I find "leading questions" very annoying, where you first ask a broad question and then follow it up with, "Is it because of xxx?" Once such a question is posed, it creates a lose-lose situation. The person asking reveals their cognitive laziness, throwing out half-baked thoughts without separating observation from hypothesis. Even if it's often well-intentioned, the result is that the answers received will be tainted by the asker’s assumptions, and the other party is likely to respond within the framework set by the second sentence rather than answering the first question based on the actual state. As someone who is often asked questions, I also feel offended because this way of questioning implies, "I’m afraid you can’t answer abstract questions, so I’m giving you an easy way out," when it’s actually the asker who is shifting their incomplete thoughts onto me. Additionally, it creates a sense of confusion. For a "why" type of question, I only need to analyze two layers: 1) What is the assumption behind the other person's question, and is it correct; 2) If the assumption is correct, how should I respond. But with leading questions, I also have to help them do an extra layer of work to determine whether the guiding direction is the true assumption implied by the question (which most of the time it isn’t) or just the easiest response they can think of (which is often the least meaningful). This leads to a serious waste of mental resources. The questioning style I prefer is either you give me an abstract question directly, regardless of which direction I want to answer; if I’m unsure, I will guide you to narrow it down; or you clearly separate observation from hypothesis, stating, "The reason I’m asking this is that I observed xxx," and then accept my scrutiny of each layer of assumption. But very few people can do this because when a person is asking a question, their greatest fear is being counter-questioned and challenged. A mature conversationalist must force themselves to first overcome this fear and endure the uncertainty of open-ended answers.