I would have picked the former as well as the latter would require some qualification.
Although… depending on the context, I might not see being critical as a negative.
“Peer” in the business world generally indicates someone on the same level, for instance if I am a director then my peers are the other directors. A supervisory relationship is usually noted by referring to the folks as reports/direct reports/directs.
In any case, I would ask for clarity before answering, as the word “critical” has at least 3 distinct definitions that could apply - disparages others, thinks judiciously, is indispensable.
I doubt the other common uses - danger of death or of sufficient mass to sustain a reaction - would come into play in this case, but one never knows. 
I would read it as the former and I’m fairly confident that’s how it was meant. I would agree, however, that it could have been worded better to avoid confusion.
This was a standardized survey developed by a third party. This was not part of a performance review, but part of a leadership development program. I provided feedback on the question to the company that generated the survey, indicating that it was poorly worded in my opinion.
-
- I also indicated the third possible interpretation, that the individual could be in dire need of medical attention.
- I also indicated the third possible interpretation, that the individual could be in dire need of medical attention.
Vital to the company’s mission is the best guess. We don’t know what people are thinking or not, so someone could be critical without actually critisizing. How would we know? Poor question in any case.