-ups.

Are you tackling a new and difficult problem at work? Recently promoted and trying to both understand your new role and bring a fresh perspective? Or are you new to the workforce and seeking ways to meaningfully contribute alongside your more experienced colleagues? If so, critical thinking — the ability to analyze and effectively break down an issue in order to make a decision or find a solution — will be core to your success. And at the heart of critical thinking is the ability to formulate deep, different, and effective questions.

• JC John Coleman is the author of the HBR Guide to Crafting Your Purpose . Subscribe to his free newsletter, On Purpose , or contact him at johnwilliamcoleman.com . johnwcoleman

Partner Center

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1 – Critical Thinking

Since ancient times, the concept of critical thinking has been associated with persuasive communication, usually in the form of speeches, scholarly texts, and literature.

Today, there are many vehicles for information and ideas, but the elements of critical thinking in a university context still bear strong influences from early scholarly writing and oration.

Definition of Critical Thinking

“Critical Thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.”

Source: https://louisville.edu/ideastoaction/about/criticalthinking/what

Critical thinking may seem very abstract in  definitions such as the one above, but it is, above all,  an action . One source says critical thinking “is about being an active learner rather than a passive recipient of information” ( Skills You Need)   Most college curricula are designed to develop critical thinking.

“Critical thinkers rigorously question ideas and assumptions rather than accepting them at face value … They will always seek to determine whether the ideas, arguments, and findings represent the entire picture and are open to the possibility that they do not. It is more than the accumulation of facts, it is a way of thinking.”

                                                                                                                                   ( Source: Skills You Need )

In her article, “Why Are Critical Thinking Skills Necessary for Academics?,” journalist Jen Saunders  says, “universities concern the ways in which people research and write; their members are responsible for maintaining the foundational principles of truth and knowledge within the folds of scholarship, and permit scholars to grasp and comprehend academic subjects at levels of expertise.” ( https://classroom.synonym.com/ )

Saunders provides this information on the specific ways that critical thinking is important in  college-level work:

• Critical thinking supplies the foundation of high-quality academic writing.
• Peer awareness is an element of critical thinking in that it helps students understand and communicate with those who have different experiences, opinions, and perspectives.
• Critical thinking are necessary for passing some exams (e.g.,  essay answer, a series of multiple-choice questions to test comprehension, and especially situations where students must look for context clues or decipher word elements).
• When students are required to defend a thesis or dissertation, they need to be able to anticipate questions and respond on the spot to those asked by committee members.

Author and master teacher Michael Stratford (Demand Media), in his article, “What Are the Key Ideas for Critical Thinking Skills?”,  and the website, Skills You Need, note that someone with critical thinking skills can:

• Interpret data – becoming aware of all of the parts of an argument, such as point of view, audience, and thesis as well as reasoning through moral dilemmas
• Analyze and synthesize –  the ability to break down data into individual parts and reassemble them to create something original
• Infer and answer :  the ability to explain a problem with an inference, or educated guess. This requires knowing the difference between explaining by inference or by assumptions based on previous ideas
• Make Connections between ideas from varied sources
• Recognize, build, and appraise arguments put forth by others and determine their importance and relevance through objective evaluation
• Spot inconsistencies and errors in reasoning
• Approach problems consistently and systematically
• Reflect on the justification of one’s own assumptions, beliefs, and values

Indeed.com ., a service for finding jobs and polishing a resume, provides the following information about critical thinking. Their website offers five types of skills are important:

Five Important Critical Thinking Skills

Observation.

Observational skills are important for critical thinking because they help you to notice opportunities, problems, and solutions.  Eventually, good observers can predict  or anticipate problems or issues because their experience widens when they get in the habit of close observation. It is necessary to train yourself to pay close attention to details.

After you have spotted and identified a problem from your observation, your analytical skills become important: You must determine what part of a text or media is important and which parts are not. In other words,  gathering and evaluating sources of information that may support or depart from your text or media. This may involve a search for balanced research reports or scholarly work, and asking good questions about the text or media to make sure it is accurate and objective.

Now that you have gathered information or data, you must now interpret it and find a solution or resolution.  Even though the information you have may be incomplete, just make an “educated guess,” rather than a quick conclusion.  Look for clues (images, symbolism, data charts, or reports) that will help you analyze a situation, so you can evaluate the text or situation and come to a measured conclusion.

COMMUNICATION

In the context of critical thinking, this means engaging or initiating discussions, particularly on difficult issues or questions, especially when you face an audience that you know disagrees with your position. Use your communication skills to persuade them. Active listening, remaining calm, and showing respect are very important elements of communicating with an audience.

PROBLEM SOLVING

The problem-solving part of critical thinking involves applying or executing a conclusion or solution. You will want to choose the best, so this requires a strong understanding of your topic or goal, as well as some idea of how others have handled similar situations.

Essential “Critical” Vocabulary

[Source:  ( https://www.espressoenglish.net/difference-between-criticize-criticism-critique-critic-and-critical/]

Now let’s examine the many ways the word “critical” is used in various academic contents. You might be familiar with movie reviews or customer reviews on products in which a critic offers comments.  Below are some reviews of a long-standing Chinese restaurant in Columbus, Hunan Lion:

• The restaurant is over priced. You pay for the atmosphere. Ordered the beef and oriental veggies and to be honest it was onions and 3 pieces of broccoli. The meat was fatty and that is the worst. Typically the food is good but last night it wasn’t.
• 35 years of incredible food. By far the best Chinese restaurant in Columbus. If you want to have a great experience, without a doubt go there, you will love it.
• We ordered take out 10/01/2020. Food was TERRIBLE! The Crab Rangoon…well it’s not crab and I’m not sure of the texture it had going on but it was disgusting! The entire order of food after 1 bite went in the trash! I will certainly spread the word DO NOT ORDER FOOD from this restaurant! They are expensive and you are wasting your money. The girl at the cash register surpasses RUDE.
• The food and service were fantastic! We were in on Christmas day, and despite being busy, they did a magnificent job. We will definitely be back!

These reviews were voluntary; nevertheless, the writers of them are considered “critics,” because what they are really offering is judgment.

In a professional or academic setting, critics do much more than give a strong opinion. Whether they offer positive or negative comments, they all try to do so as objectively as possible. In other words, they avoid Personal Bias, meaning they try not to rely exclusively on their personal experiences, but rather they include influences from people, environments, cultures, values, stereotypes, and beliefs.

It is worth noting that all of these influences are part of being human. Part of critical thinking, however, means acknowledging the impact your own biases may have on the questions you ask or your interpreting of material; then, learn to overcome these evaluations. You must be like a judge in a courtroom:  you have to try to be fair and leave your own feeling out of the situation.

Activity #1:, inference exercise, harper’s is the oldest general-interest monthly magazine in the u.s. it emphasizes excellent writing and unique and varied perspectives. one of its most celebrated features is the “harper’s index,” which is a collection of random statistics about  politics, business, human behavior, social trends, research findings, and so forth. the reader is left alone to make sense of a fact by using inferences and background knowledge., below are some statistics from “harper’s index.” it is up to you to decide what each statistic suggests. something surprising mysterious what could explain its significance.

Choose a few of the facts below and write a response for each in which you raise questions , offer a possible explanation , or propose a tentative theory to explain the fact, or its significance.  Consider what the statistic suggests beyond what is written. Your response should be your own opinion , without consulting any internet resources or others.

Example:    Percentage increase last year in UFO sightings nationwide:   16% Source: [ July 2021 • Source: National UFO Reporting Center (Davenport,Wash.)] Response: Is this a large or small increase? Maybe the  increase is due to the recent U.S. government’s release of a file on unidentified flying objects (UFOs), or, what they call, “Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.” Maybe people feel like they can admit to seeing such phenomena since the government now acknowledges their existence? In the recent past, perhaps people would be laughed at or stigmatized if they claimed to see a UFO because the government and general public believed the idea of “alien life forms”  was ridiculous.

Percentage by which the unemployment rate of recently graduated U.S. physics majors exceeds that of art history majors:  60%

Source:  November 2020 • Source: Federal Reserve Bank of New York

ACTIVITY #2 – LINKING FACTS

Sometimes the “Harper’s Index” features pairs of statistics.  It is up to you to decide what the pair, seen together, suggests. Select a couple of the pairs below and write down questions you may have, or possible explanations that tell why the pair might be significant.  Consider what the statistic suggests beyond what is written. What you write should be your own opinion , without consulting any internet resources or others.

Type your response below each set:

Movie Reviews

One of the most familiar types of criticism we encounter is a movie review,  a short description of a film and the reviewer’s opinion about it. When you watch a movie on Netflix, for example, you can see the number of stars (1-5) given by those who have watched and rated the movie. Professional reviewers usually try to give a formal, balanced account of a movie, meaning they usually provide a summary and point out some positive and negative points about a film. Amateur critics, however, can write whatever they like – all positive, all negative, or a combination.

Amateur film critiques can be found in many places; the movie review site, IMDB , is one of the most popular, with a user-generated rating feature.  Another popular site is Rotten Tomatoes, which uses a unique ‘tomato meter’ to rate movies: a green tomato means fresh while red means rotten. You can also view the individual ratings given by critics. It has more than 50,000 movies in its database. And finally, another good source of movie reviews is Metacritic , which offers a collection of reviews from various sources.

Let’s look at this review by professional movie critic Roger Ebert ( https://www.rogerebert.com/

In “Top Gun: Maverick,” a sequel to “ Top Gun, ” an admiral refers to navy aviator Pete Mitchell (Tom Cruise)—call sign “ Maverick ”—as “the fastest man alive.” Truth be told, our fearless and ever-handsome action hero earns both appraisals and applause.  Indeed, Cruise’s consistent commitment to Hollywood showmanship deserves the same level of respect usually reserved for the fully-method actors such as Daniel Day-Lewis . Even if you somehow overlook the fact that Cruise is one of our most gifted and versatile dramatic and comedic actors with movies like “ Mission Impossible , ”  “ Born on the Fourth of July ,” “ Magnolia ,” “ Tropic Thunder ,” and “ Collateral ” on his CV, you will never forget why you show up to a Tom Cruise movie.

Director Joseph Kosinski allows the leading actor to be exactly what he is—a star—while upping the emotional and dramatic stakes of the first Top Gun (1986) with a healthy dose of nostalgia.  In this Top Gun sequel, we find Maverick in a role on the fringes of the US Navy, working as a test pilot. You won’t be surprised that soon enough, he gets called on a one-last-job type of mission as a teacher to a group of recent training graduates. Their assignment is just as obscure and politically cuckoo as it was in the first movie. There is an unnamed enemy—let’s called it Russia because it’s probably Russia—some targets that need to be destroyed, a flight plan that sounds nuts, and a scheme that will require all successful Top Gun recruits to fly at dangerously low altitudes. But can it be done?

In a different package, all the proud fist-shaking seen in “Top Gun: Maverick” could have been borderline insufferable, but fortunately Kosinski seems to understand exactly what kind of movie he is asked to navigate. In his hands, the tone of “Maverick” strikes a fine balance between good-humored vanity and half-serious self-deprecation, complete with plenty of emotional moments that catch one off-guard.

In some sense, what this movie takes most seriously are concepts like friendship, loyalty, romance, and okay, bromance.  Still, the action sequences are likewise the breathtaking stars of “Maverick.” Reportedly, all the flying scenes were shot in actual U.S. Navy F/A-18s, for which the cast had to be trained. Equally worthy of that big screen is the emotional strokes of “Maverick” that pack an unexpected punch. Sure, you might be prepared for a second sky-dance with “Maverick,” but perhaps not one that might require a tissue or two in its final stretch.

Available in theaters May 27th, 2022

ACTIVITY #3 – BEING A CRITIC

Analyze the film review above.  Does the reviewer give the movie a strongly positive or negative review? A mildly positive or negative review? A balanced review? How can you tell?  Support your opinion by identifying words, phases, and/or comparisons that directly or indirectly are positive, negative, or neutral.

ACTIVITY #4 – WRITE A MOVIE REVIEW

Select a movie to review. Choose one you either love or hate. (If it evokes emotions, it’s usually easier to review.) You may choose any movie, but for this assignment, don’t choose a film that might upset your target audience – your instructor and classmates. A movie review can be long or short.  Usually a simple outline of the plot and a sentence or two about the general setting in which it takes place will be sufficient, then add your opinion and analysis. The opinion section should be the main focus of your review. Don’t get too detailed. Your instructor will determine the word limit of this assignment.

Suggestions:

Do a web search to find information about the film: is it based on real-life events or is it fiction?

Find some information about the director and his/her/their style.

Look for information about the cast, the budget, the filming location, and where the idea for the film’s story came from. In other words, why did the producers want to make the movie?

Be sure to keep notes on where you find each piece of information – its source.  Most of the facts about movies are considered common knowledge, so they don’t have to be included in your review.

Avoid reading other reviews. They might influence your opinion, and that kind of information needs to be cited in a review.

When you are watching the film make notes of important scenes or details, symbolism, or the performances of the characters. You may want to analyze these in detail later. Again, keep notes on the source of the information you find.

Don’t give away the ending! Remember, reviews help readers decide whether or not to watch the movie. No spoilers!

Suggested Steps:

Write an introduction where you include all the basic information so that the film can be easily identified. Note the name, the director, main cast, and the characters in the story, along with the year it was made. Briefly provide the main idea of the film.

Write the main body. Analyze the story, the acting, and the director’s style. Discuss anything you would have done differently, a technique that was successful, or dialogue that was important. In other words, here is where you convey your opinion and the reasons for it. You may choose to analyze in detail one scene from the film that made an impression on you, or you may focus on an actor’s performance, or the film’s setting, music, light, character development, or dialogu

Make a conclusion. Search for several reviews of the film. Include how the film was rated by others. You will need to include information about where you found the information. Then, give your own opinion and your recommendation. You can end with a reason the audience might enjoy it or a reason you do not recommend it. Include a summary of the reasons you recommend or do not recommend it.

[Source:  https://academichelp.net/academic-assignments/review/write-film-review.html]

————————————————

References:

10 Top Critical Thinking Skills (and how to improve them).(2022).   Indeed.com: https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/critical-thinking-skills

Difference between criticize, criticism, critique, critic, and critical. Espresso English : https://www.espressoenglish.net/difference-between-criticize-criticism-critique-critic-and-critical/

Hansen, R.S. (n.d.).  Ways in which college is different from high school.  My CollegeSuccessStory.com .

Ideas to Action. Critical Thinking Inventories. University of Louisville:  https:// louisville.edu/ideastoaction/about/criticalthinking/what

Saunders, J. (n.d.). “Why Are Critical Thinking Skills Necessary for Academics?,” Demand Media.

Stratford, M. (n.d. ) What are the key ideas for critical thinking skills? Demand Media .

Van Zyl, M.A., Bays, C.L., & Gilchrist, C. (2013). Assessing teaching critical thinking with validated critical thinking inventories: The learning critical thinking inventory (LCTI) and the teaching critical thinking inventory (TCTI). Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across The Discipline , 28(3), 40-50.

What is Critical Thinking? (n.d.). Skills You Need : https://www.skillsyouneed.com/learn/critical-thinking.html

Write a Film Review. Academic Help: Write Better : https://academichelp.net/academic-assignments/review/write-film-review.html

Critical Reading, Writing, and Thinking Copyright © 2022 by Zhenjie Weng, Josh Burlile, Karen Macbeth is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Critical listening: how to benefit from this misunderstood skill

Critical listening has a bad reputation. When we think about listening, it’s words like ‘active’ and ‘empathetic’ that have positive connotations, but ‘critical’ listening is often considered negatively.

A positive definition

If you look at the definition of the word ‘critical’, you’ll see phrases such as “ expressing adverse or disapproving comments or judgments ”. It’s this definition that encourages the negative perceptions.

However, look at the definition of ‘critique’, and you’ll see “ a detailed analysis and assessment ”.

For anyone who likes to think in terms of the structure of the English language, you can think of critical listening is a verb, “ to analyze and assess ”, it really has a very positive connotation!

Simply put, it’s the ability to pay attention to what other people are saying while assessing the validity and value of the information they are conveying. Dick Billows

When to use critical listening

Critical listening is best used when a detailed analysis and assessment is required as the basis for making a decision or a recommendation.

It’s a useful skill, when applied appropriately. There are times when other styles of listening will be more effective. Here are a few examples of activities and the styles of listening to use:

• Brainstorming or idea generation required open listening (to generating more ideas)
• Coaching a team member requires empathetic listening (to formulate coaching questions)
• Taking a break requires appreciative listening (for example, listening to music to relax and enjoy)
• Evaluating a proposal requires critical listening (to make a decision)

As you’re listening, be aware of how you’re listening, and whether you’re listening in the most appropriate way for the activity you’re undertaking. For more guidance on listening, take a look at how to become a better listener .

The skills of critical listening

When you’re using critical listening to undertake a detailed analysis and assessment, there are 5 specific critical listening skills:

1. Assessing the strength of logic

Logic models in formal project management methodologies are planning tools that define the inputs, outputs, outcomes of a program. They explain the thinking behind program design and show how specific program activities lead to desired results.

You may not be presented with a formal logic model, but you can apply the same idea. As you listen to assess what is being said, consider the strength of logic.

• Does the proposal start from the right point?
• Is the structure reasonable?
• Does each step have a clear connection?
• Are the inter dependencies clear?
• Does the resourcing match the activities and timeline?

The specific questions will vary depending on the exact circumstances, the skill is to bring the strength of logic to your critical listening.

2. Checking for assumptions and bias

Look out for the nemesis of logic: assumptions and bias.

An assumption is something that is accepted as true without evidence. The danger is that it’s not true! For example, there may be an assumption that a critical license can be easily secured, or that a key stakeholder will support the initiative, or that budget will be available. As you’re listening, check for assumptions that could be proven wrong.

A bias is a prejudice for or against one person or group (or plan of action), especially in a way considered to be unfair. A bias can be unconscious, and it’s your job as you’re listening critically, to assess for bias and prejudice. Has an alternative option been dismissed to easily? Are recommendations skewed by unconscious prejudice? What are the implications of this?

3. Evaluating the evidence

Listening for evidence is the third specific skill to master.

Evidence can come in many forms: factual, financial, survey data, direct quotations, data from markets and competitors, proof of concepts, etc. Your task, as you’re listening, is to assess the value of the evidence and the extent to which it supports what is being proposed.

Remember to look for gaps in evidence too!

