What type of feedback is typically provided during a peer review of technical documents?

The feedback typically provided during a peer review of technical documents is most effectively characterized by specific suggestions for improvement. This form of feedback is crucial in the technical writing process because it directly addresses areas where the document can be enhanced, be it in terms of clarity, accuracy, conciseness, or overall structure.

Specific suggestions might include pointing out jargon that could be replaced with simpler language, noting sections that require additional explanation for clarity, or indicating areas where information could be more relevant or better organized. This constructive feedback is invaluable because it helps the author understand what adjustments can make the document more effective for its intended audience and purpose.

While general impressions and overall impressions can provide some level of insight, they tend to lack the actionable quality that specific suggestions deliver. Non-technical perspectives may also be beneficial in certain contexts, but they do not typically align with the technical review process, which focuses on clarity, accuracy, and detail-oriented feedback relevant to the content and audience of the document.