Group vs individual information processing: The effects of outcome feedback on decision making

Recent theories of individual decision making have emphasized the role of environmental feedback on decision performance and confidence. However, in relation to group decision making, feedback has received only minor attention. This study compared individual and group decision performance and confidence on a multicue personnel decision task under three different feedback conditions. Individuals and five-person groups decided whether to promote 48 different job candidates, and rated how confident they were in each of their decisions. Feedback as to the correctness of their decisions was provided after (a) every decision (Total Feedback), (b) only those decisions to promote the candidate (Partial Feedback), or (c) after none of the decisions (No Feedback). Results indicated that groups performed best under total feedback, while individuals performed best under partial feedback. In addition, greater amounts of feedback reduced individuals' confidence but had little effect on group member confidence. Implications for both current theory in decision making and group vs individual information processing are discussed.     

Effects of false increasing,decreasing, and true electromyographic biofeedback on the frequency of stuttering

Adult stutterers received auditory feedback of laryngeal area muscle activity while reading aloud under three conditions: (1) False Increasing Feedback, (2) False Decreasing Feedback, and (3) True Feedback. The subjects were unaware that the feedback in two conditions was being altered and were instructed not to manipulate the feedback signal. Decreases in the frequency of stuttering were observed for both the false increase and true feedback conditions. Factors contributing to the effectiveness of biofeedback techniques with stutterers are discussed.     

Commission error rates on a continuous performance test are related to deficits measured by the Benton Visual Retention Test

This study is one in a series investigating the relationship between impulsive behavior on a Continuous Performance Test (i.e., the Immediate and Delayed Memory Task) and other cognitive deficits measured by clinical instruments. Forty-two adolescents were selected for two groups, controls and hospitalized patients with disruptive behavior disorders. Each adolescent completed the Immediate and Delayed Memory Task and the Benton Visual Retention Test. Our main findings were that, even when controlling for IQ, the Immediate and Delayed Memory Task commission errors were associated with adverse Benton performance, but only in the patient group. These results may be explained by a shared association between processes of impulsivity and other deficits of executive control that may interfere with successful performance of the Benton.     

Improving young drivers’ speed management behaviour through feedback: A cognitive training intervention

The aim of the present study was to examine which aspect of content-based feedback about drivers’ speed management behaviour (performance, financial infringements and safety implications for speeding) yielded positive changes in compliance with the speed limit. One hundred young drivers were randomly allocated to one of five groups (Control, Performance Feedback, Performance and Finance Feedback, Performance and Safety Feedback, Combined Feedback). Depending on group randomly allocated to, participants completed a baseline drive and received feedback about their speed management (except control). Immediately after, all groups completed a post-training drive, followed by a second drive one week later. A reduced sample (25 per cent dropout) completed a third test drive six month post-training. All drives were completed in a computer-based driving simulator. Feedback pertaining to their speed management behaviour was provided verbally immediately after the baseline drive by the researcher. Performance Feedback group received feedback about own speed-related performance (e.g., mean speed, time violated during the drive); Performance and Finance Feedback group received feedback about own performance and potential fines that could be received for exceeding the speed limit; Performance and Safety Feedback group received feedback about own performance and potential safety outcomes for them and other passengers; the Combined Feedback group received feedback about own performance, financial infringements and safety implications for speeding; and the Control group received no feedback. The results showed that all types of feedback are effective in modifying young drivers’ speed management behaviour, and these effects were present up to six months post-training in both low and high-speed zones. These findings have valuable implications in the development of a new training approach to improve young drivers’ speed management behaviour.     

Effects of generalized self-efficacy and negative social comparison feedback on specific self-efficacy and performance

The effects of social comparison feedback on specific self-efficacy and performance of high generalized self-efficacy participants and low generalized self-efficacy participants were examined with the help of 20 participants with high generalized self-efficacy and 20 participants with low generalized self-efficacy. Half of the participants in each generalized self-efficacy group received negative social comparison feedback after each of four trials of an experimental task while the other half received no feedback. Two kinds of specific self-efficacy-performance-based and normative-based--were measured once before the task and four times after the trials of the task. After the task, the High generalized self-efficacy/Feedback group rated performance-based specific self-efficacy higher and performed better than the Low generalized self-efficacy/Feedback group. No significant difference was observed between the High generalized self-efficacy/No feedback group and Low generalized self-efficacy/No feedback group. There were no significant effects with regard to normative-based specific self-efficacy.     