4. Checking for ‘Fit to goals’

We align our work towards certain agreed goals. That’s the intent. However, the reality is more complex. We have short-term and long-term goals. We have different stakeholders with different needs. We have an overall strategy and specific milestones within that strategy. We may also have local, regional and global perspectives. There are many different aspects.

How does what you’re listening to fit to goals? What is it really achieving and what’s missing? Where are the areas of misalignment? Which stakeholders’ needs are not being fully met? What are the consequences of all these points?

5. Assessing for completeness

The final critical listening skill is to assess for completeness. What is not being said? What is not being considered?

In many respects this is the hardest part of critical listening. You need to continue applying the 4 skills above, while also keeping some ‘mental bandwidth’ available for the unsaid.

This ability to analyze what is not being said will often trigger powerful insights that help you to effectively assess the value of what is being said.

Critical listening in summary

Critical listening is essential when you wish to analyze and assess what is being said.

There are 5 specific skills:

• Assessing the strength of logic
• Checking for assumptions and biases
• Evaluating the evidence
• Checking for ‘fit to goals’
• Assessing for completeness

Practice these 5 skills to develop your critical listening!

For more support to develop your listening skills, including a 5-day plan, take a look at the Chinese character for listening .

Inc. Best in Business Early-Rate Deadline Friday, August 16! Apply Today!

• Newsletters
• Best Industries
• Business Plans
• Home-Based Business
• The UPS Store
• Customer Service
• Black in Business
• Your Next Move
• Female Founders
• Best Workplaces
• Company Culture
• Public Speaking
• HR/Benefits
• Productivity
• All the Hats
• Digital Transformation
• Artificial Intelligence
• Bringing Innovation to Market
• Cloud Computing
• Social Media
• Data Detectives
• Exit Interview
• Bootstrapping
• Crowdfunding
• Venture Capital
• Business Models
• Personal Finance
• Founder-Friendly Investors
• Upcoming Events
• Inc. 5000 Vision Conference
• Become a Sponsor
• Cox Business
• Verizon Business
• Branded Content
• Apply Inc. 5000 US

Inc. Premium

How Emotionally Intelligent People Handle Criticism: They Don't Do This

Be proactive, not reactive..

(This is the second article in a series. Don't miss the first part:  How Emotionally Intelligent People Handle Criticism: The New York Times vs. Thomas Keller . )

In an early leadership role many years ago, I experienced an exchange I'll never forget. I chastised a team member (we'll call him David) for a major blunder. My point was valid, but I'm sure I could have delivered it better. David's response was quick and cutting: "You know, you're the kind of manager the rest of us hate."

None of us enjoy getting criticized. It's human nature to enjoy being right and feel a sense of hurt when we're wrong. The thing is, we all need criticism. Although we're generally drawn to like-minded people, those who disagree with us truly help us grow. The ones who call us out, point out our weaknesses and flaws.

Yes, the ones who challenge us make us better.

How EQ helps

Emotional intelligence involves the ability to recognize and understand your emotions, and to use that information to guide decision making.

There are times when you shouldn't listen to criticism--for example, when it's based on falsehood or given in a way that's meant to destroy your sense of self-worth.

But in reality, that's not usually the case. And although I encourage delivering criticism in a way that's constructive and helpful (I've come a long way since that first management position), these points are important when we're giving criticism.

When we're on the receiving end of criticism, our goal should be to learn from the feedback, and not let emotion close our minds. The key is to be proactive, not reactive. (I discuss this further in part one of this series. )

That being said, what reactions do emotionally intelligent people try to avoid when they're criticized?

1. They don't minimize the problem.

When receiving criticism, your first instinct might be to think: Is it really that big of a deal?

Maybe it is, or maybe it isn't. For the person who brought it to your attention, it was. And you can be sure it will be for others, too.

Remember: When you're striving for excellence, the small stuff matters.

2. They don't rationalize.

As a young teen, when Dad came home and asked why I hadn't taken the garbage out, I would respond:

"Well, I kind of took the garbage out. See, it's right next to the door. I was planning on dumping it in a few minutes."

It didn't help then, and it doesn't help now.

3. They don't make excuses.

If someone has the courage to tell you your presentation stunk, don't waste time explaining that you needed more time to prepare or you didn't know who your audience would be.

Instead, ask why it stunk. Then listen carefully.

4. They don't justify themselves.

OK, this one comes with a caveat. Obviously, you shouldn't automatically take the fall for something you didn't do, and there are circumstances when you'll need to defend yourself.

But in general, keeping a learning mindset when it comes to criticism will bring the most benefit. When you see yourself as right all of the time, you're missing something.

5. They don't sidestep the issue.

Politicians and spin doctors are experts at this. But refusing to tackle issues head-on is not only bad form, it's also self-defeating.

The first step in improving any weakness: Recognize that it's there.

6. They don't shift the blame.

For some people, it's always the other guy's fault. But guess what? Those individuals usually end up pretty lonely.

We can't control others, but we can work on ourselves. When we accept criticism, apply it, and move forward, not only do we benefit--but others benefit from our example.

Putting it into practice

Let's go back to that opening story. Although I learned a major lesson that day, we could argue that David didn't respond with great EQ. But I took his words to heart, asked him why he felt the way he did, and learned from his honesty.

Because I did, he apologized and learned from his mistake as well.

And therein lies the moral: Nobody's perfect; we won't always respond in the best way possible.

But if you work at controlling yourself and your emotions, every situation becomes a chance to learn and grow--just like that one from years ago did...

For David and me both.

A refreshed look at leadership from the desk of CEO and chief content officer Stephanie Mehta

Privacy Policy

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

15 Critical Listening

Learning objectives.

• Understand the differences between listening and hearing.
• Explain the benefits of listening.
• Understand the types of noise that can affect a listener’s ability to attend to a message.
• Define and explain critical listening and its importance in the public speaking context.
• Understand ways to improve your ability to critically listen to speeches.

Zach Graves – The Importance of Listening – CC BY-SA 2.0.

“Are you listening to me?” Often this question is asked because the speaker thinks the listener is nodding off or daydreaming. We sometimes think that listening means we only have to sit back, stay barely awake, and let a speaker’s words wash over us. While many Americans look upon being active as something to admire, to engage in, and to excel at, listening is thought of as a “passive” activity. More recently, O, the Oprah Magazine featured a cover article with the title, “How to Talk So People Really Listen: Four Ways to Make Yourself Heard.” This title leads us to expect a list of ways to leave the listening to others and insist that they do so, but the article contains a surprise ending. The final piece of advice is this: “You can’t go wrong by showing interest in what other people say and making them feel important. In other words, the better you listen, the more you’ll be listened to” (Jarvis, 2009).

You may have heard the adage, “We have two ears but only one mouth.” This saying reminds us that listening can be twice as important as talking. As a student, you most likely spend many hours in a classroom doing a significant amount of focused listening. Sometimes it is difficult to apply those efforts to communication in other areas of your life. As a result, your listening skills may not be all they could be. In this chapter, we will examine listening versus hearing, listening styles, listening difficulties, listening stages, and listening critically.

Listening vs. Hearing

Kimba Howard – megaphone – CC BY 2.0.

Listening or Hearing

Hearing is an accidental and automatic brain response to sound that requires no effort. We are surrounded by sounds most of the time. For example, we are accustomed to the sounds of airplanes, lawn mowers, furnace blowers, the rattling of pots and pans, and so on. We hear those incidental sounds and, unless we have a reason to do otherwise, we train ourselves to ignore them. We learn to filter out sounds that mean little to us, just as we choose to hear our ringing cell phones and other sounds that are more important to us.

Listening, on the other hand, is purposeful and focused rather than accidental. As a result, it requires motivation and effort. Listening , at its best, is active, focused, and concentrated attention for the purpose of understanding the meanings expressed by a speaker. We are not always the best listeners. Later in this chapter, we will examine some of the reasons why and some strategies for becoming more active critical listeners.

Hearing is an accidental and automatic brain response to sound that requires no effort.

Listening is active, focused, and concentrated attention for the purpose of understanding the meanings expressed by a speaker.

Benefits of Listening

Try not to take listening for granted. Before the invention of writing, people conveyed virtually all knowledge through some combination of showing and telling. Elders recited tribal histories to attentive audiences. Listeners received religious teachings enthusiastically. Myths, legends, folktales, and stories for entertainment only survived because audiences were eager to listen. Nowadays, however, you can gain information and entertainment through reading and electronic recordings rather than through real-time listening. If you become distracted and let your attention wander, you can go back and replay a recording. Despite that fact, you can still gain at least four compelling benefits by becoming more active and competent at real-time listening.

You Become a Better Student

When you focus on the material presented in a classroom, you will be able to identify the words used in a lecture and the way they were emphasized. Listening instead of hearing will help you understand the more complex meanings of the words said in a lecture. You will take better notes, and you will more accurately remember the instructor’s claims, information, and conclusions. Many times, instructors give verbal cues about what information is important, specific expectations about assignments, and even what material is likely to be on an exam, so careful listening can be beneficial.

You Become a Better Friend

When you give your best attention to people expressing thoughts and experiences that are important to them, those individuals are likely to see you as someone who cares about their well-being. This fact is especially true when you give your attention only and refrain from interjecting opinions, judgments, and advice.

People Will Perceive You as Intelligent and Perceptive

When you listen well to others, you reveal yourself as being curious and interested in people and events. Also, your ability to understand the meanings of what you hear will make you a more knowledgeable and thoughtful person.

Good Listening Can Help Your Public Speaking

When you listen well to others, you start to pick up more on the stylistic components related to how people form arguments and present information. As a result, you can analyze what you think works and doesn’t work in others’ speeches, which can help you transform your speeches in the process. For example, paying attention to how others cite sources orally during their speeches may give you ideas about how to more effectively cite sources in your presentation.

Listening Styles

John Benson – Listening Styles – CC BY 2.0.

If listening were easy, and if all people went about it in the same way, the task for a public speaker would be much easier. Even Aristotle, as long ago as 325 BC, recognized that listeners in his audience were varied in listening style . He differentiated them as follows:

Rhetoric falls into three divisions, determined by the three classes of listeners to speeches. For of the three elements in speech-making—speaker, subject, and person addressed—it is the last one, the hearer, that determines the speech’s end and object. The hearer must be either a judge, with a decision to make about things past or future, or an observer. A member of the assembly decides about future events, a juryman about past events: while those who merely decide on the orator’s skill are observers (Aristotle, c. 350 BCE).

Thus, Aristotle classified listeners into those who would be using the speech to make decisions about past events, those who would make decisions affecting the future, and those who would evaluate the speaker’s skills. This is all the more remarkable when we consider that Aristotle’s audiences were composed exclusively of male citizens of one city-state, all prosperous property owners.

Our audiences today are likely to be much more heterogeneous. Think about the classroom audience that will listen to your speeches in this course. Your classmates come from many religious and ethnic backgrounds. Some of them may speak English as a second language. Some might be survivors of war-torn parts of the world such as Bosnia, Darfur, or northwest China. Being mindful of such differences will help you prepare a speech in which you minimize the potential for misunderstanding.

Listening style is the way an audience member listens to the speech.

Part of the potential for misunderstanding is the difference in listening styles. In an article in the International Journal of Listening , Watson, Barker, and Weaver (Watson, et al., 1995) identified four listening styles: people, action, content, and time.

The people-oriented listener is interested in the speaker. People-oriented listeners listen to the message in order to learn how the speaker thinks and how they feel about their message. For instance, when people-oriented listeners listen to an interview with a famous rap artist, they are likely to be more curious about the artist as an individual than about music, even though the people-oriented listener might also appreciate the artist’s work. If you are a people-oriented listener, you might have certain questions you hope will be answered, such as: Does the artist feel successful? What’s it like to be famous? What kind of educational background does he or she have? In the same way, if we’re listening to a doctor who responded to the earthquake crisis in Haiti, we might be more interested in the doctor as a person than in the state of affairs for Haitians. Why did he or she go to Haiti? How did he or she get away from his or her normal practice and patients? How many lives did he or she save? We might be less interested in the equally important and urgent needs for food, shelter, and sanitation following the earthquake.

The people-oriented listener is likely to be more attentive to the speaker than to the message. If you tend to be such a listener, understand that the message is about what is important to the speaker.

Action-oriented listeners are primarily interested in finding out what the speaker wants. Does the speaker want votes, donations, volunteers, or something else? It’s sometimes difficult for an action-oriented speaker to listen through the descriptions, evidence, and explanations with which a speaker builds his or her case.

Action-oriented listening is sometimes called task-oriented listening. In it, the listener seeks a clear message about what needs to be done and might have less patience for listening to the reasons behind the task. This can be especially true if the reasons are complicated. For example, when you’re a passenger on an airplane waiting to push back from the gate, a flight attendant delivers a brief speech called the preflight safety briefing. The flight attendant does not read the findings of a safety study or the regulations about seat belts. The flight attendant doesn’t explain that the content of his or her speech is actually mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration. Instead, the attendant says only to buckle up so we can leave. An action-oriented listener finds “buckling up” a more compelling message than a message about the underlying reasons.

Content-oriented listeners are interested in the message itself, whether it makes sense, what it means, and whether it’s accurate. When you give a speech, many members of your classroom audience will be content-oriented listeners who will be interested in learning from you. You, therefore, have an obligation to represent the truth in the fullest way you can. You can emphasize an idea, but if you exaggerate, you could lose credibility in the minds of your content-oriented audience. You can advocate ideas that are important to you, but if you omit important limitations, you are withholding part of the truth and could leave your audience with an inaccurate view.

Imagine you’re delivering a speech on the plight of orphans in Africa. If you just talk about the fact that there are over forty-five million orphans in Africa but don’t explain why you’ll sound like an infomercial. In such an instance, your audience’s response is likely to be less enthusiastic than you might want. Instead, content-oriented listeners want to listen to well-developed information with solid explanations.

People who are  time-oriented listeners   prefer a message that gets to the point quickly. Time-oriented listeners can become impatient with slow delivery or lengthy explanations. This kind of listener may be receptive for only a brief amount of time and may become rude or even hostile if the speaker expects a longer focus of attention. Time-oriented listeners convey their impatience through eye rolling, shifting about in their seats, checking their cell phones, and other inappropriate behaviors. If you’ve been asked to speak to a group of middle-school students, you need to realize that their attention spans are simply not as long as those of college students. This is an important reason speeches to young audiences must be shorter or broken up by more variety than speeches to adults.

In your professional future, some of your audience members will have real-time constraints, not merely perceived ones. Imagine that you’ve been asked to deliver a speech on a new project to the board of directors of a local corporation. Chances are the people on the board of directors are all pressed for time. If your speech is long and filled with overly detailed information, time-oriented listeners will simply start to tune you out as you’re speaking. Obviously, if time-oriented listeners start tuning you out, they will not be listening to your message. This is not the same thing as being a time-oriented listener who might be less interested in the message content than in its length.

Types of Listeners

The people-oriented listener is interested in the speaker.

The action-oriented listener is primarily interested in finding out what the speaker wants.

The content-oriented listener  is interested in the message itself, whether it makes sense, what it means, and whether it’s accurate.

The time-oriented listener prefers a message that gets to the point quickly.

Why Listening Is Difficult

Ian T. McFarland – Listen – CC BY-SA 2.0.

At times, everyone has difficulty staying completely focused during a lengthy presentation. We can sometimes have difficulty listening to even relatively brief messages. Some of the factors that interfere with good listening might exist beyond our control, but others are manageable. It’s helpful to be aware of these factors so that they interfere as little as possible with understanding the message.

Noise is one of the biggest factors to interfere with listening. Noise can be defined as anything that interferes with your ability to attend to and understand a message. There are many kinds of noise, but we will focus on only the four you are most likely to encounter in public speaking situations: physical noise, psychological noise, physiological noise, and semantic noise.

Physical Noise

Physical noise   consists of various sounds in an environment that interfere with a source’s ability to hear. Construction noises right outside a window, planes flying directly overhead, or loud music in the next room can make it difficult to hear the message being presented by a speaker even if a microphone is being used. It is sometimes possible to manage the context to reduce the noise. Closing a window might be helpful. Asking the people in the next room to turn their music down might be possible. Changing to a new location is more difficult, as it involves finding a new location and having everyone get there.

Psychological Noise

Psychological noise consists of distractions to a speaker’s message caused by a receiver’s internal thoughts. For example, if you are preoccupied with personal problems, it is difficult to give your full attention to understanding the meanings of a message. The presence of another person to whom you feel attracted, or perhaps a person you dislike intensely, can also be psychosocial noise that draws your attention away from the message.

Physiological Noise

Physiological noise consists of distractions to a speaker’s message caused by a listener’s own body. Maybe you’re listening to a speech in class around noon and you haven’t eaten anything. Your stomach may be growling and your desk is starting to look tasty. Maybe the room is cold and you’re thinking more about how to keep warm than about what the speaker is saying. In either case, your body can distract you from attending to the information being presented.

Semantic Noise

Semantic noise occurs when a receiver experiences confusion over the meaning of a source’s word choice. While you are attempting to understand a particular word or phrase, the speaker continues to present the message. While you are struggling with a word interpretation, you are distracted from listening to the rest of the message. One of the authors was listening to a speaker who mentioned using a sweeper to clean carpeting. The author was confused, as she did not see how a broom would be effective in cleaning carpeting. Later, the author found out that the speaker was using the word “sweeper” to refer to a vacuum cleaner; however, in the meantime, her listening was hurt by her inability to understand what the speaker meant. Another example of semantic noise is the euphemism. Euphemism is diplomatic language used for delivering unpleasant information. For instance, if someone is said to be “flexible with the truth,” it might take us a moment to understand that the speaker means this person sometimes lies.

  Noise can be defined as anything that interferes with your ability to attend to and understand a message.

Physical noise consists of various sounds in an environment that interfere with a source’s ability to hear.

Psychological noise consists of distractions to a speaker’s message caused by a receiver’s internal thoughts.

Physiological noise consists of distractions to a speaker’s message caused by a listener’s own body.

Semantic noise occurs when a receiver experiences confusion over the meaning of a source’s word choice.

Examples of Noise

Many distractions are not the fault of the listener or the speaker. However, when you are the speaker, being aware of these sources of noise , or distractions that keep a person from listening, can help you reduce some of the noise that interferes with your audience’s ability to understand you.

