I've read that asking specific questions will get you better feedback; vague questions like "was it good?" are going to get you vague answers. Something like, "I think my middle section drags a little and the main character might not have enough flaws," are going to get you much more specific and useful feedback. That all sounds about right to me. But I've also read that asking questions before the beta reader has even read the manuscript can bias them. I know when I read any book I want to know as little about it as possible going in, and for a critique that seems even more important. An easy solution to this would be to send questions later, or send them separately and asking the critique-r not to look at them until after. But am I just finding solutions to a problem that doesn't exist? Does this really make that much of a difference?
I ask questions, but not so specifically. "What part(s) of the book dragged for you?" "Were there any parts where you skimmed or skipped ahead? Where?""What did you think of the middle section?" "Any thoughts on the characters?" "Who's your favorite?" "Least favorite?" "What did you like?" "What didn't you like?" "What do you want more / less of?" When I need to ask questions I put them on the last page of what they're reading, as part of the document. ETA: I should point out that I don't ask all of these things. They're just examples of non-leading questions.
First I'm waiting what the critiquer says on his/her own, because sometimes what they volunteer without getting asked is what I need to hear most. Maybe they talk in detail about a specific development, but completely gloss over an event that I as the author wanted to emphasize. That tells me that there is a pretty big problem with my writing. What they don't mention is sometimes the most important detail of their critique. And when that's done, I ask non-leading questions, like Shena mentioned, if I'm particularly curious about a detail. If not, then that's it
It depends - with alpha readers I generally let them give me whatever they want (but I haven't had a decent alpha reader since my last one moved to Antarctica ) With Betas I usually ask the sort of questions Shen mentions, unless i'm looking for them to fact check a particular field of expertise in which case i'll ask more specific questions
I think it makes a difference to the reader. They know what to focus on and exactly what you're looking for and concerned about. I would say that all feedback is welcome but feedback on these particular points and then list them clearly. Then thank the readers and rip my hair out until I get a reply!
You are more likely to get answers and more likely to get useful answers if you tell the reviewer what you are interested in concerning their comments.
In different parts of working process you need different kind of feedback. In different parts of your writing career you need different kind of feedback. You tell what kind of feedback you need just there and hope you get what you need. You tell if you are ready to get also something else or not. For alpha readers: Don't say a word about that text, plot, charactedrs.... Just tell me about your own physical reactions and how many pages you read. Don't tell me anything else. For beta readers: Tell me about anything and everything that is wrong, boring or does not work. For final readers in markets: Gimmemoney, gimmemoneys, gimmemoney....
