Say a person has a spouse, they have children, and that person also has a boss at work.
At work, the boss gives them a look which that tells that person that perhaps the boss is displeased with him. The boss never verbalizes.
Same thing at home, the spouse at home gives them silent treatment and the person in turn gives a sharp look at his children and they feel the messed up but the parent hasn't verbalized.
In all of our interaction experiences we seek the verbalization, the articulation, the reason for that look or treatment.
In the hospitality industry as well, a guest when they leave feedback after their stay, can check say everything in the room not in working order to checking that and adding their toilet was running the whole night or their shower had inadequate pressure, etc. It is plain which type of feedback is more useful.
The question is what makes the decision makers on StackExchange believe that feedback of downvotes with no comments is useful on StackExchange when that is at odds with everyday interactive experience? The users here are the same people out there, who appreciate feedback verbalized or articulated or with reason given.
cf. Incentivizing people to leave a comment with downvote by 1) assigning different values for w or w/o comments or 2) allowing anonymous comments [duplicate] and Need help understanding what is the official response to some feature requests.
The effect this has had on me
On ChristianityStackExchange, I have stopped asking questions. I wonder how many others eventually give up asking or answering questions.
That's the cost in the Cost-Benefit analysis for the decision makers to consider.