Attention Span

A person can only maintain focused attention for a finite length of time. In his 1985 book Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business , New York University’s Steinhardt School of Education professor Neil Postman argued that modern audiences have lost the ability to sustain attention to a message (Postman, 1985). More recently, researchers have engaged in an ongoing debate over whether Internet use is detrimental to attention span (Carr, 2010). Whether or not these concerns are well founded, you have probably noticed that even when your attention is “glued” to something in which you are deeply interested, every now and then you pause to do something else, such as getting a drink of water, stretching, or looking out the window.

The limits of the human attention span can interfere with listening, but listeners and speakers can use strategies to prevent this interference. As many classroom instructors know, listeners will readily renew their attention when the presentation includes frequent breaks in pacing (Middendorf & Kalish, 1996). For example, a fifty- to seventy-five-minute class session might include some lecture material alternated with questions for class discussion, video clips, handouts, and demonstrations. Instructors who are adept at holding listeners’ attention also move about the front of the room, writing on the board, drawing diagrams, and intermittently using slide transparencies or PowerPoint slides.

If you have instructors who do a good job of keeping your attention, they are positive role models showing strategies you can use to accommodate the limitations of your audience’s attention span.

Receiver Biases

Good listening involves keeping an open mind and withholding judgment until the speaker has completed the message. Conversely, biased listening is characterized by jumping to conclusions; the biased listener believes, “I don’t need to listen because I already know what I think.” Reciever bias can refer to two things: biases with reference to the speaker and preconceived ideas and opinions about the topic or message. Both can be considered noise. Everyone has biases, but good listeners have learned to hold them in check while listening.

The first type of bias listeners can have is related to the speaker. Often a speaker stands up and an audience member simply doesn’t like the speaker, so the audience member may not listen to the speaker’s message. Maybe you have a classmate who just gets under your skin for some reason, or maybe you question a classmate’s competence on a given topic. When we have preconceived notions about a speaker, those biases can interfere with our ability to listen accurately and competently to the speaker’s message.

The second type of bias listeners can have is related to the topic or content of the speech. Maybe the speech topic is one you’ve heard a thousand times, so you just tune out the speech. Or maybe the speaker is presenting a topic or position you fundamentally disagree with. When listeners have strong preexisting opinions about a topic, such as the death penalty, religious issues, affirmative action, abortion, or global warming, their biases may make it difficult for them to even consider new information about the topic, especially if the new information is inconsistent with what they already believe to be true. As listeners, we have difficulty identifying our biases, especially when they seem to make sense. However, it is worth recognizing that our lives would be very difficult if no one ever considered new points of view or new information. We live in a world where everyone can benefit from clear thinking and open-minded listening.

Listening or Receiver Apprehension

Listening or receiver apprehension is the fear that you might be unable to understand the message or process the information correctly or be able to adapt your thinking to include the new information coherently (Wheeless, 1975). In some situations, you might worry that the information presented will be “over your head”—too complex, technical, or advanced for you to understand adequately.

Many students will actually avoid registering for courses in which they feel certain they will do poorly. In other cases, students will choose to take a challenging course only if it’s a requirement. This avoidance might be understandable but is not a good strategy for success. To become educated people, students should take a few courses that can shed light on areas where their knowledge is limited.

As a speaker, you can reduce listener apprehension by defining terms clearly and using simple visual aids to hold the audience’s attention. You don’t want to underestimate or overestimate your audience’s knowledge on a subject, so good audience analysis is always important. If you know your audience doesn’t have special knowledge on a given topic, you should start by defining important terms. Research has shown us that when listeners do not feel they understand a speaker’s message, their apprehension about receiving the message escalates. Imagine that you are listening to a speech about chemistry and the speaker begins talking about “colligative properties.” You may start questioning whether you’re even in the right place. When this happens, apprehension clearly interferes with a listener’s ability to accurately and competently understand a speaker’s message. As a speaker, you can lessen the listener’s apprehension by explaining that colligative properties focus on how much is dissolved in a solution, not on what is dissolved in a solution. You could also give an example that they might readily understand, such as saying that it doesn’t matter what kind of salt you use in the winter to melt ice on your driveway, what is important is how much salt you use.

Sources of noise , or distractions that keep a person from listening, include attention span, receiver bias, and listening or receiver apprehension.

Stages of Listening

Figure 3: Stages of Feedback

As you read earlier, there are many factors that can interfere with listening, so you need to be able to manage a number of mental tasks at the same time in order to be a successful listener. Author Joseph DeVito has divided the listening process into five stages: receiving, understanding, remembering, evaluating, and responding (DeVito, 2000).

Receiving is the intentional focus on hearing a speaker’s message, which happens when we filter out other sources so that we can isolate the message and avoid the confusing mixture of incoming stimuli. At this stage, we are still only hearing the message. Notice in Figure 3: Stages of Feedback that this stage is represented by the ear because it is the primary tool involved with this stage of the listening process.

One of the authors of this book recalls attending a political rally for a presidential candidate at which about five thousand people were crowded into an outdoor amphitheater. When the candidate finally started speaking, the cheering and yelling was so loud that the candidate couldn’t be heard easily despite using a speaker system. In this example, our coauthor had difficulty receiving the message because of the external noise. This is only one example of the ways that hearing alone can require sincere effort, but you must hear the message before you can continue the process of listening.

Understanding

In the understanding stage, we attempt to learn the meaning of the message, which is not always easy. For one thing, if a speaker does not enunciate clearly, it may be difficult to tell what the message was—did your friend say, “I think she’ll be late for class,” or “my teacher delayed the class”? Notice in Figure 3:  Stages of Feedback that stages two, three, and four are represented by the brain because it is the primary tool involved with these stages of the listening process.

Even when we have understood the words in a message, because of the differences in our backgrounds and experience, we sometimes make the mistake of attaching our own meanings to the words of others. For example, say you have made plans with your friends to meet at a certain movie theater, but you arrive and nobody else shows up. Eventually, you find out that your friends are at a different theater all the way across town where the same movie is playing. Everyone else understood that the meeting place was the “west side” location, but you wrongly understood it as the “east side” location and therefore missed out on part of the fun.

The consequences of ineffective listening in a classroom can be much worse. When your professor advises students to get an “early start” on your speech, he or she probably hopes that you will begin your research right away and move on to developing a thesis statement and outlining the speech as soon as possible. However, students in your class might misunderstand the instructor’s meaning in several ways. One student might interpret the advice to mean that as long as she gets started, the rest of the assignment will have time to develop itself. Another student might instead think that to start early is to start on the Friday before the Monday due date instead of Sunday night.

So much of the way we understand others is influenced by our own perceptions and experiences. Therefore, at the understanding stage of listening, we should be on the lookout for places where our perceptions might differ from those of the speaker.

Remembering

Remembering begins with listening; if you can’t remember something that was said, you might not have been listening effectively. Wolvin and Coakley note that the most common reason for not remembering a message after the fact is because it wasn’t really learned in the first place (Wolvin & Coakley, 1996). However, even when you are listening attentively, some messages are more difficult than others to understand and remember. Highly complex messages that are filled with detail call for highly developed listening skills. Moreover, if something distracts your attention even for a moment, you could miss out on information that explains other new concepts you hear when you begin to listen fully again.

It’s also important to know that you can improve your memory of a message by processing it meaningfully—that is, by applying it in ways that are meaningful to you (Gluck, et al., 2008). Instead of simply repeating a new acquaintance’s name over and over, for example, you might remember it by associating it with something in your own life. “Emily,” you might say, “reminds me of the Emily I knew in middle school,” or “Mr. Impiari’s name reminds me of the Impala my father drives.”

Finally, if understanding has been inaccurate, recollection of the message will be inaccurate too.

The fourth stage in the listening process is evaluating or judging the value of the message. We might be thinking, “This makes sense” or, conversely, “This is very odd.” Because everyone embodies biases and perspectives learned from widely diverse sets of life experiences, evaluations of the same message can vary widely from one listener to another. Even the most open-minded listeners will have opinions of a speaker, and those opinions will influence how the message is evaluated. People are more likely to evaluate a message positively if the speaker speaks clearly, presents ideas logically, and gives reasons to support the points made.

Unfortunately, personal opinions sometimes result in prejudiced evaluations. Imagine you’re listening to a speech given by someone from another country and this person has an accent that is hard to understand. You may have a hard time simply making out the speaker’s message. Some people find a foreign accent to be interesting or even exotic, while others find it annoying or even take it as a sign of ignorance. If a listener has a strong bias against foreign accents, the listener may not even attempt to attend to the message. If you mistrust a speaker because of an accent, you could be rejecting important or personally enriching information. Good listeners have learned to refrain from making these judgments and instead to focus on the speaker’s meanings.

Responding ,  sometimes referred to as feedback, is the fifth and final stage of the listening process. It’s the stage at which you indicate your involvement. Almost anything you do at this stage can be interpreted as feedback. For example, you are giving positive feedback to your instructor if at the end of class you stay behind to finish a sentence in your notes or approach the instructor to ask for clarification. The opposite kind of feedback is given by students who gather their belongings and rush out the door as soon as class is over. Notice in Figure 3: Stages of Feedback that this stage is represented by the lips because we often give feedback in the form of verbal feedback; however, you can just as easily respond nonverbally.  

Stages of Feedback

Receiving is the stage where you intentionally focus on hearing a speaker’s message. This focus happens when you filter out other sources so that you can isolate the message and avoid the confusing mixture of incoming stimuli.

Understanding is the stage where we attempt to learn the meaning of the message.

Remembering is the stage that begins with listening. If you can’t remember something that was said, you might not have been listening effectively.

Evaluating is the stage where we judge the value of the message.

Responding is the stage where you give the speaker feedback.

Formative Feedback

Not all response occurs at the end of the message. Formative feedback is a natural part of the ongoing transaction between a speaker and a listener. As the speaker delivers the message, a listener signals their involvement with focused attention, note-taking, nodding, and other behaviors that indicate understanding or failure to understand the message. These signals are important to the speaker, who is interested in whether the message is clear and accepted or whether the content of the message is meeting the resistance of preconceived ideas. Speakers can use this feedback to decide whether additional examples, support materials, or explanation is needed.

Summative Feedback

Summative feedback is given at the end of the communication. When you attend a political rally, a presentation given by a speaker you admire, or even a class, there are verbal and nonverbal ways of indicating your appreciation for or your disagreement with the messages or the speakers at the end of the message. Maybe you’ll stand up and applaud a speaker you agreed with or just sit staring in silence after listening to a speaker you didn’t like. In other cases, a speaker may be attempting to persuade you to donate to a charity, so if the speaker passes a bucket and you make a donation, you are providing feedback on the speaker’s effectiveness. At the same time, we do not always listen most carefully to the messages of speakers we admire. Sometimes we simply enjoy being in their presence, and our summative feedback is not about the message but about our attitudes about the speaker. If your feedback is limited to something like, “I just love your voice,” you might be indicating that you did not listen carefully to the content of the message.

There is little doubt that by now, you are beginning to understand the complexity of listening and the great potential for errors. By becoming aware of what is involved with active listening and where difficulties might lie, you can prepare yourself both as a listener and as a speaker to minimize listening errors with your own public speeches.

Formative feedback is a natural part of the ongoing transaction between a speaker and a listener during the speech (note taking, nodding, smiling, etc.).

Summative feedback is given at the end of the communication (asking questions, peer reviewing, etc).

Listening Critically

Kizzzbeth – Good Listener – CC BY-SA 2.0.

As a student, you are exposed to many kinds of messages. You receive messages conveying academic information, institutional rules, instructions, and warnings; you also receive messages through political discourse, advertisements, gossip, jokes, song lyrics, text messages, invitations, web links, and all other manners of communication. You know it’s not all the same, but it isn’t always clear how to separate the truth from the messages that are misleading or even blatantly false. Nor is it always clear which messages are intended to help the listener and which ones are merely self-serving for the speaker. Part of being a good listener is to learn when to use caution in evaluating the messages we hear.

Critical listening , in a public speaking context, means using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence. Critical listening can be learned with practice but is not necessarily easy to do. Some people never learn this skill; instead, they take every message at face value even when those messages are in conflict with their knowledge. Problems occur when messages are repeated to others who have not yet developed the skills to discern the difference between a valid message and a mistaken one. Critical listening can be particularly difficult when the message is complex. Unfortunately, some speakers may make their messages intentionally complex to avoid critical scrutiny. For example, a city treasurer giving a budget presentation might use very large words and technical jargon, which make it difficult for listeners to understand the proposed budget and ask probing questions.

Critical listening, in a public speaking context, means using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence.

Six Ways to Improve Your Critical Listening

Critical listening is first and foremost a skill that can be learned and improved. In this section, we are going to explore six different techniques you can use to become a more critical listener.

Recognizing the Difference between Facts and Opinions

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited with saying, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts” (Wikiquote). Part of critical listening is learning to separate opinions from facts, and this works two ways: critical listeners are aware of whether a speaker is delivering a factual message or a message based on opinion, and they are also aware of the interplay between their own opinions and facts as they listen to messages.

In American politics, the issue of health care reform is heavily laden with both opinions and facts, and it is extremely difficult to sort some of them out. A clash of fact versus opinion happened on September 9, 2010, during President Obama’s nationally televised speech to a joint session of Congress outlining his health care reform plan. In this speech, President Obama responded to several rumors about the plan, including the claim “that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false—the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” At this point, one congressman yelled out, “You lie!” Clearly, this congressman did not have a very high opinion of either the health care reform plan or the president. However, when the nonpartisan watch group Factcheck.org examined the language of the proposed bill, they found that it had a section titled “No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens” (Factcheck.org, 2009).

Often when people have a negative opinion about a topic, they are unwilling to accept facts. Instead, they question all aspects of the speech and have a negative predisposition toward both the speech and the speaker.

This is not to say that speakers should not express their opinions. Many of the greatest speeches in history include personal opinions. Consider, for example, Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he expressed his personal wish for the future of American society. Critical listeners may agree or disagree with a speaker’s opinions, but the point is that they know when a message they are hearing is based on opinion and when it is factual.

Uncovering Assumptions

If something is factual , supporting evidence exists. However, we still need to be careful about what evidence does and does not mean. Assumptions are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate. When listening to a public speech, you may find yourself being asked to assume something is a fact when in reality many people question that fact. For example, suppose you’re listening to a speech on weight loss. The speaker talks about how people who are overweight are simply not motivated or lack the self-discipline to lose weight. The speaker has built the speech on the assumption that motivation and self-discipline are the only reasons why people can’t lose weight. You may think to yourself, what about genetics? By listening critically, you will be more likely to notice unwarranted assumptions in a speech, which may prompt you to question the speaker if questions are taken or to do further research to examine the validity of the speaker’s assumptions. If, however, you sit passively by and let the speaker’s assumptions go unchallenged, you may find yourself persuaded by information that is not factual.

Factual means supporting evidence exists.

Assumptions are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate.

When you listen critically to a speech, you might hear information that appears unsupported by evidence. You shouldn’t accept that information unconditionally. You would accept it under the condition that the speaker offers credible evidence that directly supports it.

Facts vs. Assumptions

Be Open to New Ideas

Sometimes people are so fully invested in their perceptions of the world that they are unable to listen receptively to messages that make sense and would be of great benefit to them. Human progress has been possible, sometimes against great odds, because of the mental curiosity and discernment of a few people. In the late 1700s when the technique of vaccination to prevent smallpox was introduced, it was opposed by both medical professionals and everyday citizens who staged public protests (Edward Jenner Museum). More than two centuries later, vaccinations against smallpox, diphtheria, polio, and other infectious diseases have saved countless lives, yet popular opposition continues.

In the world of public speaking, we must be open to new ideas. Let’s face it, people have a tendency to filter out information they disagree with and to filter in information that supports what they already believe. Nicolaus Copernicus was a sixteenth-century astronomer who dared to publish a treatise explaining that the earth revolves around the sun, which was a violation of Catholic doctrine. Copernicus’s astronomical findings were labeled heretical and his treatise banned because a group of people at the time were not open to new ideas. In May of 2010, almost five hundred years after his death, the Roman Catholic Church admitted its error and reburied his remains with the full rites of Catholic burial (Owen, 2010).

While the Copernicus case is a fairly dramatic reversal, listeners should always be open to new ideas. We are not suggesting that you have to agree with every idea that you are faced with in life; rather, we are suggesting that you at least listen to the message and then evaluate the message.

Relate New Ideas to Old Ones

As both a speaker and a listener, one of the most important things you can do to understand a message is to relate new ideas to previously held ideas. Imagine you’re giving a speech about biological systems and you need to use the term “homeostasis,” which refers to the ability of an organism to maintain stability by making constant adjustments. To help your audience understand homeostasis, you could show how homeostasis is similar to adjustments made by the thermostats that keep our homes at a more or less even temperature. If you set your thermostat for seventy degrees and it gets hotter, the central cooling will kick in and cool your house down. If your house gets below seventy degrees, your heater will kick in and heat your house up. Notice that in both cases your thermostat is making constant adjustments to stay at seventy degrees. Explaining that the body’s homeostasis works in a similar way will make it more relevant to your listeners and will likely help them both understand and remember the idea because it links to something they have already experienced.

If you can make effective comparisons while you are listening, it can deepen your understanding of the message. If you can provide those comparisons for your listeners, you make it easier for them to give consideration to your ideas.

Note-taking is a skill that improves with practice. You already know that it’s nearly impossible to write down everything a speaker says. In fact, in your attempt to record everything, you might fall behind and wish you had divided your attention differently between writing and listening.

Careful, selective note-taking is important because we want an accurate record that reflects the meanings of the message. However much you might concentrate on the notes, you could inadvertently leave out an important word, such as not , and undermine the reliability of your otherwise carefully written notes. Instead, if you give the same care and attention to listening, you are less likely to make that kind of a mistake.

It’s important to find a balance between listening well and taking good notes. Many people struggle with this balance for a long time. For example, if you try to write down only key phrases instead of full sentences, you might find that you can’t remember how two ideas were related. In that case, too few notes were taken. At the opposite end, extensive note-taking can result in a loss of emphasis on the most important ideas.

To increase your critical listening skills, continue developing your ability to identify the central issues in messages so that you can take accurate notes that represent the meanings intended by the speaker.

Listening Ethically

Ben Smith – String telephone – CC BY-SA 2.0.

Ethical listening rests heavily on honest intentions. We should extend to other speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak. We should be facing the speaker with our eyes open. We should not be checking our cell phones. We should avoid any behavior that belittles the speaker or the message.