The Effect of Type of Feedback in Multiple-Choice Testing on Long-Term Retention

We investigated how different types of feedback in multiple-choice testing influence long-term retention. Participants completed an initial multiple-choice test on general-knowledge questions. Then, they were randomly placed into one of the following four conditions: feedback displaying the original question and four alternative options including the correct answer (Feedback 1); feedback displaying the original question and the correct answer (Feedback 2); feedback displaying only the correct answer (Feedback 3); and no feedback (Control). On the final test two days later, participants in the feedback conditions showed improved retention—even participants who received Feedback 3 outperformed the control group, regardless of whether feedback followed correct or incorrect responses. There was no difference between the feedback conditions when feedback followed correct responses, but Feedback 1 was superior to Feedback 3 when feedback followed incorrect responses. The function of feedback in multiple-choice testing is to maintain correct responses and to correct erroneous responses.     

Effects of normative feedback on motor learning are dependent on the frequency of knowledge of results

Studies on normative feedback have shown superior motor learning outcomes for individuals who believe that they are performing better than others through increased self-efficacy. Nevertheless, the effects of normative feedback were never dissociated from the knowledge of results (KR) provided to the learners which potentially interacts with self-efficacy as well. Thus, we investigated whether the effects of normative feedback on motor learning, associated with self-efficacy, would be dependent on the amount of KR provided. Fifty-six participants were randomly assigned to four experimental groups in terms of KR frequency (100% and 33%) and normative feedback (positive and negative). In the acquisition phase, all groups received the average KR of their performance at the end of each block of trials (True feedback) and a fake KR based on their own performance (but said to be from a group of participants who practiced the same task) (False Feedback). The False Feedback indicated better or worse performance of the participant in comparison to the fake group, depending on their experimental group. Retention tests were performed immediately and after 24 h from the acquisition phase. To measure self-efficacy, a questionnaire on participant's efficacy was applied before the first block, after each block of trials and before the retention tests. The results revealed superiority of positive normative feedback and 100% KR frequency, compared to negative normative feedback and 100% KR frequency in the 24h retention test. No difference was found between the groups with a frequency of 33% of KR (positive and negative). All groups increased self-efficacy during practice, but there was no difference between groups at any stage of the study. We conclude that the effects of normative feedback on motor learning are dependent on the KR frequency. However, they were not associated with self-efficacy.     

反馈效价影响家族相似性类别学习的ERPs研究

采用事件相关电位技术,以大学生为被试,运用被试间实验设计探讨反馈效价（积极反馈,消极反馈）对家族相似性类别学习的影响。研究结果表明,行为结果上相比积极反馈,消极反馈在推理测验中的成绩显著优于积极反馈。脑电结果上,P200,P300和FRN均与家族相似性类别学习中的反馈加工有关;家族相似性类别学习中,积极反馈与消极反馈存在不对称性。相比于无反馈的条件,P300对消极反馈更加的敏感,消极反馈诱发更大的波幅,而P300对于有无积极反馈并不敏感。说明消极反馈条件下,吸引学习者投入更多的注意资源进行认知加工。此外,相比无反馈条件下,消极反馈条件下FRN有更大的激活,说明了消极反馈对被试以后的行为起着更大的调节作用。总之,研究表明相比于积极反馈,消极反馈对家族相似性类别学习更加有效,错误驱动发挥较大作用。     

Combined Audience and Video Feedback With Cognitive Review Improves State Anxiety and Self-Perceptions During Speech Tasks in Socially Anxious Individuals

This study investigated the effects of combined audience feedback with video feedback plus cognitive preparation, and cognitive review (enabling deeper processing of feedback) on state anxiety and self-perceptions including perception of performance and perceived probability of negative evaluation in socially anxious individuals during a speech performance. One hundred and forty socially anxious students were randomly assigned to four conditions: Cognitive Preparation + Video Feedback + Audience Feedback + Cognitive Review (CP + VF + AF + CR), Cognitive Preparation + Video Feedback + Cognitive Review (CP + VF + CR), Cognitive Preparation + Video Feedback only (CP + VF), and Control. They were asked to deliver two impromptu speeches that were evaluated by confederates. Participants’ levels of anxiety and self-perceptions pertaining to the speech task were assessed before and after feedback, and after the second speech. Compared to participants in the other conditions, participants in the CP + VF + AF + CR condition reported a significant decrease in their state anxiety and perceived probability of negative evaluation scores, and a significant increase in their positive perception of speech performance from before to after the feedback. These effects generalized to the second speech. Our results suggest that adding audience feedback to video feedback plus cognitive preparation and cognitive review may improve the effects of existing video feedback procedures in reducing anxiety symptoms and distorted self-representations in socially anxious individuals.     

