From Peers to Progress: Tackling Feedback Challenges in Malaysian Medical Education
This qualitative study identifies challenges Malaysian medical students face in providing peer feedback, such as cultural concerns and lack of expertise, and proposes faculty-led training and anonymous digital platforms to foster a psychologically safe environment for effective collaborative learning.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In the training of future doctors, learning is rarely a solitary pursuit. It happens in teams, in hospitals, and in the classroom, where students must learn not only how to treat patients but how to work together. A crucial part of this training is the ability to give and receive honest feedback. This is not about grading a test or assigning a final score; it is a formative process where students offer constructive comments to one another to help improve skills before they ever touch a patient. The goal is to build a habit of open communication and mutual accountability, which are essential for safe medical practice. However, for this system to work, students must be willing to speak up about mistakes and accept criticism without fear. In many parts of the world, including Malaysia, cultural norms that prioritize harmony and respect for hierarchy can make this kind of direct, honest exchange difficult. When students are asked to critique their peers, they often face a conflict between the need to improve and the desire to avoid hurting feelings or damaging relationships.
Researchers at AIMST University in Malaysia set out to understand exactly how these dynamics play out among medical students. They focused on fourth-year students who had just completed a rotation in anesthesia, a period where they worked in small groups to prepare and present medical topics. After each presentation, the students were asked to give feedback to their teammates. While the exercise was designed to build communication skills, the researchers noticed that students often struggled to provide useful comments. To find out why, the team conducted a series of in-depth group discussions with twelve students. They did not use surveys or tests; instead, they simply listened to the students talk about their experiences, recording and analyzing their words to find common patterns in how they felt about the process.
The students agreed that peer feedback could be powerful. They recognized that when friends give advice, it can be tailored to the individual because they know each other's strengths and weaknesses. One student noted that this familiarity fosters trust and open communication. However, the path to giving that feedback was often blocked by fear. Many students worried that their comments would be taken the wrong way. They feared that even a well-intentioned critique could hurt a friend's feelings, demotivate them, or ruin a relationship. This hesitation was not just about personal anxiety; it was deeply rooted in the local culture. The researchers found that in Malaysia, there is a strong cultural tendency to "sugarcoat" things—to say only what is good to maintain social harmony. Direct criticism is often seen as rude or aggressive, making students reluctant to point out flaws in their peers' work.
Another major hurdle was a lack of confidence in their own ability to judge. The students felt they were at the same level as their peers, so they questioned whether they had the right or the knowledge to offer corrections. They worried that their feedback would be inconsistent, biased, or simply not helpful. Some admitted that they gave feedback only because they were forced to, offering random comments just to get the task over with. When they did receive feedback, the reaction varied wildly. Some students were open to suggestions and used them to improve their future presentations, such as changing how they organized their slides. Others, however, felt offended or defensive, especially if the feedback came from a peer rather than a teacher. The students consistently expressed that they were more comfortable accepting advice from a senior faculty member, whom they viewed as an authority figure, than from a classmate.
To solve these problems, the students offered a clear set of suggestions that went beyond simple complaints. They believed that the skill of giving feedback should be taught explicitly, just like any other medical subject. They suggested that training should start early in their education, teaching them how to give respectful, specific, and actionable advice. They also proposed that these feedback sessions should happen regularly, not just once or twice a year, so that giving and receiving critique becomes a normal part of their daily routine rather than a rare, high-stakes event. To reduce the fear of hurting feelings, many students suggested making the feedback anonymous, perhaps through digital forms or QR codes, so that the focus remains on the work rather than the person giving the comment. They also emphasized the importance of tone and body language, noting that even a correct comment can feel like an attack if delivered in a bossy or harsh manner.
The study concludes that while peer feedback has the potential to transform how medical students learn to work together, it cannot succeed without the right environment. The researchers found that the main barriers were not a lack of willingness to learn, but rather a lack of training and a learning culture that feels unsafe. If students feel they will be judged or that their relationships are at risk, they will hold back. The solution lies in creating a space where students feel psychologically safe to speak up and where they are taught exactly how to do it. By training faculty to guide these sessions and by helping students understand that constructive criticism is a tool for growth rather than a personal attack, medical schools can turn the challenge of peer feedback into a genuine engine for professional progress.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.