Scholars Stephanie Coopman and James Lull emphasize the creation of a climate of caring and mutual understanding, observing that “respecting others’ perspectives is one hallmark of the effective listener” (Coopman & Lull, 2008). Respect, or unconditional positive regard for others, means that you treat others with consideration and decency whether you agree with them or not. Professors Sprague, Stuart, and Bodary (Sprague, et al., 2010). also urge us to treat the speaker with respect even when we disagree, don’t understand the message, or find the speech boring.

Doug Lippman (1998) (Lippman, 1998), a storytelling coach, wrote powerfully and sensitively about listening in his book:

Like so many of us, I used to take listening for granted, glossing over this step as I rushed into the more active, visible ways of being helpful. Now, I am convinced that listening is the single most important element of any helping relationship. Listening has great power. It draws thoughts and feelings out of people as nothing else can. When someone listens to you well, you become aware of feelings you may not have realized that you felt. You have ideas you may have never thought before. You become more eloquent, more insightful.… As a helpful listener, I do not interrupt you. I do not give advice. I do not do something else while listening to you. I do not convey distraction through nervous mannerisms. I do not finish your sentences for you. In spite of all my attempts to understand you, I do not assume I know what you mean. I do not convey disapproval, impatience, or condescension. If I am confused, I show a desire for clarification, not dislike for your obtuseness. I do not act vindicated when you misspeak or correct yourself. I do not sit impassively, withholding participation. Instead, I project affection, approval, interest, and enthusiasm. I am your partner in communication. I am eager for your imminent success, fascinated by your struggles, forgiving of your mistakes, always expecting the best. I am your delighted listener (Lippman, 1998).

This excerpt expresses the decency with which people should treat each other. It doesn’t mean we must accept everything we hear, but ethically, we should refrain from trivializing each other’s concerns. We have all had the painful experience of being ignored or misunderstood. This is how we know that one of the greatest gifts one human can give to another is listening.

Ethical listening is a concept that rests heavily on honest intentions. It is when we extend to other speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak.

Aristotle. (c. 350 BCE). Rhetoric (W. Rhys Roberts, Trans.). Book I, Part 3, para. 1. Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.1.i.html .

Carr, N. (2010, May 24). The Web shatters focus, rewires brains.  Wired Magazine . Retrieved from  http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/05/ff_nicholas_carr/all/1 .

Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2008).  Public speaking: The evolving art . Cengage Learning, p. 60.

DeVito, J. A. (2000).  The elements of public speaking  (7th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

Edward Jenner Museum. (n.d.). Vaccination. Retrieved from  http://www.jennermuseum.com/Jenner/vaccination.html

Factcheck.org, a Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. (2009, September 10). Obama’s health care speech. Retrieved from  http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech

Gluck, M. A., Mercado, E., & Myers, C. E. (2008).  Learning and memory: From brain to behavior . New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 172–173.

Jarvis, T. (2009, November). How to talk so people really listen: Four ways to make yourself heard. O, the Oprah Magazine . Retrieved from http://www.oprah.com/relationships/Communication-Skills-How-to-Make-Yourself-Heard

Lippman, D. (1998).  The storytelling coach: How to listen, praise, and bring out people’s best . Little Rock, AR: August House.

Middendorf, J., & Kalish, A. (1996). The “change-up” in lectures.  The National Teaching and Learning Forum ,  5 (2).

Owen, R. (2010, May 23). Catholic church reburies “heretic” Nicolaus Copernicus with honour.  Times Online . Retrieved from  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7134341.ece

Postman, N. (1985).  Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business . New York: Viking Press.

Sprague, J., Stuart, D., & Bodary, D. (2010).  The speaker’s handbook  (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage.

Watson, K. W., Barker, L. L., & Weaver, J. B., III. (1995). The listening styles profile (LSP-16): Development and validation of an instrument to assess four listening styles.  International Journal of Listening ,  9 , 1–13.

Wheeless, L. R. (1975). An investigation of receiver apprehension and social context dimensions of communication apprehension. Speech Teacher , 24 , 261–268.

Wikiquote. (n.d.). Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Retrieved from  http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan

Wolvin, A., & Coakley, C. G. (1996). Listening (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Stand up, Speak out Copyright © 2017 by Josh Miller; Marnie Lawler-Mcdonough; Megan Orcholski; Kristin Woodward; Lisa Roth; and Emily Mueller is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Helpful Free Resources
• Happiness & Fun
• Healthy Habits
• Love & Relationships
• Mental Health
• Mindfulness & Peace
• Purpose & Passion
• Fun & Inspiring
• Submit a Post
• Books & Things
• Tiny Buddha’s Breaking Barriers to Self-Care

“Criticism is something you can easily avoid by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.” ~Aristotle

At the end of the day, when I feel completely exhausted, it often has nothing to do with all the things I’ve done.

It’s not a consequence of juggling multiple responsibilities and projects. It’s not my body’s way of punishing me for becoming a late-life jogger after a period of laziness. It’s not even about getting too little sleep.

When I’m exhausted, you can be sure I’ve bent over backward trying to win everyone’s approval. I’ve obsessed over what people think of me, I’ve assigned speculative and usually inaccurate meanings to feedback I’ve received, and I’ve lost myself in negative thoughts about criticism and its merit.

I work at minimizing this type of behavior, and I’ve had success for the most part, but admittedly, it’s not easy.

I remember back in college, taking a summer acting class, when I actually made the people around me uncomfortable with my defensiveness. This one time, the teacher was giving me feedback after a scene in front of the whole class. She couldn’t get through a single sentence without me offering some type of argument.

After a couple minutes of verbal sparring, one of my peers actually said, “Stop talking. You’re embarrassing yourself.”

Looking back, I cut myself a little slack. You’re vulnerable in the spotlight, and the student’s reaction was kind of harsh. But I know I needed to hear it.

Because I was desperately afraid of being judged, I took everything, from everyone, as condemnation.

I realize criticism doesn’t always come gently, from someone legitimately trying to help. A lot of the feedback we receive is unsolicited and doesn’t come from teachers—or maybe all of it does. Maybe there’s a lesson in every criticism, if only we’re willing to find it.

We can’t control what other people will say to us. But we can control how we internalize it, respond to it, and learn from it, and when we release it and move on.

If you’ve been having a hard time dealing with criticism lately, it may help to remember the following:

The Benefits of Criticism

Personal growth.

1. Looking for seeds of truth in criticism encourages humility. It’s not easy to take an honest look at yourself and your weaknesses, but you can only grow if you’re willing to try.

2. Learning from criticism allows you to improve. Almost every critique gives you a tool to more effectively create the tomorrow you visualize.

3. Criticism opens you up to new perspectives and ideas that you may not have considered. Whenever someone challenges you, they help expand your thinking.

4. Your critics give you an opportunity to practice active listening. This means you resist the urge to analyze in your head, planning your rebuttal, and simply consider what the other person is saying.

5. You have the chance to practice forgiveness when you come up against harsh critics. Most of us carry around stress and frustration that we unintentionally misdirect from time to time.

Emotional Benefits

6. It’s helpful to learn how to sit with the discomfort of an initial emotional reaction instead of immediately acting or retaliating. All too often we want to do something with our feelings—generally not a great idea!

7. Criticism gives you the chance to foster problem solving skills, which isn’t always easy when you’re feeling sensitive, self-critical, or annoyed with your critic.

8. Receiving criticism that hits a sensitive spot helps you explore unresolved issues. Maybe you’re sensitive about your intelligence because you’re holding onto something someone said to you years ago, something you need to release.

9. Interpreting someone else’s feedback is an opportunity for rational thinking—sometimes, despite a negative tone, criticism is incredibly useful.

10. Criticism encourages you to question your instinctive associations and feelings; praise is good, criticism is bad. If we recondition ourselves to see things in less black and white terms, there’s no stop to how far we can go!

Improved Relationships

11. Criticism presents an opportunity to choose peace over conflict. When criticized. our instinct may be to fight, creating unnecessary drama. The people around us generally want to help us, not judge us.

12. Fielding criticism well helps you mitigate the need to be right. Nothing closes an open mind like ego—bad for your personal growth and damaging for relationships.

13. Your critics give you an opportunity to challenge any people-pleasing tendencies. Relationships based on a constant need for approval can be draining for everyone involved. It’s liberating to let people think whatever they want—they’re going to do it anyway.

14. Criticism gives you the chance to teach people how to treat you. If someone delivers it poorly, you can take this opportunity to tell them, “I think you make some valid points, but I would receive them better if you didn’t raise your voice.”

15. Certain pieces of criticism teach you not to sweat the small stuff. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t matter that your boyfriend thinks you load the dishwasher “wrong.”

Time Efficiency

16. The more time you spend dwelling about what someone said, the less time you have to do something with it.

17. If you improve how you operate after receiving criticism, this will save time and energy in the future. When you think about from that perspective—criticism as a time saver—it’s hard not to appreciate it!

18. Fostering the ability to let go of your feelings and thoughts about being critiqued can help you let go in other areas of your life. Letting go of worries, regrets, stresses, fears, and even positive feelings helps you root yourself in the present moment. Mindfulness is always the most efficient use of time.

19. Criticism reinforces the power of personal space. Taking ten minutes to process your emotions, perhaps by writing in a journal, will ensure you respond well. And responding well the first time prevents one critical comment from dominating your day.

20. In some cases, criticism teaches you how to interact with a person, if they’re negative or hostile, for example. Knowing this can save you a lot of time and stress in the future.

Self-Confidence

21. Learning to receive false criticism—feedback that has no constructive value—without losing your confidence is a must if you want to do big things in life. The more attention your work receives, the more criticism you’ll have to field.

22. When someone criticizes you, it shines a light on your own insecurities. If you secretly agree that you’re lazy, you should get to the root of that. Why do you believe that, and what can you do about it?

23. Learning to move forward after criticism, even if you don’t feel incredibly confident, ensures that no isolated comment will prevent you from seizing your dreams. Think of it as separating the wheat from the chaff; take what’s useful, leave the rest, and keep going!

24. When someone else appraises you harshly, you have an opportunity to monitor your internal self-talk. Research indicates up to 80% of our thoughts are negative. Take this opportunity to monitor and change your thought processes so you don’t drain and sabotage yourself!

25. Receiving feedback well reminds you it’s okay to have flaws—imperfection is part of being human. If you can admit weakness and work on them without getting down on yourself, you’ll experience far more happiness, peace, enjoyment, and success.

We are all perfectly imperfect, and other people may notice that from time to time. We may even notice in it each other.

Somehow accepting that is a huge weight off my mind.

About Lori Deschene

Lori Deschene is the founder of Tiny Buddha. She started the site after struggling with depression, bulimia, c-PTSD, and toxic shame so she could recycle her former pain into something useful and inspire others do the same. She recently created the Breaking Barriers to Self-Care eCourse to help people overcome internal blocks to meeting their needs—so they can feel their best, be their best, and live their best possible life. If you’re ready to start thriving instead of merely surviving, you can learn more and get instant access here .

Did you enjoy this post? Please share the wisdom :)

Related posts:

Free Download: Buddha Desktop Wallpaper

Recent Forum Topics

• Being a lonely young woman in a world obsessed with romance and sex
• My boyfriend is traveling & I had surgery. I feel abandoned
• I want to feel accomplished
• I try setting boundaries and fail a lot
• Compromise for Conflict, Marriage or Break up Decision
• so is life….
• Consummating Our Marriage
• Desire for Different Experiences
• Scholarship demand.
• Losing weight, but family having doubts about me

I Don’t Need Anyone

GET MORE FUN & INSPIRING IMAGES & VIDEOS .

Latest Posts

Beyond the Inner Critic: Choosing a New Reality

My Path to Purpose and an Unexpected Impact

6 Mindset Shifts to Overcome the Need for External Validation

Forge Your Own Path: How to Know When It’s Time to Walk Away

The Magic of Celebrating Every Little Win

This site is not intended to provide and does not constitute medical, legal, or other professional advice. The content on Tiny Buddha is designed to support, not replace, medical or psychiatric treatment. Please seek professional care if you believe you may have a condition.

Tiny Buddha, LLC may earn affiliate income from qualifying purchases, including from the Amazon Associate Program.

Before using the site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use .

Click to opt-out of Google Analytics tracking.

Who Runs Tiny Buddha?

Get More Tiny Buddha

•   Twitter
•   Facebook
•   Instagram
•   Youtube
•   RSS Feed

Credits & Copyright

• Back to Top

How to Handle Criticism Professionally in 5 Steps

Have you ever received criticism and felt defensive, defeated, or disappointed, though the remarks were constructive and designed to help you improve? If this is the case, it’s highly possible you need to become better versed in accepting criticism, which can be a valuable aspect of growing healthy relationships professionally and personally. 

As Carl Sagan, consultant and adviser to NASA, once said , “One of the criteria for leadership should be a talent for understanding, encouraging, and making constructive use of vigorous criticism.” For this reason, receiving constructive criticism is a skill that should be developed over time with practice. If you’re normally defensive and easily upset by negative feedback, keep an open mind and learn to take it in stride so you can become a better version of yourself.

Key Takeaways

Why handling criticism is an important life skill.

“We all need people who will give us feedback. That’s how we improve.” Bill Gates

Handling criticism can be challenging, especially if the criticism is directed at something you care about deeply, such as your intelligence or character. Yet, it’s essential to work on your ability to absorb and respond to criticism, particularly if it’s constructive criticism from a trusted source.

Types of Criticism + How to Differentiate Them

“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” Winston Churchill

People face different types of criticism, each of which requires a different skill set to respond to effectively. Not all criticism is constructive or helpful; it can also be hurtful, mean-spirited, or lacking in substance. It’s important to differentiate between constructive and destructive criticism because when you understand the type of criticism you’re dealing with, you’ll better understand how to respond to it appropriately.

How to Handle Criticism in 5 Steps

“Feedback is a gift. Ideas are the currency of our next success. Let people see you value both feedback and ideas.” Jim Trinka and Les Wallace

There are several strategies you can use when responding to criticism that are advantageous:

1. Pause and Reflect

2. avoid taking it personally, 3. consider the source, 4. look for kernels of truth, 5. take action and improve, what to avoid when dealing with critics.

“Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing.” Attributed to Aristotle

In order to keep a level head when confronted with a critic, here are some things to avoid to handle the situation in a constructive manner:

Accepting Feedback as Part of a Growth Mindset

• The Big Think Interview
• Your Brain on Money
• Explore the Library
• The Universe. A History.
• The Progress Issue
• A Brief History Of Quantum Mechanics
• 6 Flaws In Our Understanding Of The Universe
• Michio Kaku
• Neil deGrasse Tyson
• Michelle Thaller
• Steven Pinker
• Ray Kurzweil
• Cornel West
• Helen Fisher
• Smart Skills
• High Culture
• The Present
• Hard Science
• Special Issues
• Starts With A Bang
• Everyday Philosophy
• The Learning Curve
• The Long Game
• Perception Box
• Strange Maps
• Free Newsletters
• Memberships

Five strategies for giving (and receiving) constructive criticism

• Constructive criticism has become an important life skill.
• If social media are anything to go by, it’s also one many people lack.
• Like any skill, constructive criticism can be honed with practice and dedication to some key strategies.

Constructive criticism was once the professional coin of a select few. Editors and writers developed the skill to do their jobs, while the rare manager or professor may have honed their feedback craft if they were dedicated. For most though, constructive criticism rarely factored into daily life.

However, the critical circle has expanded — thanks in no small part to our digital saturation. Today, everyone is a creator, critic, and idea communicator rolled into one.

Businesses, restaurants, and even complete strangers ask us to review them online. The lifeblood of social media is the content we create and our critical analysis of others’. And the steady march from the manufacturing economy to one based on service and creativity means more of us will need to generate ideas while helping others construct and strengthen their own.

Criticism is no longer a behind-the-scenes workshop. It’s a social and economic mainstay, a skill front and center for many of our lives. It’s also a skill many of us must refine. 

Can criticism even be constructive?

It’s worth considering what we mean by constructive criticism , a phrase that seems as paradoxical as a Buddhist koan . To construct is to build something up. To criticize is to tear it down. How can we practice both in a single action?

Thankfully, you don’t need to achieve enlightenment to criticize constructively. It helps simply to remember the word’s origin. Critic came to English by way of Latin’s criticus , which means “a judge, censor, or estimator.” Criticus itself hails from the Greek kritikos , meaning one who is “able to make judgments.” 

Notice that neither of these etymons is necessarily scowl-faced. A judge can be favorable. An estimator can praise a work’s brilliance and pick apart its bungles. It’s from here that we derive one modern notion of a critic — that being, someone with the expertise to evaluate the merits of films, novels, overpriced entrees, and so on.

Unfortunately, critic ’s English word family has its chippy cousins. Take the adjective critical . Just say the word out loud. You can’t help but hear the irritated toe taps of a censorious supervisor. And those tapping toes connect to critic ’s second definition: “one given to harsh or captious judgment.”

When we qualify criticism as constructive , we signal in advance that we are working within the first definition. Yes, that requires pointing to places of disagreement or that need improvement. But it also means celebrating a work’s value and accomplishments.

And to reach that mindset, critics and recipients should follow these five strategies.

Establish trust

Author and MacArthur fellow Jacqueline Woodson knows the difference between constructive and destructive criticism. As a writer, she’s had to work with editors to improve drafts of her novels. As a reader and teacher, she’s offered advice to fellow writers. 

In a Big Think+ interview, Woodson shared that she always wants people to start with what they love about the work.

“It really is fragile, right? When you first put your words out into the world, and for someone to jump on them and start critiquing or criticizing them right off the bat can be devastating. Even for me at this stage, it has to be incremental, and always starting with praise, lots and lots of praise, and then getting to the nitty-gritty,” she says.

But this strategy isn’t about inflating egos. It’s about establishing trust.

According to Paul Zak , founding director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies, when your strengths are recognized, your hypothalamus releases the neurotransmitter and hormone oxytocin . Also called the “love hormone,” oxytocin promotes sexual arousal as well as pro-social behaviors such as bonding and maternal care. Zak’s research suggests it is directly connected to trust , as well. 

When someone’s brain is awash in oxytocin, they become less fearful and more trusting of others, even strangers. The more trusting, the more willing they are to be vulnerable in the other person’s presence. And as Woodson’s experience points out, vulnerability is a delicate but necessary step in receiving criticism.

The opposite is also true. To come in vulnerable and immediately face the firing squad — no matter how well-intentioned their aim may be — is brutal. Starting with what’s wrong sets the conversation’s tone in a stressful D minor, and as Zak points out, stress is a potent oxytocin inhibitor. It prevents people from interacting effectively with others.

