IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v71y2025i5p4198-4222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Physicians Improve More from Positive or Negative Feedback?

Author

Listed:
  • Manasvini Singh

    (Social and Decision Sciences Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

  • Jacob Zureich

    (Accounting Department, College of Business, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015)

Abstract

We use clinical data on more than 240,000 surgeries and quasi-experimental methods to examine how physicians respond to the surprise release of a performance “report card.” Such feedback interventions are commonly used to encourage physicians to improve performance yet show limited evidence of success. Our results show that these limited effects mask heterogeneous behavioral responses to feedback valence. In particular, physicians improve more from positive feedback than from negative feedback, with negative feedback even reducing performance for a nontrivial share of patients. Experiments with laypersons replicate these results and show that struggles with negative feedback can be mitigated by giving incentives directly tied to improvement and by adding qualitative information that helps individuals interpret past performance. These results are consistent with behavioral models that suggest cognitive and emotional difficulties limit how well individuals use negative feedback. Thus, feedback interventions in healthcare should be carefully designed to mitigate these counterproductive behavioral responses.

Suggested Citation

  • Manasvini Singh & Jacob Zureich, 2025. "Do Physicians Improve More from Positive or Negative Feedback?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(5), pages 4198-4222, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:71:y:2025:i:5:p:4198-4222
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2023.01340
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.01340
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2023.01340?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:71:y:2025:i:5:p:4198-4222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.