Person- versus computer-mediated feedback

PsycEXTRA Dataset

This report focuses on how situational characteristics affect feedback seeking. It also examines how individual differences in feedback propensities affect feedback seeking. Proposed antecedents of feedback eliciting (overt feedback seeking) were examined utilizing a computer-based technique that permitted objective measurement of the behavior. A 2 X 2 research design was used, with two levels of social presence (an observer present or absent) and two different task rationales (evaluating the task evaluating the participant). Feedback eliciting was operationalized in two complementary ways-as the number of times the participant elicited feedback and as the number of seconds he or she spent examining feedback information. Two types of feedback were examined: (1) outcome feedback or information about level of performance, and (2) process feedback or information about how to improve performance. Separate hypotheses were formulated for each, in addition, to social presence and task rationale, the following variables were hypothesized to affect feedback eliciting: performance, arousal (measured as state anxiety), external feedback propensity, task-specific internal feedback ability, task familiarity, internal feedback propensity, self-esteem, locus of control, tolerance for ambiguity, and need for achievement.

We report an experimental study that examined two questions: (a) The effect of affective feedback from computers on participants' motivation and self-perception of ability; and (b) whether people respond similarly to computer feedback as they do to human feedback. This study, framed within the Computers As Social Actors (CASA) framework, essentially replicated a prior study on human-human interaction ) except that human evaluators were replaced with computer evaluators. The Meyer et al. study showed that there was a paradoxical relationship between praise and blame feedback and students perception of ability and motivation to engage in a task. Results of our study indicate that, consistent with the CASA hypothesis, people do respond to praise and blame feedback when provided by a computer. However, there are important differences between the results of our study and the Meyer et al. study. The participants in our study took the feedback from the computer at "face value" and seemed unwilling to commit to the same level of "deep psychological processing" about intentionality as they appeared to do with human respondents. We believe that this research combining existing theory and research on motivation and human computer interaction offers signifi cant implications for the design of educational technology and also points to directions for future research. Praise, like penicillin, must not be administered haphazardly. There are rules and cautions that govern the handling of potent medicines-rules

Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 1985

The purpose of this study was to research the impact of certain types of computer feedback on the subjects. Forty-one subjects were divided into two treatment groups. The corrective and noncorrective feedback types, both characteristic of commercially produced software, were isolated and systematized. Each subject was pra and posttested on the content of the computer lesson. Test scores were analyzed by ANOVA. The results indicated no overall significance. When groups were redefined by gender, the girls who received the noncorrective feedback scored significantly lower (JJ < .01) than the boys of either group. For these girls, noncorrective feedback may have reinforced the well documented sex bias that exists in all phases of education. What is the meta-message the students receive from the computer? In the process of evaluating many of the Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI) programs in the sciences last year, the researcher found that the type of feedback was widely variable. The student could conceivably feel that he or she is or is not "OK" as a result of the type of feedback received. Certain elements are generic to good instruction. One of these is good feedback. Learning should be reinforced via immediate, systematic methods, according to Chambers and Sprecher [ l ]. Nadler maintains that feedback can affect the learner both positively and negatively, and that feedback is generally a motivator [2]. The microcomputer programmed to give good feedback is being used as an integral part of an interactive\educational environment. 249 0 1086, Baywood Pub-Co.. Inc.

Computers & Education, 2012

EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Feedback plays an important role in fostering deep learning. It is widely recognized as one of the most powerful influences on students' learning. Meanwhile, timeliness is one of the important elements for feedback to be effective. In line with the technology development, the trend of feedback delivery has been shifted from conventional written and oral feedback to computerized feedback. It can be planned and delivered to students in a timely manner. To fully utilize the advantage of computerized feedback, students' views should be taken into account. This study investigated students' perception on computerized feedback through semi-structured interviews. From the results, seven themes were identified: (1) Meaning, (2) Content, (3) Comprehensibility, (4) Usefulness, (5) Timeliness, (6) Emotion, and (7) Attention. The findings of this study emphasize the needs for understanding students' perceptions of computerized feedback to maximize its role in improving students' performance.

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2008

Sunshine Coast Assessment of student learning is a core function of educators. Ideally students should be provided with timely, constructive feedback to facilitate learning. However, provision of high quality feedback becomes more complex as class sizes increase, modes of study expand and academic workloads increase. ICT solutions are being developed to facilitate quality feedback, whilst not impacting adversely upon staff workloads. Hence the research question of this study is 'How do academic staff perceive the usefulness of an automated feedback system in terms of impact on workloads and quality of feedback?' This study used an automated feedback generator (AFG) across multiple tutors and assessment items within an MBA course delivered in a variety of modes. All academics marking in the course completed a survey based on an adaptation of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model. Results indicated that while the workload impact was generally positive with savings in both cost and time, improvements and modifications to the system could further reduce workloads. Furthermore, results indicated that AFG improves quality in terms of timeliness, greater consistency between markers and an increase in the amount of feedback provided.

The Journal of Educators Online, 2005

In an online learning environment, students are forced to rely on feedback to gauge the extent to which they have mastered course content and to enhance their knowledge of course material.

Psychologica Belgica, 2008

In the current study, we examined the interactive effects of feedback type and sign on feedback-seeking behaviour, as well as the moderating role of regulatory focus. Using a behavioural measure of feedback seeking, we demonstrated a strong interaction between feedback type and sign, such that individuals subsequently sought the most feedback after they were provided with negative process feedback. Additionally, results suggested that an individual's chronic regulatory focus has implications for his or her feedback seeking behaviour. Overall, our results emphasised the value of negative process feedback, which arguably provides the most diagnostic information for behaviour adjustment and performance improvement. Research and everyday experience demonstrate the value of feedback in helping individuals gain insight into the effectiveness or shortcomings of their performance-in the workplace, the classroom, or even on the ballfield. Despite the valuable information that can be provided through feedback, research has found variable effects of feedback on subsequent performance and motivation (e.g., Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). Individuals actively seek feedback that can guide them to better performance; developing a better understanding as to why people seek positive or negative feedback is important to delineate feedback's motivational effects. A number of researchers have introduced theories regarding the role of feedback sign (i.e., positive or negative feedback), yet this research as a whole has provided inconsistent conclusions (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). Overall, further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the role that feedback sign plays in feedback seeking (VandeWalle, 2003). Taking feedback type into consideration may offer additional insights on the effect of feedback sign. Whereas outcome feedback merely provides gen

We would like to thank Michael M. Harris and Filip Lievens for their comments on an earlier version of this paper and Marc Covents for his programming work on the webbased work simulation.

Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 2006

The electronic medium continues to play an increasingly important role in the delivery of management education despite a paucity of empirical studies on its impact and efficacy. Results from a study of competitive attitudes and feedback-seeking behaviors across seven "hybrid" electronic cum live classes showed that Kiasu-Negative (a competitive attitude directed at preventing others from getting ahead of oneself) and Kiasu-Positive (a competitive attitude directed at personal diligence to get ahead of others) were related to two electronic discussion board feedback-seeking behaviors. These feedback-seeking behaviors, in turn, were related to grade performance as measured by multiple-choice tests. Traditional feedback-seeking measures of asking the professor in class or outside the class, and checking with fellow students for their views on class topics did not have a positive influence on multiple-choice test performance. In light of these findings, educators should consider how best to encourage participation on electronic discussion boards for hybrid type courses, while researchers should further examine the underlying causes of learning from such electronic exchanges. Other implications of these findings are also discussed.