Recipients can build trust with their critics, too. By being appreciative, honest about their vulnerabilities, and recognizing good ideas, recipients massage their critic’s hypothalamus to create a feedback loop of love hormone production and subsequent trust that opens a path to constructive criticism

Breathe deeply, think slowly

System 1 is the fast and intuitive thinking we use to read traffic signs on the freeway. System 2 is the slow and deliberate thinking used to solve math problems. While System 1 has its purpose — you don’t want to deliberate before hitting the brakes in rush-hour traffic — that place is neither giving nor receiving criticism.

In his seminal book Thinking, Fast and Slow , psychologist Daniel Kahneman distinguished between two modes of thinking: System 1 and System 2. 

For critics, that means going slow and being attentive. They should take a breath, consider the work or idea as a whole, and choose an approach that works best. Their goal should be to short-circuit, as best as possible, the many cognitive biases that could stymie their criticism. These include: 

• The egocentric bias, in which we rely too heavily on our own perspective.
• The confirmation bias, in which we look for evidence of our initial belief while discounting contrary evidence. 
• The framing effect, in which our decisions are based on the way something is presented, not the thing itself.

Similarly, recipients shouldn’t react immediately and emotionally to criticism. Rather than despair at red markups, they too should take a breath and spend time analyzing their emotional state. Then they should process the criticism as a whole before returning to tackling lingering issues one at a time. 

This is one reason constructive criticism is best facilitated face-to-face. When you can see how a person acts — not just their words but the minutiae in their facial expressions and body language — you have a better chance of understanding where your assumptions may be wrong or your interpretation needs more information to improve accuracy.

Use questions to your advantage

Another cognitive bias that plagues criticism is known as the curse of knowledge. When under its spell, people assume that everyone will have the same background knowledge and experiences they do. After all, who wouldn’t know these things that come so easily and effortlessly to them, right?

The critic assumes the recipient must be brainless to not see these obvious mistakes. Meanwhile, the recipient assumes the critic just doesn’t “get it.” Secure in their belief that such knowledge is widely known, they never elaborate on the missing element that would clear up the confusion.

As Steven Pinker notes in The Sense of Style : “Anyone who wants to lift the curse of knowledge must first appreciate what a devilish curse it is. Like a drunk who is too impaired to realize that he is too impaired to drive, we do not notice the curse because the curse prevents us from noticing it. This blindness impairs us in every act of communication.”

Thankfully, Woodson has a remedy to break the curse: questions. Lots of ‘em!

“[Constructive] criticism should be the kind of critiquing that asks questions, asks bigger questions. Why does this happen? I’m curious about where this is going. What were you intending for the reader to get? That kind of thing, so it doesn’t make you feel so vulnerable,” she says.

Questions help because they reveal the areas where the critic and recipient’s experiences and knowledge may not align. They show where something, so clear to one person, is muddled and opaque for the other. And they identify problems that the other may not see as a problem and therefore wouldn’t consider fixing.

Employ a growth mindset

But the question-focused approach demands a change to what psychologist Carol Dweck calls a growth mindset . Critics and recipients must see mistakes not as failures but as opportunities to learn.

Novelist Salman Rushdie embodies this mindset when discussing his feedback process: “I’m looking for people to say: I got confused here, or I wanted to know more about her, or I wanted a little less about him. And you want people to tell you that much more than to just say, “It’s great!” Because “It’s great!” doesn’t help me. I mean, it’s comforting, but I’m much more interested in people putting their finger on areas where they had problems.”

While praise and confidence building are nice, once trust is established, recipients must then take in the criticism and use it to discover what doesn’t work and correct it. That doesn’t mean taking every critic’s suggestion all the time — one can’t please all of the critics all of the time. But it means giving the advice honest appraisal and seeking ways to use it to improve.

But that requires a shift in the critic’s mindset as well. They must realize their job is not to fix the problem. That’s taking someone else’s work, ideas, or perspective and trying to make it their own. Instead, constructive criticism points to areas for potential growth that can make the work stronger in the end.

Choose your words wisely, listen carefully

It’s impossible to decouple emotions from the critical process, meaning shame, anger, and self-defeat are always potential outcomes. For this reason, criticism can never be a simple exchange of information. It is a social exercise in which we must be careful of the words we choose.

“The words I choose to describe a situation will give meaning to the situation and will shape my experience of this entire situation. That is the power of language,” psychotherapist Esther Perel told us. “We need to know what [our] words represent. They have cultural, historical, and social resonance.”

The questions-based approach outlined above is a good start. It shifts the conversation away from a series of need to’s — which can make the feedback read like a despotic decree — and shifts it to a process in problem-solving. Another tactic is to make the language impersonal and contributive. Instead of saying, “You did this wrong,” critics can switch to focus on their experience: “I had trouble with this part.”

Critics and recipients must also engage in quality listening. According to Perel, people too often approach conversation as a debate. They’re looking to prove their point and have already formulated a response before the other is finished talking. 

But the quality of constructive criticism is determined by the quality of the listening on both sides. Perel notes that means acknowledging with attention, validating their point of view, and empathizing with them even if you ultimately disagree.

Constructive criticism points to areas for potential growth that can make the work stronger in the end.

Don’t fear constructive criticism

Like any skill, constructive criticism sharpens with practice and commitment. That’s true for giving and receiving criticism — which, in their way, are distinct skills.

When you practice receiving criticism, you build what Rushdie calls your “confidence muscles.” To extend his metaphor, seeking feedback is like going to the gym. Through resistance and some discomfort, you strengthen your confidence. Your ego may be sore in the morning, but as you continue, you’ll discover that you can recover from critiques with much less mental fatigue.

Giving criticism is more like building your coaching abilities. As you improve, you’ll discover what feedback is appropriate, which is extraneous, how to encourage through tough times, and how to better set aside your biases.

And ultimately, both athlete and coach are working toward the same goal: a win.

These five strategies can help anyone develop their constructive criticism skills. And while we won’t always get it right, devoting ourselves to the project will not only make us better but could help us be a little happier in our critically-minded era.

Watch more of these experts on Big Think+

Nurture a culture of lifelong learning with lessons on Big Think+. Our e-learning platform brings together more than 350 experts, academics, and entrepreneurs to help your organization develop the skills necessary to succeed in the 21st century.

Join authors such as Jacqueline Woodson, Salman Rushdie, Esther Perel, and Sheila Heen for lessons in:

• A Writer’s Guide to Creativity and Criticism
• Use Criticism to Your Advantage
• How to Have Difficult Conversations
• The Science of Receiving Feedback

Learn more about Big Think+ or request a demo for your organization today.

How to Handle Criticism

What to do when you feel like others are rooting for you to fail..

Posted August 26, 2023 | Reviewed by Ray Parker

• How to Handle Bullying
• Take our Anger Management Test
• Find counselling to support kids or teens
• The key to receiving criticism is not letting it diminish your self-confidence.
• When someone unfairly criticizes you, reflecting on what they're saying is helpful.
• Get clear about who you are, what you're OK with, and what you're still working on.

It's never fair for someone to impose their opinion on you when you haven't asked for it, so you must be clear about what purpose your critics serve.

If you're using drugs and your family is bugging you to stop, that might be something you need to change. But if you know that the things your critics are ranting about don't reflect reality, that's a clue that their criticism is really about them , not you. Whether there's some truth in what they say or none, it isn't fun to be criticized and picked apart.

So how do you respond to people who only see your faults, exaggerate the truth, and root for you to fail?

You deserve to be able to fight your battles and work on your changes on your own time, without pressure to do things on other people's timelines or according to their opinions. When someone unfairly criticizes you, reflecting on what they're saying might be helpful.

It could be useful to consider which of your imperfections you're OK with and which you'd like to change; if you do this, you won't be so sensitive when another person points them out.

How to Respond to Unfair Criticism

The first step when you feel criticized is to get clear about who you are, what you're OK with, and what you're still working on. This allows you to explore how comfortable you are, letting others give you input about your life—even if it's negative—without making you feel like you need to change or defend yourself.

Sometimes you put boundaries in place with people in your life and repeatedly ask them to be more respectful of your choices, but they continue to be critical. Maybe you know what you need to work on, but that person just won't let it go; they remind you every chance they get.

For example, one of my previous clients, Alan, came to see me soon after getting a divorce . He explained that he and his wife had grown apart, and she had left him for another man. Alan's mother never liked his wife and constantly complained about her. Once the divorce was finalized, all he heard from his mother was, "I told you so. None of this would have ever happened if you'd listened to me." Although Alan's marriage did end in divorce, he didn't regret his decision to wed. He admitted to me that while some of his mother's points were valid, and he should have worked on some things earlier in the marriage, her constantly criticizing and rooting for his marriage to fail didn't help either. She was one of the wedges that drove him and his wife apart, and after the divorce, she continued to try to get in the way of his decision-making , criticizing his every move. As he said: "She's trying to help in her way, but it's too much. I get it; my marriage didn't work. But it's like she's so happy she was right about it that now she uses it every chance she gets. I can't even sit through dinner with her. Last time I got so angry, I stormed out of her house."

Constantly being unfairly criticized, like Alan was, can make anyone angry. The key to receiving criticism is not letting it diminish your self-confidence . In Alan's case, his mother's criticism was unfair and unhelpful—unjust because it was constant and offensive; incorrect because it was inaccurate.

How to Deal with a Critic Who Roots for Your Failure

If you continue to get angry when you're criticized or feel like someone is rooting for you to fail, first clarify that you, your decisions, and your actions are undeserving of the criticism you received. Then, follow these tips.

1. Create internal calm. Try to remain calm and centered, whether the metaphorical slap in the face comes from family, friends, or a co-worker. Any criticism can fuel anger because it brings up feelings of inadequacy. So, by all means, let yourself get angry about it. But most of the time, expressing that anger will only make matters worse and give your critic the high ground. No doubt, it will prevent them from listening to you. So when the harsh words come, take a minute to breathe and get grounded. Then, before responding, channel your logical brain and access the calm within.

2. Respond, don't react. Once you establish an internal calm, it will be easier for you to respond, instead of reacting with anger. This is responding by setting a boundary about the criticism. In Alan's case, a boundary sounds like, "I have heard this all before; I would like to talk about something else. If you continue to bring this up, I will finish my dinner at home."

3. Recap the words back to your critic. Refrain from pressuring yourself to have the perfect response to a critic; nothing comes out as perfectly as you'd like. So if you have a tough time setting boundaries, repeat your critic's complaint to them, ensuring that you clearly understand it.

You can start by saying, "I want to be sure I heard you correctly," and then repeat how you heard the person's words. The objective is to focus on the words, not the emotions they provoke.

An aggressive person might be hoping to anger you and cause you to react. Or they might want you to accept the criticism to empower themselves. Instead, you are taking the focus off your reaction and putting it back onto the literal words of the criticisms—without accepting them.

4. Open up the discussion. Not being overly emotional might surprise your critics, allowing them to think more deeply about their words. If this happens, an honest discussion can take place. It's helpful to use language that shows your perspective.

For example, "I can see how you might get that idea, but allow me to tell you my thoughts." This indicates that you're open to talking about it and seeing their perspective, which will disarm them and open them up to listening to you. You're less likely to be heard if you get defensive or disregard their statements.

It's natural to react strongly to unjust criticism, and sometimes there's no avoiding it. But if you're constantly getting angry and nothing changes, try this approach.

My client Alan started to manage his anger about his mother's comments by remaining calm, calling his mom to clarify what she meant by her criticism, and then stating that he understood what she'd said. He found out that his mom just wanted to be heard. Once she felt he'd listened to her, she backed off and started to be receptive to his perspective.

This may not work every time, but it is worth a try.

Changing your responses to critical people takes time and work. However, if you can manage it, they will hopefully change how they react to you as well.

Ilene S. Cohen, Ph.D. , is a psychotherapist and blogger, who teaches in the Department of Counseling at Barry University.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Constructive criticism that works

Psychologists are discovering how to increase the odds that feedback will lead to change

Vol. 52 No. 7 Print version: page 61

• Healthy Workplaces
• Managing Human Capital

When psychologist Naomi Winstone, PhD, started delving into research about constructive feedback, she found an abundance of literature on how to have these conversations but little on whether the recommended strategies were working. In response, Winstone, director of the University of Surrey’s Institute of Education in the United Kingdom, started investigating the effectiveness of different types of feedback and was surprised by what she found. In multiple experiments, Winstone found that people were far more likely to recall evaluative feedback—feedback about something they have already completed—than feedback on how they could improve on a future task, also known as directive feedback ( Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , Vol. 44, No. 12, 2018). For Winstone, the findings were somewhat puzzling because in recent years, studies in education have shown that students prefer directive feedback because it motivates them to improve their grades.

“Our results demonstrate how little we know about what happens after feedback is given,” she said. “We should not assume people know how to use the information to improve, and my goal is to help people develop skills to leverage this input more effectively.”

Winstone and other psychologists at the forefront of feedback research are discovering that the skills needed for both delivering and receiving constructive criticism are not always intuitive, and investigators are starting to understand how to increase the odds that these interactions will help students, employees, researchers, and leaders be successful. For psychologists, the latest findings can inform how they provide feedback in their roles as graduate student advisers, clinical supervisors, journal editors, lab directors, and managers.

Work environment matters

Winstone believes that one of the critical, yet often neglected, elements needed in conversations is time spent teaching people how to use the feedback they receive. Rather than assuming her students will remember comments about how to improve their work, she encourages them to keep a record of feedback. She recently developed an online tool called FEATS (Feedback Engagement and Tracking System) that helps students log the feedback they receive, categorize their strengths and weaknesses, and identify a plan for improvement.

Industrial and organizational (I/O) psychologist Lisa Steelman, PhD, has found that the work environment is another key factor that influences whether people use the feedback they get. At the most recent annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, she presented results of a study in which senior and middle managers received 360-degree feedback from peers and subordinates before participating in a 5-day leadership development program focused on performance improvement. The participants also rated how supportive their work environments were for feedback in areas such as credibility of supervisors, quality of ongoing feedback, levels of empathy when feedback was delivered, and accessibility of leaders for regular check-ins. Then the managers returned to their workplaces to use their newly learned skills.

“We found that leaders in a supportive environment for feedback had much better performance improvement over time than those in the unsupportive feedback environment,” said Steelman, a professor of I/O psychology at the Florida Institute of Technology. “This shows that feedback does not happen in a vacuum, and we need to set the stage by creating a ­growth-oriented environment.”

One of the ways she has created a supportive environment is by making herself more accessible to her students. “When students see me walking quickly in the hallways as I rush to class, they assume I am not available,” she said. “I noticed that they would approach me with comments like, ‘I’m sorry to bother you.’ I’ve intentionally started walking more slowly, and I check in with them proactively to see how they are doing. I may not deliver feedback during these informal interactions, but this sets the stage for later feedback by promoting an environment that supports coaching and mentoring.”

Similarly, New York University’s Jay Van Bavel, PhD, has fostered a feedback culture in his Social Identity and Morality Lab by modeling the importance of intellectual humility. He shares his draft papers with students in the lab and invites an open discussion where they can offer feedback. “I’m in a position of power, and it’s important for my students to see that I am open to receiving criticism,” said Van Bavel, an associate professor of psychology and neural science. Everyone working in the lab also shares their papers. “It’s not really about one senior person giving feedback, because everyone has a turn giving and receiving comments,” he said.

Winstone also emphasizes to students that receiving a critique of their work is just the beginning of the process, not the end. “There is often a power dynamic in which the professor or manager is seen as the gatekeeper and thus the feedback should not be questioned,” she said. “But I urge my students to respond to my input and explain why they wrote something in a certain way, because I may have misunderstood or been biased.”

The role of empathy

Researchers have also been questioning feedback strategies focused on using a specific sequence of positive versus constructive comments, such as the “feedback sandwich” in which the person giving feedback offers a praise statement before and after constructive criticism. One recent study compared three different forms of feedback given to people who were learning how to work with children with intellectual disabilities: the feedback sandwich, three constructive comments followed by three praise comments, and in-the-moment feedback that was constructive or praising ( Journal of Organizational Behavior Management , Vol. 41, No. 1, 2021).

The participants watched a training video, implemented what they learned in a role-­playing exercise, and received feedback on their performance in one of the three ways. Then they role-played and received feedback two more times. The researchers rated the performance of the participants in 10 areas, and all three feedback groups performed equally well.

“This suggests that the order of praise and constructive statements may not matter in the context of teaching a new skill,” said study author Summer Bottini, PhD, BCBA-D, a postdoctoral psychology resident at the Marcus Autism Center in Atlanta. In a follow-up survey, the participants also rated their preferences when receiving feedback, and the responses showed that they cared more about the interpersonal abilities of the person giving the feedback than the delivery method. “People want input from someone who is genuine, engaging, kind, and clear,” said Bottini.

Although soft skills are valuable when building rapport and trust, leaders who embody these traits are often more likely to feel reluctant to offer constructive criticism because they place a premium on relationships, and delivering negative feedback conflicts with that goal, said I/O psychologist Christopher Rosen, PhD, a professor in the Sam M. Walton College of Business at the University of Arkansas who studies the use of feedback in leadership roles. “Most people agree that constructive criticism is important for learning, but leaders higher in empathy are more at risk of avoiding these conversations and may even be more likely to inflate performance ratings,” he said.

To better understand why certain leaders are averse to giving constructive criticism, Rosen and his colleagues conducted several studies, and they found that people who are high in empathy reported increased levels of distress and lower attentiveness while working after providing negative feedback to subordinates. They were also less productive at work after these conversations because they then struggled with executive functioning and problem-solving tasks. Conversely, managers low in empathy reported feeling more attentive and less distressed after delivering negative feedback ( Journal of Applied Psychology , in press).

“We found that the experience hijacks them emotionally and cognitively, and it impairs their performance,” Rosen said.

Leaders high in empathy can offset the psychological costs by taking breaks after providing constructive criticism, he said. Rosen, who believes he is high in empathy, tries to avoid scheduling these conversations before important deadlines or presentations. He also strives to offer feedback to graduate students frequently so the experience feels less intimidating and is a familiar part of the growth process.

Consistency is key

Although constructive criticism is vital for people who want to improve performance, psychologist Cydney Dupree, PhD, an assistant professor of organizational behavior in Yale University’s School of Management, recently found another reason people may be tempted to avoid these important conversations. In a recent study, she discovered that people who identify as White and liberal tended to present themselves as less competent when they interacted with non-White people, while White conservatives presented equal competence when they interacted with White versus Black people. In a series of experiments, she found that White liberals used fewer words related to competence, such as “competitive” or “assertive,” when talking with a Black person or mostly Black audience than when talking with a White person or mostly White audience ( Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 117, No. 3, 2019).