The effects of experimenter's instructions, feedback, and praise on teacher praise and student attending behavior

Systematic use of experimenter's instructions, feedback, and feedback plus social praise was used to increase teacher praise for student attending behavior of three elementary school teachers. Experimenter's verbal interactions with teachers, teacher's verbal praise for student behaviors, and pupil attending behavior were recorded during baseline conditions. As the three successive experimental conditions were introduced first with Teacher A, then with Teacher B, in a multiple baseline design, behaviors of the experimenter, the two teachers, and eight students were measured and recorded. In the cases of Teachers A and B, experimental condition one (Instructions) and experimental condition two (Feedback) produced inconclusive results. Experimental condition three (Feedback Plus Social Praise) produced more teacher praise for student attending behavior. The entire "Package" of Experimenter's Instructions, Feedback, and Feedback Plus Social Praise was introduced to Teacher C in a single experimental condition. As in the cases of Teachers A and B, behaviors measured were: (1) the experimenter's verbal interactions, (2) the teacher's praise of students, and (3) the student's attending behavior. Introduction of the "Package" also produced more teacher praise for student attending behavior.     

Feedback effects on sequential ordering in humans

Under various feedback conditions, 38 college undergraduates were asked to rearrange abstract graphic characters on a computer screen, placing them in arbitrarily designated “correct” sequences. Two sets of seven horizontally arrayed stimuli were used. In Experiment 1, subjects in Group 1 learned to arrange the first set under Selection Feedback in which a “+” appeared above each character after it was selected in the correct order and to arrange the second set under Order Feedback in which a correct response produced a copy of the character in its correct ordinal position at the top of the screen. For Group 2 the order of these conditions was reversed. In Experiment 2, for subjects in Group 3, correct responses produced neither of these types of feedback. Subjects in Group 4 received Order Feedback only until the first set was correctly ordered once. Order Feedback was more effective than Selection Feedback during initial acquisition of the first set but not during maintenance; no differences were found for the second set. Only 2 of 9 subjects successfully put the characters in correct sequential order under the No Feedback condition. When, in Experiment 2, Order Feedback was eliminated after the first correctly arranged sequence, the steady-state criteria were met more slowly than in Experiment 1.     

Effects of hearing the past, present, or future during music performance

Three experiments were performed to explore the effects of mismatches between actions (key-presses) and the contents of auditory feedback (pitch events) during music performance. Pianists performed melodies from memory during altered auditory feedback that was synchronized with key-presses but matched the pitch of other sequence events. Feedback direction was manipulated by presenting pitches that matched events intended for the past (delays; Experiments 1 and 3) or the future (prelays; Experiments 2 and 3). Feedback distance was manipulated by varying the absolute separation between the current event and the location of the feedback pitch. All alterations disrupted the accuracy of performance (pitch errors) more so than timing. Serial-ordering errors indicated confusions among proximal and metrically similar events, consistent with the predictions of an incremental planning model (Palmer & Pfordresher, 2003). Patterns of serial-ordering errors suggested that performers compensate for the disruptive effects of altered feedback by changing event activations during planning.     

On the role of reduced auditory feedback and kinesic self-stimulation during Stroop Color-Word performance1

Feedback from one's own voice provides important vocal–motor cues for effective cognitive processing. Reduction of such feedback is known to disturb such functioning. Work in our laboratory has shown that kinesic self-stimulation also plays an important role in cognition, and appears to regulate the focusing of attention under conditions of distraction. The present study investigated the effects of both auditory feedback and kinesic self-stimulation in the regulation of cognitive interference during performance of the Stroop Color-Word Task. Twelve subjects were tested on the Stroop task under conditions of normal and occluded hearing. Kinesic self-stimulation and response errors during color-word performance were recorded on video tape. The findings indicated that not only did self-stimulation increase when voice feedback was reduced, but that this increase was associated with a reduction in specific types of color-word performance errors. Individual differences revealed that high kinesic responders made significantly fewer errors in task performance than did low kinesic responders. Results were interpreted as revealing a kinesic feedback mechanism which has adaptive significance in regard to self-editing when auditory feedback is reduced.     

Effects of auditory feedback on a musical performance task

Two experiments examined the effects of various feedback conditions on performance by 12 Ss on an electronic organ. Playing time scores showed complete absence of auditory feedback to have little or no detrimental effect; in fact, some Ss played fastest under this condition. Delayed auditory feedback (DAF), as expected, caused considerable performance decrement when compared with immediate auditory feedback (IAF). Extraneous prerecorded input as a distractor in the absence of auditory feedback ranked between mixed DAF-with-IAF, and pure DAF, which showed the greatest disruption. The possible role of auditory imagery in musical performance was discussed, together with four components which perhaps contribute to the standard DAF effect: distraction, error repetition, conflict with expectancies and auditory imagery, and presentation of two competing and conflicting signals (IAF and DAF).     