“This is likely a well-­intentioned, yet patronizing, attempt to connect with racial minorities by distancing themselves from stereotypes that depict White Americans as dominant,” she said. “Ironically, they are aligning with stereotypes that depict minorities as incompetent.”

The findings relate to delivering feedback because leaders unknowingly influenced by this desire to connect with people of color may unintentionally avoid giving negative feedback, or they might patronize researchers of color by trying to appear less competent themselves. To avoid these pitfalls, Dupree suggests that managers, advisers, and mentors create a standardized list of specific topics to provide feedback on and to schedule sessions regularly. “Avoid skipping topics, and update the list regularly, being sure to focus on relevancy to the job,” she said.

Increasing the quality and frequency of feedback is also a goal for Carol Falender, PhD, who has worked as a training director of APA-accredited internships for more than 20 years. One of the most common errors she sees among supervisors is a failure to provide frequent feedback. “They may fear that feedback will strain or rupture the relationship,” said Falender, an adjunct professor at Pepperdine University and a clinical professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. “But the consequence is that supervisees don’t have an opportunity to respond to or learn from this input, and they often feel blindsided when they eventually receive evaluation.”

Falender teaches clinical supervisors to incorporate feedback into each supervision session, ideally linking comments to direct observation of patient sessions. For example, a supervisor could observe that the supervisee changed the subject when a patient became angry. “Then the supervisee can reflect or clarify the reasons for their behavior, and this leads to a collaborative discussion,” she said.

Feedback from afar

Submitting papers to journals is another aspect of psychologists’ work that involves critique, and the protocol for providing feedback can vary widely between editors. Although most researchers agree that rejection is part of the territory, the way editors communicate feedback can significantly influence the experience and possibly the career trajectory of an author.

“It’s painful to have a paper rejected, but it’s even more difficult when the feedback is brief, with words like ‘the paper wasn’t a good fit,’” said Thalia Goldstein, PhD, editor of Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. “A more detailed explanation can help authors improve their work or take the paper to another journal.”

Although it takes time to flesh out a critique, Goldstein, an assistant professor of applied developmental psychology at George Mason University, simplifies the process by using a template that starts with an introduction about how the paper was reviewed and the reason for the rejection. The next section includes a more detailed explanation of questions or concerns from reviewers, and she always includes comments about the paper’s strengths. “Every paper has positives and negatives,” she said. “The goal is to help the field of psychology, so I try to give some sense of encouragement.”

Like Goldstein, Robin Codding, PhD, editor of School Psychology , uses a template to guide all of her feedback on journal submissions. In a rejection letter, she often recommends other journals that might be a better match for the paper. “I always recognize the work the authors have done and express my appreciation for their effort,” said Codding, an associate professor in the Department of Applied Psychology at Northeastern University.

Researchers also frequently receive feedback about their work on social media, but etiquette online can be unpredictable, said Goldstein. “I’m active on Twitter, and I enjoy seeing research that would not otherwise cross my desk,” she explained. “But it can be a risky environment to exchange feedback because negative comments can go viral.”

For Van Bavel, this reality overtly contradicts the feedback culture he is trying to encourage in his lab. “It is crucial for scientists to be open to critical feedback, but the social media environment makes this difficult when moral outrage is often encouraged because it generates more attention,” he said.

When he disagrees with research findings posted on social media, Van Bavel is careful to explain why he disagrees and link his opinion to supporting evidence. He also avoids tagging people when he offers criticism to reduce the chances of igniting a negative-feedback firestorm.

“When people feel threatened, they become more closed-minded,” said Van Bavel, who studies social threat and belongingness. “Both in person and online, we should criticize with kindness. Rather than attacking people as individuals, we need to focus on behavior that can be changed.”

Further reading

When feedback signals failure but offers hope for improvement: A process model of constructive criticism Fong, C. J., et al., Thinking Skills and Creativity , 2018

Let’s talk about it: Turning confrontation into collaboration at work Marciano, P. L. McGraw-Hill, 2021

Development of a measure of receptivity to instructional feedback and examination of its links to personality Lipnevich, A. A., et al., Personality and Individual Differences , 2021

Recommended Reading

Key takeaways for leaders and mentors.

• Encourage students and employees to keep a record of the feedback they receive and the plan for improvement.
• Make yourself accessible to foster a positive feedback environment.
• Give students an opportunity to provide constructive criticism on your papers.
• Know that your interpersonal skills may matter more than your feedback delivery method.
• Take breaks after providing constructive criticism.
• Incorporate feedback into each clinical supervision session.

Contact APA

You may also like.

Week 7: Listening and Responding

Listening critically, learning objectives.

• Define and explain critical listening and its importance in the public speaking context.
• Understand six distinct ways to improve your ability to critically listen to speeches.
• Evaluate what it means to be an ethical listener.

As a student, you are exposed to many kinds of messages. You receive messages conveying academic information, institutional rules, instructions, and warnings; you also receive messages through political discourse, advertisements, gossip, jokes, song lyrics, text messages, invitations, web links, and all other manner of communication. You know it’s not all the same, but it isn’t always clear how to separate the truth from the messages that are misleading or even blatantly false. Nor is it always clear which messages are intended to help the listener and which ones are merely self-serving for the speaker. Part of being a good listener is to learn when to use caution in evaluating the messages we hear.

Critical listening in this context means using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence. Critical listening can be learned with practice but is not necessarily easy to do. Some people never learn this skill; instead, they take every message at face value even when those messages are in conflict with their knowledge. Problems occur when messages are repeated to others who have not yet developed the skills to discern the difference between a valid message and a mistaken one. Critical listening can be particularly difficult when the message is complex. Unfortunately, some speakers may make their messages intentionally complex to avoid critical scrutiny. For example, a city treasurer giving a budget presentation might use very large words and technical jargon, which make it difficult for listeners to understand the proposed budget and ask probing questions.

Six Ways to Improve Your Critical Listening

Critical listening is first and foremost a skill that can be learned and improved. In this section, we are going to explore six different techniques you can use to become a more critical listener.

Recognizing the Difference between Facts and Opinions

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited with saying, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.” [1] Part of critical listening is learning to separate opinions from facts, and this works two ways: critical listeners are aware of whether a speaker is delivering a factual message or a message based on opinion, and they are also aware of the interplay between their own opinions and facts as they listen to messages.

In American politics, the issue of health care reform is heavily laden with both opinions and facts, and it is extremely difficult to sort some of them out. A clash of fact versus opinion happened on September 9, 2010, during President Obama’s nationally televised speech to a joint session of Congress outlining his health care reform plan. In this speech, President Obama responded to several rumors about the plan, including the claim “that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false—the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” At this point, one congressman yelled out, “You lie!” Clearly, this congressman did not have a very high opinion of either the health care reform plan or the president. However, when the nonpartisan watch group Factcheck.org examined the language of the proposed bill, they found that it had a section titled “No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens.” [2]

Often when people have a negative opinion about a topic, they are unwilling to accept facts. Instead, they question all aspects of the speech and have a negative predisposition toward both the speech and the speaker.

This is not to say that speakers should not express their opinions. Many of the greatest speeches in history include personal opinions. Consider, for example, Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he expressed his personal wish for the future of American society. Critical listeners may agree or disagree with a speaker’s opinions, but the point is that they know when a message they are hearing is based on opinion and when it is factual.

Uncovering Assumptions

If something is factual, supporting evidence exists. However, we still need to be careful about what evidence does and does not mean. Assumptions are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate. When listening to a public speech, you may find yourself being asked to assume something is a fact when in reality many people question that fact. For example, suppose you’re listening to a speech on weight loss. The speaker talks about how people who are overweight are simply not motivated or lack the self-discipline to lose weight. The speaker has built the speech on the assumption that motivation and self-discipline are the only reasons why people can’t lose weight. You may think to yourself, what about genetics? By listening critically, you will be more likely to notice unwarranted assumptions in a speech, which may prompt you to question the speaker if questions are taken or to do further research to examine the validity of the speaker’s assumptions. If, however, you sit passively by and let the speaker’s assumptions go unchallenged, you may find yourself persuaded by information that is not factual.

When you listen critically to a speech, you might hear information that appears unsupported by evidence. You shouldn’t accept that information unconditionally. You would accept it under the condition that the speaker offers credible evidence that directly supports it.

Table 1. Facts vs. Assumptions

Be Open to New Ideas

Sometimes people are so fully invested in their perceptions of the world that they are unable to listen receptively to messages that make sense and would be of great benefit to them. Human progress has been possible, sometimes against great odds, because of the mental curiosity and discernment of a few people. In the late 1700s when the technique of vaccination to prevent smallpox was introduced, it was opposed by both medical professionals and everyday citizens who staged public protests. [3] More than two centuries later, vaccinations against smallpox, diphtheria, polio, and other infectious diseases have saved countless lives, yet popular opposition continues.

In the world of public speaking, we must be open to new ideas. Let’s face it, people have a tendency to filter out information they disagree with and to filter in information that supports what they already believe. Nicolaus Copernicus was a sixteenth-century astronomer who dared to publish a treatise explaining that the earth revolves around the sun, which was a violation of Catholic doctrine. Copernicus’s astronomical findings were labeled heretical and his treatise banned because a group of people at the time were not open to new ideas. In May of 2010, almost five hundred years after his death, the Roman Catholic Church admitted its error and reburied his remains with the full rites of Catholic burial. [4]

While the Copernicus case is a fairly dramatic reversal, listeners should always be open to new ideas. We are not suggesting that you have to agree with every idea that you are faced with in life; rather, we are suggesting that you at least listen to the message and then evaluate the message.

Rely on Reason and Common Sense

If you are listening to a speech and your common sense tells you that the message is illogical, you very well might be right. You should be thinking about whether the speech seems credible and coherent. In this way, your use of common sense can act as a warning system for you.

One of our coauthors once heard a speech on the environmental hazards of fireworks. The speaker argued that fireworks (the public kind, not the personal kind people buy and set off in their backyards) were environmentally hazardous because of litter. Although there is certainly some paper that makes it to the ground before burning up, the amount of litter created by fireworks displays is relatively small compared to other sources of litter, including trash left behind by all the spectators watching fireworks at public parks and other venues. It just does not make sense to identify a few bits of charred paper as a major environmental hazard.

If the message is inconsistent with things you already know, if the argument is illogical, or if the language is exaggerated, you should investigate the issues before accepting or rejecting the message. Often, you will not be able to take this step during the presentation of the message; it may take longer to collect enough knowledge to make that decision for yourself.

However, when you are the speaker, you should not substitute common sense for evidence. That’s why during a speech it’s necessary to cite the authority of scholars whose research is irrefutable, or at least highly credible. It is all too easy to make a mistake in reasoning, sometimes called fallacy, in stating your case. We will discuss these fallacies in more detail in Chapter 8 “Supporting Ideas and Building Arguments”. One of the most common fallacies is post hoc, ergo propter hoc , a “common sense” form of logic that translates roughly as “after the fact, therefore because of the fact.” The argument says that if A happened first, followed by B, then A caused B. We know the outcome cannot occur earlier than the cause, but we also know that the two events might be related indirectly or that causality works in a different direction. For instance, imagine a speaker arguing that because the sun rises after a rooster’s crow, the rooster caused the sun to rise. This argument is clearly illogical because roosters crow many times each day, and the sun’s rising and setting do not change according to crowing or lack thereof. But the two events are related in a different way. Roosters tend to wake up and begin crowing at first light, about forty-five minutes before sunrise. Thus it is the impending sunrise that causes the predawn crowing.

In Chapter 2 “Ethics Matters: Understanding the Ethics of Public Speaking,” we pointed out that what is “common sense” for people of one generation or culture may be quite the opposite for people of a different generation or culture. Thus it is important not to assume that your audience shares the beliefs that are, for you, common sense. Likewise, if the message of your speech is complex or controversial, you should consider the needs of your audience and do your best to explain its complexities factually and logically, not intuitively.

Relate New Ideas to Old Ones

As both a speaker and a listener, one of the most important things you can do to understand a message is to relate new ideas to previously held ideas. Imagine you’re giving a speech about biological systems and you need to use the term “homeostasis,” which refers to the ability of an organism to maintain stability by making constant adjustments. To help your audience understand homeostasis, you could show how homeostasis is similar to adjustments made by the thermostats that keep our homes at a more or less even temperature. If you set your thermostat for seventy degrees and it gets hotter, the central cooling will kick in and cool your house down. If your house gets below seventy degrees, your heater will kick in and heat your house up. Notice that in both cases your thermostat is making constant adjustments to stay at seventy degrees. Explaining that the body’s homeostasis works in a similar way will make it more relevant to your listeners and will likely help them both understand and remember the idea because it links to something they have already experienced.

If you can make effective comparisons while you are listening, it can deepen your understanding of the message. If you can provide those comparisons for your listeners, you make it easier for them to give consideration to your ideas.

Note-taking is a skill that improves with practice. You already know that it’s nearly impossible to write down everything a speaker says. In fact, in your attempt to record everything, you might fall behind and wish you had divided your attention differently between writing and listening.

Careful, selective note-taking is important because we want an accurate record that reflects the meanings of the message. However much you might concentrate on the notes, you could inadvertently leave out an important word, such as not , and undermine the reliability of your otherwise carefully written notes. Instead, if you give the same care and attention to listening, you are less likely to make that kind of a mistake.

It’s important to find a balance between listening well and taking good notes. Many people struggle with this balance for a long time. For example, if you try to write down only key phrases instead of full sentences, you might find that you can’t remember how two ideas were related. In that case, too few notes were taken. At the opposite end, extensive note-taking can result in a loss of emphasis on the most important ideas.

To increase your critical listening skills, continue developing your ability to identify the central issues in messages so that you can take accurate notes that represent the meanings intended by the speaker.

Listening Ethically

Ethical listening rests heavily on honest intentions. We should extend to speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak. We should be facing the speaker with our eyes open. We should not be checking our cell phones. We should avoid any behavior that belittles the speaker or the message.

Scholars Stephanie Coopman and James Lull emphasize the creation of a climate of caring and mutual understanding, observing that “respecting others’ perspectives is one hallmark of the effective listener.” [5] Respect, or unconditional positive regard for others, means that you treat others with consideration and decency whether you agree with them or not. Professors Sprague, Stuart, and Bodary [6] also urge us to treat the speaker with respect even when we disagree, don’t understand the message, or find the speech boring.

Doug Lipman (1998), [7] a storytelling coach, wrote powerfully and sensitively about listening in his book:

Like so many of us, I used to take listening for granted, glossing over this step as I rushed into the more active, visible ways of being helpful. Now, I am convinced that listening is the single most important element of any helping relationship. Listening has great power. It draws thoughts and feelings out of people as nothing else can. When someone listens to you well, you become aware of feelings you may not have realized that you felt. You have ideas you may have never thought before. You become more eloquent, more insightful.… As a helpful listener, I do not interrupt you. I do not give advice. I do not do something else while listening to you. I do not convey distraction through nervous mannerisms. I do not finish your sentences for you. In spite of all my attempts to understand you, I do not assume I know what you mean. I do not convey disapproval, impatience, or condescension. If I am confused, I show a desire for clarification, not dislike for your obtuseness. I do not act vindicated when you misspeak or correct yourself. I do not sit impassively, withholding participation. Instead, I project affection, approval, interest, and enthusiasm. I am your partner in communication. I am eager for your imminent success, fascinated by your struggles, forgiving of your mistakes, always expecting the best. I am your delighted listener. [8]

This excerpt expresses the decency with which people should treat each other. It doesn’t mean we must accept everything we hear, but ethically, we should refrain from trivializing each other’s concerns. We have all had the painful experience of being ignored or misunderstood. This is how we know that one of the greatest gifts one human can give to another is listening.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Critical listening is the process a listener goes through using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a speaker’s message makes sense in light of factual evidence. When listeners are not critical of the messages they are attending to, they are more likely to be persuaded by illogical arguments based on opinions and not facts.
• Critical listening can be improved by employing one or more strategies to help the listener analyze the message: recognize the difference between facts and opinions, uncover assumptions given by the speaker, be open to new ideas, use both reason and common sense when analyzing messages, relate new ideas to old ones, and take useful notes.
• Being an ethical listener means giving respectful attention to the ideas of a speaker, even though you may not agree with or accept those ideas.
• Think of a time when you were too tired or distracted to give your full attention to the ideas in a speech. What did you do? What should you have done?
• Give an example of a mistake in reasoning that involved the speaker mistaking an assumption for fact.
• Wikiquote. (n.d.). Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Retrieved from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan ↵
• Factcheck.org, a Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. (2009, September 10). Obama’s health care speech. Retrieved from http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech ↵
• Edward Jenner Museum. (n.d.). Vaccination. Retrieved from http://www.jennermuseum.com/Jenner/vaccination.html ↵
• Owen, R. (2010, May 23). Catholic church reburies “heretic” Nicolaus Copernicus with honour. Times Online . Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7134341.ece ↵
• Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2008). Public speaking: The evolving art . Cengage Learning, p. 60. ↵
• Sprague, J., Stuart, D., & Bodary, D. (2010). The speaker’s handbook (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage. ↵
• Lippman, D. (1998). The storytelling coach: How to listen, praise, and bring out people’s best . Little Rock, AR: August House. ↵
• Lippman, D. (1998). The storytelling coach: How to listen, praise, and bring out people’s best . Little Rock, AR: August House, pp. 110–111. ↵
• Public Speaking: Practice and Ethics. Authored by : Anonymous. Provided by : Anonymous. Located at : http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/public-speaking-practice-and-ethics/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

4.6 Listening Critically

As a student, you are exposed to many kinds of messages. You receive messages conveying academic information, institutional rules, instructions, and warnings; you also receive messages through political discourse, advertisements, gossip, jokes, song lyrics, text messages, invitations, web links, and all other manners of communication. You know it’s not all the same, but it isn’t always clear how to separate the truth from the messages that are misleading or even blatantly false. Nor is it always clear which messages are intended to help the listener and which ones are merely self-serving for the speaker. Part of being a good listener is to learn when to use caution in evaluating the messages we hear.

Critical listening in this context means using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence. Critical listening can be learned with practice but is not necessarily easy to do. Some people never learn this skill; instead, they take every message at face value even when those messages are in conflict with their knowledge. Problems occur when messages are repeated to others who have not yet developed the skills to discern the difference between a valid message and a mistaken one. Critical listening can be particularly difficult when the message is complex. Unfortunately, some speakers may make their messages intentionally complex to avoid critical scrutiny. For example, a city treasurer giving a budget presentation might use very large words and technical jargon, which make it difficult for listeners to understand the proposed budget and ask probing questions.

Six Ways to Improve Your Critical Listening

Critical listening is first and foremost a skill that can be learned and improved. In this section, we are going to explore six different techniques you can use to become a more critical listener.

Recognizing the Difference between Facts and Opinions

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is credited with saying, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts” (Wikiquote). Part of critical listening is learning to separate opinions from facts, and this works two ways: critical listeners are aware of whether a speaker is delivering a factual message or a message based on opinion, and they are also aware of the interplay between their own opinions and facts as they listen to messages.

In American politics, the issue of health care reform is heavily laden with both opinions and facts, and it is extremely difficult to sort some of them out. A clash of fact versus opinion happened on September 9, 2010, during President Obama’s nationally televised speech to a joint session of Congress outlining his health care reform plan. In this speech, President Obama responded to several rumors about the plan, including the claim “that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false—the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” At this point, one congressman yelled out, “You lie!” Clearly, this congressman did not have a very high opinion of either the health care reform plan or the president. However, when the nonpartisan watch group Factcheck.org examined the language of the proposed bill, they found that it had a section titled “No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens” (Factcheck.org, 2009).

Often when people have a negative opinion about a topic, they are unwilling to accept facts. Instead, they question all aspects of the speech and have a negative predisposition toward both the speech and the speaker.

This is not to say that speakers should not express their opinions. Many of the greatest speeches in history include personal opinions. Consider, for example, Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he expressed his personal wish for the future of American society. Critical listeners may agree or disagree with a speaker’s opinions, but the point is that they know when a message they are hearing is based on opinion and when it is factual.

Uncovering Assumptions

If something is factual, supporting evidence exists. However, we still need to be careful about what evidence does and does not mean. Assumptions are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate. When listening to a public speech, you may find yourself being asked to assume something is a fact when in reality many people question that fact. For example, suppose you’re listening to a speech on weight loss. The speaker talks about how people who are overweight are simply not motivated or lack the self-discipline to lose weight. The speaker has built the speech on the assumption that motivation and self-discipline are the only reasons why people can’t lose weight. You may think to yourself, what about genetics? By listening critically, you will be more likely to notice unwarranted assumptions in a speech, which may prompt you to question the speaker if questions are taken or to do further research to examine the validity of the speaker’s assumptions. If, however, you sit passively by and let the speaker’s assumptions go unchallenged, you may find yourself persuaded by information that is not factual.

When you listen critically to a speech, you might hear information that appears unsupported by evidence. You shouldn’t accept that information unconditionally. You would accept it under the condition that the speaker offers credible evidence that directly supports it.

Be Open to New Ideas

Sometimes people are so fully invested in their perceptions of the world that they are unable to listen receptively to messages that make sense and would be of great benefit to them. Human progress has been possible, sometimes against great odds, because of the mental curiosity and discernment of a few people. In the late 1700s when the technique of vaccination to prevent smallpox was introduced, it was opposed by both medical professionals and everyday citizens who staged public protests (Edward Jenner Museum). More than two centuries later, vaccinations against smallpox, diphtheria, polio, and other infectious diseases have saved countless lives, yet popular opposition continues.

In the world of public speaking, we must be open to new ideas. Let’s face it, people have a tendency to filter out information they disagree with and to filter in information that supports what they already believe. Nicolaus Copernicus was a sixteenth-century astronomer who dared to publish a treatise explaining that the earth revolves around the sun, which was a violation of Catholic doctrine. Copernicus’s astronomical findings were labeled heretical and his treatise banned because a group of people at the time were not open to new ideas. In May of 2010, almost five hundred years after his death, the Roman Catholic Church admitted its error and reburied his remains with the full rites of Catholic burial (Owen, 2010).

While the Copernicus case is a fairly dramatic reversal, listeners should always be open to new ideas. We are not suggesting that you have to agree with every idea that you are faced with in life; rather, we are suggesting that you at least listen to the message and then evaluate the message.

Rely on Reason and Common Sense

If you are listening to a speech and your common sense tells you that the message is illogical, you very well might be right. You should be thinking about whether the speech seems credible and coherent. In this way, your use of common sense can act as a warning system for you.

One of our coauthors once heard a speech on the environmental hazards of fireworks. The speaker argued that fireworks (the public kind, not the personal kind people buy and set off in their backyards) were environmentally hazardous because of litter. Although there is certainly some paper that makes it to the ground before burning up, the amount of litter created by fireworks displays is relatively small compared to other sources of litter, including trash left behind by all the spectators watching fireworks at public parks and other venues. It just does not make sense to identify a few bits of charred paper as a major environmental hazard.

If the message is inconsistent with things you already know, if the argument is illogical, or if the language is exaggerated, you should investigate the issues before accepting or rejecting the message. Often, you will not be able to take this step during the presentation of the message; it may take longer to collect enough knowledge to make that decision for yourself.

However, when you are the speaker, you should not substitute common sense for evidence. That’s why during a speech it’s necessary to cite the authority of scholars whose research is irrefutable, or at least highly credible. It is all too easy to make a mistake in reasoning, sometimes called fallacy, in stating your case. One of the most common fallacies is post hoc, ergo propter hoc, a “common sense” form of logic that translates roughly as “after the fact, therefore because of the fact.” The argument says that if A happened first, followed by B, then A caused B. We know the outcome cannot occur earlier than the cause, but we also know that the two events might be related indirectly or that causality works in a different direction. For instance, imagine a speaker arguing that because the sun rises after a rooster’s crow, the rooster causes the sun to rise. This argument is clearly illogical because roosters crow many times each day, and the sun’s rising and setting do not change according to crowing or lack thereof. But the two events are related in a different way. Roosters tend to wake up and begin crowing at first light, about forty-five minutes before sunrise. Thus it is the impending sunrise that causes the predawn crowing.

What is “common sense” for people of one generation or culture may be quite the opposite for people of a different generation or culture. Thus it is important not to assume that your audience shares the beliefs that are, for you, common sense. Likewise, if the message of your speech is complex or controversial, you should consider the needs of your audience and do your best to explain its complexities factually and logically, not intuitively.

Relate New Ideas to Old Ones

As both a speaker and a listener, one of the most important things you can do to understand a message is to relate new ideas to previously held ideas. Imagine you’re giving a speech about biological systems and you need to use the term “homeostasis,” which refers to the ability of an organism to maintain stability by making constant adjustments. To help your audience understand homeostasis, you could show how homeostasis is similar to adjustments made by the thermostats that keep our homes at a more or less even temperature. If you set your thermostat for seventy degrees and it gets hotter, the central cooling will kick in and cool your house down. If your house gets below seventy degrees, your heater will kick in and heat your house up. Notice that in both cases your thermostat is making constant adjustments to stay at seventy degrees. Explaining that the body’s homeostasis works in a similar way will make it more relevant to your listeners and will likely help them both understand and remember the idea because it links to something they have already experienced.

If you can make effective comparisons while you are listening, it can deepen your understanding of the message. If you can provide those comparisons for your listeners, you make it easier for them to give consideration to your ideas.

Note-taking is a skill that improves with practice. You already know that it’s nearly impossible to write down everything a speaker says. In fact, in your attempt to record everything, you might fall behind and wish you had divided your attention differently between writing and listening.

Careful, selective note-taking is important because we want an accurate record that reflects the meanings of the message. However much you might concentrate on the notes, you could inadvertently leave out an important word, such as not, and undermine the reliability of your otherwise carefully written notes. Instead, if you give the same care and attention to listening, you are less likely to make that kind of a mistake.

It’s important to find a balance between listening well and taking good notes. Many people struggle with this balance for a long time. For example, if you try to write down only key phrases instead of full sentences, you might find that you can’t remember how two ideas were related. In that case, too few notes were taken. At the opposite end, extensive note-taking can result in a loss of emphasis on the most important ideas.

To increase your critical listening skills, continue developing your ability to identify the central issues in messages so that you can take accurate notes that represent the meanings intended by the speaker.

Listening Ethically

Ethical listening rests heavily on honest intentions. We should extend to speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak. We should be facing the speaker with our eyes open. We should not be checking our cell phones. We should avoid any behavior that belittles the speaker or the message.

Scholars Stephanie Coopman and James Lull emphasize the creation of a climate of caring and mutual understanding, observing that “respecting others’ perspectives is one hallmark of the effective listener” (Coopman & Lull, 2008). Respect, or unconditional positive regard for others, means that you treat others with consideration and decency whether you agree with them or not. Professors Sprague, Stuart, and Bodary (Sprague et al., 2010). also urge us to treat the speaker with respect even when we disagree, don’t understand the message, or find the speech boring.

Doug Lippman (1998) (Lippman, 1998), a storytelling coach, wrote powerfully and sensitively about listening in his book:

Like so many of us, I used to take listening for granted, glossing over this step as I rushed into the more active, visible ways of being helpful. Now, I am convinced that listening is the single most important element of any helping relationship.

Listening has great power. It draws thoughts and feelings out of people as nothing else can. When someone listens to you well, you become aware of feelings you may not have realized that you felt. You have ideas you may have never thought of before. You become more eloquent, more insightful.…

As a helpful listener, I do not interrupt you. I do not give advice. I do not do something else while listening to you. I do not convey distraction through nervous mannerisms. I do not finish your sentences for you. In spite of all my attempts to understand you, I do not assume I know what you mean.

I do not convey disapproval, impatience, or condescension. If I am confused, I show a desire for clarification, not dislike for your obtuseness. I do not act vindicated when you misspeak or correct yourself.

I do not sit impassively, withholding participation.

Instead, I project affection, approval, interest, and enthusiasm. I am your partner in communication. I am eager for your imminent success, fascinated by your struggles, forgiving of your mistakes, always expecting the best. I am your delighted listener (Lippman, 1998).

This excerpt expresses the decency with which people should treat each other. It doesn’t mean we must accept everything we hear, but ethically, we should refrain from trivializing one another’s concerns. We have all had the painful experience of being ignored or misunderstood. This is how we know that one of the greatest gifts one human can give to another is listening.

• Listen to the TedTalk “How to Spot a Liar” by Pamela Meyer  (see below).
• While listening to the talk, take notes.
• What are the main points of the speech?
• What are some new things (ideas) that you’ve learned from the talk? Can you relate the speaker’s ideas to old ideas you already had or knew about?
• What evidence does the speaker provide to support her claims? Are there any unwarranted assumptions that the speaker makes? Does the speaker provide evidence for all her claims?
• In groups of two, share about a person that you admire the most.
• Each person in the group must talk for 2-3 minutes. The other person cannot speak or intervene during this time, just listen quietly. You may engage in nonverbal feedback such as eye contact, nodding, etc.
• At the end of speaking, the listener paraphrases what the speaker said in their own words. The speaker can correct, confirm, or clarify what the listener has paraphrased.

Aristotle. (c. 350 BCE). Rhetoric (W. Rhys Roberts, Trans.). Book I, Part 3, para. 1. Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/rhetoric.1.i.html.

Bodie, G. D., & Fitch-Hauser, M. (2010). Quantitative research in listening: Explication and overview. In A. D. Wolvin (Ed.), Listening and human communication in the 21st century (pp. 46–93). Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Bodie, G. D., St. Cyr, K., Pence, M., Rold, M., & Honeycutt, J. M. (2010). Listening competence in initial interactions I: Distinguishing between what listening is and what listeners do. Unpublished manuscript, Baton Rouge, LA.

Carr, N. (2010, May 24). The Web shatters focus, rewires brains. Wired Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/2010/05/ff-nicholas-carr.

Coopman, S. J., & Lull, J. (2008). Public speaking: The evolving art. Cengage Learning, p. 60.

DeVito, J. A. (2000). The elements of public speaking (7th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.

Edward Jenner Museum. (n.d.). Vaccination. Retrieved from https://jennermuseum.com/learning/vaccination.

Factcheck.org, a Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. (2009, September 10). Obama’s health care speech. Retrieved from http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech.

Gluck, M. A., Mercado, E., & Myers, C. E. (2008). Learning and memory: From brain to behavior. New York: Worth Publishers, pp. 172–173.

Jarvis, T. (2009, November). How to talk so people really listen: Four ways to make yourself heard. O, the Oprah Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.oprah.com/relationships/Communication-Skills-How-to-Make-Yourself-Heard.

Lippman, D. (1998). The storytelling coach: How to listen, praise, and bring out people’s best. Little Rock, AR: August House.

Middendorf, J., & Kalish, A. (1996). The “change-up” in lectures. The National Teaching and Learning Forum, 5(2).

Owen, R. (2010, May 23). Catholic church reburies “heretic” Nicolaus Copernicus with honour. Times Online. Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7134341.ece

Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Viking Press.

Sprague, J., Stuart, D., & Bodary, D. (2010). The speaker’s handbook (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage.

Trees, A. R. (2000). Nonverbal communication and the support process: Interactional sensitivity in interactions between mothers and young adult children. Communication Monographs, 67, 239–261. doi:10.1080/03637750009376509.

Waterford.org, (2020, March 3). The Value of Listening in the Classroom: How to Teach Your Students Active Listening. Retrieved from https://www.waterford.org/education/active-listening-in-the-classroom/.

Watson, K. W., Barker, L. L., & Weaver, J. B., III. (1995). The listening styles profile (LSP-16): Development and validation of an instrument to assess four listening styles. International Journal of Listening, 9, 1–13.

Watson, K. W., & Barker, L. L. (2000). Watson/Barker Listening Test (2nd ed.). New Orleans, LA: Spectra Inc.

Wheeless, L. R. (1975). An investigation of receiver apprehension and social context dimensions of communication apprehension. Speech Teacher, 24, 261–268.

Wikiquote. (n.d.). Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Retrieved from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan

Wolvin, A., & Coakley, C. G. (1996). Listening (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

using careful, systematic thinking and reasoning to see whether a message makes sense in light of factual evidence

are gaps in a logical sequence that listeners passively fill with their own ideas and opinions and may or may not be accurate

rests heavily on honest intentions; we should extend to speakers the same respect we want to receive when it’s our turn to speak

It’s About Them: Public Speaking in the 21st Century Copyright © 2022 by LOUIS: The Louisiana Library Network is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

6 Highly Effective Ways To Stop Being Critical Of Others

Disclosure: this page may contain affiliate links to select partners. We receive a commission should you choose to make a purchase after clicking on them. Read our affiliate disclosure.

Speak to an accredited and experienced therapist to help you be less critical of others. Simply click here to connect with one via BetterHelp.com.

Criticism can be a useful tool when it is used in a healthy way.

But many people struggle to separate negative criticism from helpful, constructive criticism.

Negative criticism is a toxic behavior because it interferes with building and maintaining healthy relationships with other people.

Few people want to be criticized unless they ask for it. Even if they ask for it, there’s a difference between casting judgment and looking to use criticism as a tool to help someone improve.

Being critical of others all the time paints you in an unflattering light. People will see you as a complainer and someone to be avoided, especially when they have good news or feel happy about something. No one wants a perpetual storm cloud floating over them to rain on their sunny day.

Being an unwanted critic is a sure way to find yourself alone or surrounded by other negative, judgmental people. And that’s not a great way to live.

What can we do to stop being critical of others? Let’s look at some steps you can take.

1. Identify when you are projecting onto another person.

The judgments that we cast on others are often a reflection of what we have inside of us. Being critical of others often stems from our own sadness, anger, jealousy, or other difficult emotions.

Maybe someone acts in an irresponsible way by over-indulging in food, alcohol, or risky behavior. You may be critical of them even though you sometimes act in a similar way. It might be that you don’t want to face up to your own irresponsibility, so you turn a blind eye to it and criticize this other person instead.

Or perhaps you are critical of someone who you deem to be playing it safe, lacking ambition, not stepping out of their comfort zone, when these are all labels that you unconsciously apply to yourself but don’t want to admit to.

When you feel the urge to criticize someone, pause for a moment and ask yourself whether the thing you are about to criticize is something that you are projecting onto them, rather than the reality of the situation.

Learn more with this article of ours: How To Spot When You Are Projecting Onto Others

2. Understand that you don’t know how someone thinks or feels.

It’s so easy to look at another person and make snap judgments about their weight, looks, actions, personality, or whatever else.

The problem with those snap judgments is that they often come from our own limited perspective of that person.

The truth is, you don’t necessarily know why that person is the way that they are. And if you are critical of them based on your limited or imagined perspective, you are causing problems for yourself that need not exist.

A person with depression may look at someone smiling and feel anger or disgust. What do they have to be so happy about? Don’t they know how hard life is? How bad things are for a lot of people? How bad are things for someone like me?

The problem with that kind of criticism is that it assumes that the smiling person is happy, carefree, and without problems. That can be so very far from the truth.

Many people put on a smile and get on with their day because that’s just how they survive. Maybe they’re coping with a severe loss that you don’t about. Maybe they’re dying or dead inside from the trauma and pain that life has loaded onto their shoulders. Maybe they’re depressed and heartbroken too, but they still have some energy to put on a smile, so other people don’t ask too many questions.

Or perhaps a friend begins to show less commitment to a friendship and regularly fails to reply to messages promptly or says no to meeting up. It’s easy to think or say that this person is a bad friend or that they’re lazy and boring.

In fact, that friend might be going through something in their life that prevents them from giving as much of their free time and energy to a friendship, even one that is relatively close. That could be family issues, poor health, or financial/work stresses. But if they don’t feel comfortable talking about these things, it’s easy to make up a narrative to explain things.

So, to stop being critical of others, don’t assume you know what’s going on in their lives or minds.

3. Don’t confuse negative criticism with being helpful.

Many people who are too critical or judgmental don’t even realize that’s what they’re doing. They often feel like they are trying to be helpful and motivate others with their criticism.

The problem with that is that people really don’t want unsolicited opinions and advice most of the time. That type of advice is often just met with an eye roll and an “okay” because hey, why would they bother fighting with you about it if they clearly don’t understand what the problem is?

For some people, being rough and speaking your mind is a valuable quality that they would like other people to do for them. But that doesn’t work for everyone. Criticism may not pump up the person or get them motivated to get moving. It may just be a statement of how they aren’t doing things right or in a way you approve of.