Single Session Treatment of Test Anxiety with Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR)

One session of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) appeared to be an effective treatment for test anxiety, reducing reported physiological distress, worry, and fears of negative evaluation. The research design included two components: a comparison study, comparing Immediate Treatment and Wait List groups, and a replication study, comparing the treatment response of Immediate and Delayed (Treated Wait List) groups. Seventeen test anxious university students were randomly assigned to one session of EMDR or Wait List. At post-test, the Immediate group demonstrated significant improvement, compared to the Wait List group, on the Test Anxiety Inventory (TAI) and Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Treatment effects were maintained at follow-up. The Wait List group received treatment after post-measures were taken. Treatment of the Delayed group replicated effects. Improvement was reflected by large treatment effect sizes and a decrease in percentile ranking on the TAI from the 90th to the 50th percentile.     

Does Feedback Improve the Accuracy of Recurrent Judgmental Forecasts?

Feedback has been shown to be a useful tool for improving decision making (Balzeret al.,1992) and might also be a useful tool for improving the accuracy of recurrent judgmental forecasts. The objective of this study was to examine the impact of feedback on accuracy when forecasting time series with structural instabilities. We found that task information feedback (prompting on the underlying structure of the time series) gave significantly better forecasting performance than performance outcome feedback (prompting with graphical indicators of forecasting accuracy or prompting words expressing levels of forecasting accuracy). We also found that adding cognitive information feedback (prompting on desirable forecasting behaviors) to task information feedback did not significantly improve forecasting performance. Task information and task information feedback with added cognitive information feedback, but not performance outcome feedback, were superior to the baseline of providing simple outcome feedback (following each forecast with the actual value of the time series).     

Effects of positive and negative feedback on behavior control in hyperactive and normal boys

The hypothesis that hyperactive boys have relatively less response to negative feedback than to positive feedback was studied. Sixteen hyperactive boys and 16 controls were compared on two tasks under different feedback conditions. Feedback conditions were no feedback, positive feedback, and negative feedback. Tasks were symbol encoding and correcting spelling words. Hyperactives and controls were compared in amount of time on-task and amount of work correctly completed. Hyperactives were on-task significantly more under conditions of negative feedback than under positive feedback, but negative feedback significantly increased errors on the spelling correction task. Controls were equally responsive to positive, negative, or no feedback. Hyperactives accomplished significantly less than controls on the coding task, but performed as well as controls on the spelling correction task, which was administered to each boy at his own level of spelling ability. The results imply that while consistent negative feedback can reduce off-task behavior for hyperactives, it can also decrease the accuracy of the work they are doing.This research was supported in part by U.S. Public Health Service Training Grant (in Biological Science) No. MH07081. This article is based on a dissertation presented to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph. D. degree. The assistance of Dr. John A. Stern in helping with the preparation of the dissertation is gratefully acknowledged. The generous assistance of Dr. Cynthia Janes in helping prepare this paper is appreciated. The dissertation is available from University Micro-films (Order No. 74-13, 799). The assistance of Ms. B. Talent and Ms. S. Weiner in making reliability checks is gratefully acknowledged.     

Lunchroom noise control using feedback and group contingent reinforcement

Reduction of noise levels in an elementary school lunchroom was examined as a function of feedback and feedback plus reinforcement using group contingency procedures. Feedback consisted of signals from a traffic light, with green indicating acceptable levels, yellow indicating levels approaching undesirable, and red indicating unacceptable levels. Other behaviors, including running, hitting, pushing, and kicking, were measured incidentally. Results indicate that feedback plus reinforcement was effective in reducing noise levels. Feedback only was also effective, but to a lesser degree. No response-response relationship was found to exist between noise level and the other behaviors.     

Performance feedback and self-focused attention in the classroom: When past and present interact

An experiment tested the impact of performance feedback on self-focused attention in high and low achievers. On the basis of previous research, which suggested that inconsistent feedback (i.e., feedback which contradicts one's performance history) receives considerable attention, it was predicted that such feedback would increase self-focus regardless of its valence (i.e., positive or negative). As predicted, high achievers were more self-focused when receiving failure feedback than when receiving success feedback or no feedback. The low achievers were more self-focused when receiving success feedback than when receiving failure feedback or no feedback. These findings are discussed in relation to Kluger and DeNisi's (1996) Feedback intervention theory and the literature on self-focused attention.