Don’t make the mistake of confusing criticism with trying to help. Instead of being critical, try asking, “How can I help you?” That opens the door for the person to ask for advice or help if they need it or turn it down.

A good rule of thumb for life is to never give advice unless you’re asked for it. And even then, it may not be a good idea. Your advice may not go well, and then they will blame you.

4. Identify your jealousy.

Sometimes we are critical of others because we are jealous of them.

Maybe your life has been a bit tough lately, and money’s been tight. So when a friend buys a new car, it can trigger a series of negative thoughts about him:

“How can he afford that? Why does he get to have that, and I don’t? He doesn’t deserve that.”

And in turn, that comes out through snarky, backhanded comments when your friend is just trying to enjoy their new ride.

Or perhaps a co-worker gets a promotion over you and you respond by highlighting all of their flaws to demonstrate how your superiors made a mistake. Only, the decision has already been made and all your criticism serves to do is make your working relationship with that person awkward of downright hostile.

So, to be less critical of others, examine each criticism closely for signs of jealousy. If you find any, you’ll know that your criticism is unfounded and can zip your mouth before it spills out.

5. Accept yourself and your shortcomings.

Some negative criticism of others comes from unhappiness with oneself.

Defusing negativity and practicing greater acceptance with yourself is a reliable way to stop the negative narratives your mind spins about other people.

By practicing kindness and understanding with yourself and your shortcomings, you can more easily extend that same consideration to others.

After all, no one is perfect. If we were to be critical of every little flaw a person has, it’s all we would ever talk about – and it would destroy every relationship we have.

Just remind yourself that you are flawed and you do things that, if they were done by another person, you would probably be critical of.

If you can accept that you do these things and that it’s not always easy to avoid doing them – either through habit or because that’s just who you are – you will have more patience with others and a greater tolerance of them, who they are, and what they do.

6. Assume that other people are doing the best that they can.

Have you ever heard of the term “trauma-informed care”? It’s a principle in mental health care where the assumption is that people generally aren’t working to fail or do bad things.

Instead, they are doing what makes sense to them from the perspective of their life experiences, social experiences, mental health, and abilities.

It’s to look at what a person is doing and act from the perspective that even if they are doing the wrong thing or making bad decisions, they do not do it to be malicious. They’re doing it for reasons that may not be entirely clear or understandable.

And because of that, our actions toward these people should come with care and sensitivity.

People generally don’t set out to fail. They generally don’t set out to not live up to their own expectations, mess up their lives, or do bad things.

Are there malicious people in the world? Absolutely. But most people in the world aren’t malicious, even if they’re doing things that may harm you.

The word “trauma” carries with it a lot of stigma and negative perceptions. Some people think it only applies to terrible circumstances. But the fact of the matter is that everyday experiences can leave a profound, lasting impact on people.

A bad breakup can be enough to keep someone from wanting to show vulnerability to a new partner. Losing a job brings the worry of paying bills, taking care of family, losing a safe place to live, and affording food. Death is always hard, but it’s something we all face, sooner or later.

Trauma-informed care can teach us a lot about how to avoid judgment and stop being critical of others.

Act with the assumption that other people are doing the best that they can with the hand they were dealt with, and you won’t feel it necessary to pass judgment on their lives.

Granted, it’s not perfect. You can’t be a doormat to someone who is acting in a toxic way and just let them walk all over you if they are doing harmful things. But you can avoid letting that negativity fester and occupy your mind rent-free.

All you can ever control are your own actions. Letting go of that judgment and criticism of others is a liberating feeling that can help you be a warmer, more compassionate person for everyone – including yourself.

Still not sure how to stop being critical of others? Speak to a therapist today who can walk you through the process. Simply click here to connect with one of the experienced therapists on BetterHelp.com.

You may also like:

• How To Accept Others For Who They Are (Rather Than Who You Want Them To Be)
• How To Validate Yourself: 6 Tips For Self-Validation
• 12 Radical Acceptance Coping Statements To Deal With Difficult Situations
• 8 Ways To Not Be Arrogant (And How Confidence Is Different)

You may also like...

If You Want To Earn People’s Respect, Stop Doing These 12 Things

10 Reasons Some People Never Take Anything Seriously

If You Refuse To Tolerate These 12 Behaviors, You’ve Got A Lot Of Self-Respect

11 Behaviors That Stand Between You And Promotion In The Workplace

Do you hate talking to people? Here’s the reason why

11 Reasons Why Some Adults Still Act Like Children

10 Behaviors That Make You A Very Difficult Person To Deal With

10 Reasons Some People Enjoy Getting A Rise Out Of You

20 Behaviors That Scream “I Have No Self-Respect”

About The Author

Jack Nollan is a mental health writer of 10 years who pairs lived experience with evidence-based information to provide perspectives from the side of the mental health consumer. Jack has lived with Bipolar Disorder and Bipolar-depression for almost 30 years. With hands-on experience as the facilitator of a mental health support group, Jack has a firm grasp of the wide range of struggles people face when their mind is not in the healthiest of places. Jack is an activist who is passionate about helping disadvantaged people find a better path.

How did Raygun qualify for the Olympics? Is she really the best Australia has to offer?

By Mawunyo Gbogbo

ABC Entertainment

Topic: Olympic Games

Rachael "Raygun" Gunn did not score a single point at the Paris Olympics. ( Getty Images: Elsa )

Since Australian breaker Rachael "Raygun" Gunn failed to score a single point in any of her Olympic bouts, many have asked how she qualified for the Games.

Fellow breaker and anthropologist Lucas Marie says she won her qualification "fair and square" last year, but African American man Malik Dixon has criticised the Olympic body for letting her in.

What's next?

Breaking will not be an event at the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games — a decision made before Raygun's performance.

The 2024 Paris Olympics marked breaking's debut as a sport at the global event, with 36-year-old lecturer and breaker Rachael "Raygun" Gunn representing Australia for the first time.

Having failed to win a single point in any of her Olympic bouts, Raygun quickly became a viral sensation.

The question on many people's minds now is: How did she even qualify?

Lucas Marie is a breaker who has competed, performed, taught and judged breaking competitions over the past 25 years. He's also an anthropologist who recently co-authored an article with Gunn.

He says the answer to that question is simple.

Lucas Marie recently co-authored an article with Raygun. ( Supplied )

"There was an Oceania qualifier in which any B-boy or B-girl from Australia [or] New Zealand could enter, and that was in Sydney in October 2023," he told ABC News.

"And leading up to that, there were a lot of other events in which breakers were competing.

"She won those battles fair and square and won the qualification in Sydney.

"And it wasn't really a surprise to anyone. 

"She's been fairly consistent, winning or coming second or third at a lot of breaking events in Australia for the last five to 10 years."

Marie said there was nothing out of the ordinary about Raygun's performance.

"It's not like gymnastics where there's this kind of agreed-upon standard," he said.

"It's always had a rawness to it. It's always had an improvisational kind of quality. And I think looking different and trying different stuff has always been celebrated.

"And I think Raygun, in a way, was just expressing a core kind of hip hop trait in a way a lot of breakers do."

He described her efforts as bold.

"I thought — and this is how I judge a lot of breaking events — I thought, 'Oh, she's making some really interesting choices to mimic Australian animals.' And you can kind of see the choices that she's making in the moment."

Is she the best Australia has to offer?

Team Australia chef de mission Anna Meares insisted after Raygun's performance that she was the best breaker the country had to offer. But is this true?

Lucas Marie has competed, performed, taught and judged breaking competitions for more than 25 years. ( Supplied: momentsby.naz )

"It's sometimes just who's performing better on the day," Marie said.

"And at the qualification event in which she won, and other events in which she's won, she performed better on that day and won the ticket.

"That doesn't mean she's the best. It doesn't really work like that.

"I think she's a great breaker. She won the qualification. She's won other events in the past, and she was a good representative for Australia at that competition."

Asked whether there were B-girls in Perth, regional Victoria or rural Brisbane who might have qualified but could not afford to travel to Sydney for the tryouts, Marie agreed this was possible.

"Of course, there's breakers all over the country that maybe should have been in that event, but they weren't."

Breaking will not carry over to the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles, a decision made before Raygun's battle.

Marie described this as sad.

"Maybe, based on the ratings, they'll reassess that and maybe allocate some medals to breaking," he said.

"I really hope that's the case, and I hope that for other breakers who want to compete in it as a dance sport."

Marie said that at the end of the day people should remember they were dealing with a human.

"As a friend of Rachael's, there's a human being who's getting a lot of negative attention," he said.

"I think people kind of miss that sometimes and forget the human aspect of all this."

'Toying with the culture'

Malik Dixon is an African American who has been living in Australia for more than a decade and is a Sydney University graduate.

He said Raygun made a total "mockery" out of breaking at the Olympics.

Malik Dixon says too many people feel entitled to African American culture. ( Supplied )

"She was dressed like a member of the cricket team or an Australian PE teacher, and from that point it just seemed like satire," Mr Dixon told ABC News.

"It just looked like somebody who was toying with the culture and didn't know how culturally significant it was being the first time in the Olympics and just how important it was to people who really cherish hip hop and one of the elements of hip hop, which is breakdancing.

"It made me think, was Borat her breakdancing coach?"

Mr Dixon said too many people felt entitled to African American culture.

"The African American space has been one where we've shared our community so much and without any restraints, any barriers, roadblocks, obstacles, any gatekeepers, that essentially what should have been African American cultural capital is just shared, which is cool," he said. 

"We like to share, right? 

"We shared 400 years of free labour.

"To see Rachael in her attempt to be a part of the culture just be grossly underwhelming made it seem like she didn't take it seriously."

Olympics body criticised for Raygun qualification

Mr Dixon criticised the body that qualified Raygun, saying she devalued breaking with her performance.

"Whatever governing body nominated her as Australia's entrant into the Olympics either did not understand the assignment or didn't really believe in the integrity or significance of breakdancing, because if they did they would just say, rather than disrespect the culture, we're just not ready to send an applicant this year."

He said Raygun was extremely audacious and not self-aware.

"You've got to know your role, know your position, know your limitation," he said. 

"And I think that part of privilege is saying that there are no limits to what I can do. 

"Part of privilege is having the authority to say that there are no limits and there are no requirements, there are no prerequisites to what I can do."

Raygun's degrees do not hold much water with Mr Dixon.

"Due to consumerism, this Foundational Black American product, which is hip hop, is global," he said.

"And even people who have no connection to any African Americans or any local or regional things that come out in these songs, they have become a part of the whole experience now.

"If I came in and said that I was an authority on Greek music and I was going against the grain of what the mainstream Greek musicians thought, or the school of thought, and I've said that I was the authority, people would check me on that.

"If I had a PhD in sprinting, does that qualify me to go against Noah Lyles? No, it doesn't."

He also doubts Raygun was the best breaker Australia had to offer.

"[There's] got to be somebody out here that's better than that! The kangaroo! The sprinkler! She did the sprinkler out there, man!" he said.

Should everybody just lighten up?

Should we lighten up? Mr Dixon does not believe so.

"Larrikinism is used as a get-out-of-jail-free card and to escape responsibility of how words or actions impact a hurt person," he said.

"But when the majority culture is offended, there's no playing around.

"This is a part of my culture, and I don't think Australians are in a place to tell me how I should feel about breakdancing being mocked on an international stage.

"People who don't have any or limited access to black people or hip hop culture now may see Rachael and her buffoonery as a representation of hip hop and black culture.

"People who were already side-eyeing breakdancing as an Olympic sport, Rachael Gunn has put the nail in that coffin.

"This might be the most viral clip of the whole Olympics. From a comedy standpoint, she's got it, but from an Olympics perspective, its regressive."

How to cite ChatGPT

Use discount code STYLEBLOG15 for 15% off APA Style print products with free shipping in the United States.

We, the APA Style team, are not robots. We can all pass a CAPTCHA test , and we know our roles in a Turing test . And, like so many nonrobot human beings this year, we’ve spent a fair amount of time reading, learning, and thinking about issues related to large language models, artificial intelligence (AI), AI-generated text, and specifically ChatGPT . We’ve also been gathering opinions and feedback about the use and citation of ChatGPT. Thank you to everyone who has contributed and shared ideas, opinions, research, and feedback.

In this post, I discuss situations where students and researchers use ChatGPT to create text and to facilitate their research, not to write the full text of their paper or manuscript. We know instructors have differing opinions about how or even whether students should use ChatGPT, and we’ll be continuing to collect feedback about instructor and student questions. As always, defer to instructor guidelines when writing student papers. For more about guidelines and policies about student and author use of ChatGPT, see the last section of this post.

Quoting or reproducing the text created by ChatGPT in your paper

If you’ve used ChatGPT or other AI tools in your research, describe how you used the tool in your Method section or in a comparable section of your paper. For literature reviews or other types of essays or response or reaction papers, you might describe how you used the tool in your introduction. In your text, provide the prompt you used and then any portion of the relevant text that was generated in response.

Unfortunately, the results of a ChatGPT “chat” are not retrievable by other readers, and although nonretrievable data or quotations in APA Style papers are usually cited as personal communications , with ChatGPT-generated text there is no person communicating. Quoting ChatGPT’s text from a chat session is therefore more like sharing an algorithm’s output; thus, credit the author of the algorithm with a reference list entry and the corresponding in-text citation.

When prompted with “Is the left brain right brain divide real or a metaphor?” the ChatGPT-generated text indicated that although the two brain hemispheres are somewhat specialized, “the notation that people can be characterized as ‘left-brained’ or ‘right-brained’ is considered to be an oversimplification and a popular myth” (OpenAI, 2023).

OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat

You may also put the full text of long responses from ChatGPT in an appendix of your paper or in online supplemental materials, so readers have access to the exact text that was generated. It is particularly important to document the exact text created because ChatGPT will generate a unique response in each chat session, even if given the same prompt. If you create appendices or supplemental materials, remember that each should be called out at least once in the body of your APA Style paper.

When given a follow-up prompt of “What is a more accurate representation?” the ChatGPT-generated text indicated that “different brain regions work together to support various cognitive processes” and “the functional specialization of different regions can change in response to experience and environmental factors” (OpenAI, 2023; see Appendix A for the full transcript).

Creating a reference to ChatGPT or other AI models and software

The in-text citations and references above are adapted from the reference template for software in Section 10.10 of the Publication Manual (American Psychological Association, 2020, Chapter 10). Although here we focus on ChatGPT, because these guidelines are based on the software template, they can be adapted to note the use of other large language models (e.g., Bard), algorithms, and similar software.

The reference and in-text citations for ChatGPT are formatted as follows:

• Parenthetical citation: (OpenAI, 2023)
• Narrative citation: OpenAI (2023)

Let’s break that reference down and look at the four elements (author, date, title, and source):

Author: The author of the model is OpenAI.

Date: The date is the year of the version you used. Following the template in Section 10.10, you need to include only the year, not the exact date. The version number provides the specific date information a reader might need.

Title: The name of the model is “ChatGPT,” so that serves as the title and is italicized in your reference, as shown in the template. Although OpenAI labels unique iterations (i.e., ChatGPT-3, ChatGPT-4), they are using “ChatGPT” as the general name of the model, with updates identified with version numbers.

The version number is included after the title in parentheses. The format for the version number in ChatGPT references includes the date because that is how OpenAI is labeling the versions. Different large language models or software might use different version numbering; use the version number in the format the author or publisher provides, which may be a numbering system (e.g., Version 2.0) or other methods.

Bracketed text is used in references for additional descriptions when they are needed to help a reader understand what’s being cited. References for a number of common sources, such as journal articles and books, do not include bracketed descriptions, but things outside of the typical peer-reviewed system often do. In the case of a reference for ChatGPT, provide the descriptor “Large language model” in square brackets. OpenAI describes ChatGPT-4 as a “large multimodal model,” so that description may be provided instead if you are using ChatGPT-4. Later versions and software or models from other companies may need different descriptions, based on how the publishers describe the model. The goal of the bracketed text is to briefly describe the kind of model to your reader.

Source: When the publisher name and the author name are the same, do not repeat the publisher name in the source element of the reference, and move directly to the URL. This is the case for ChatGPT. The URL for ChatGPT is https://chat.openai.com/chat . For other models or products for which you may create a reference, use the URL that links as directly as possible to the source (i.e., the page where you can access the model, not the publisher’s homepage).

Other questions about citing ChatGPT

You may have noticed the confidence with which ChatGPT described the ideas of brain lateralization and how the brain operates, without citing any sources. I asked for a list of sources to support those claims and ChatGPT provided five references—four of which I was able to find online. The fifth does not seem to be a real article; the digital object identifier given for that reference belongs to a different article, and I was not able to find any article with the authors, date, title, and source details that ChatGPT provided. Authors using ChatGPT or similar AI tools for research should consider making this scrutiny of the primary sources a standard process. If the sources are real, accurate, and relevant, it may be better to read those original sources to learn from that research and paraphrase or quote from those articles, as applicable, than to use the model’s interpretation of them.

We’ve also received a number of other questions about ChatGPT. Should students be allowed to use it? What guidelines should instructors create for students using AI? Does using AI-generated text constitute plagiarism? Should authors who use ChatGPT credit ChatGPT or OpenAI in their byline? What are the copyright implications ?

On these questions, researchers, editors, instructors, and others are actively debating and creating parameters and guidelines. Many of you have sent us feedback, and we encourage you to continue to do so in the comments below. We will also study the policies and procedures being established by instructors, publishers, and academic institutions, with a goal of creating guidelines that reflect the many real-world applications of AI-generated text.

For questions about manuscript byline credit, plagiarism, and related ChatGPT and AI topics, the APA Style team is seeking the recommendations of APA Journals editors. APA Style guidelines based on those recommendations will be posted on this blog and on the APA Style site later this year.

Update: APA Journals has published policies on the use of generative AI in scholarly materials .

We, the APA Style team humans, appreciate your patience as we navigate these unique challenges and new ways of thinking about how authors, researchers, and students learn, write, and work with new technologies.

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000

Related and recent

Comments are disabled due to your privacy settings. To re-enable, please adjust your cookie preferences.

APA Style Monthly

Subscribe to the APA Style Monthly newsletter to get tips, updates, and resources delivered directly to your inbox.

Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.

APA Style Guidelines

Browse APA Style writing guidelines by category

• Abbreviations
• Bias-Free Language
• Capitalization
• In-Text Citations
• Italics and Quotation Marks
• Paper Format
• Punctuation
• Research and Publication
• Spelling and Hyphenation
• Tables and Figures

Full index of topics