Post‐identification feedback,confidence and recollections of witnessing conditions in child witnesses

Eyewitness confidence and detailed memory reports are often considered reliable indicators of the credibility of the eyewitness testimony. This study investigated how feedback concerning the accuracy of a lineup identification influences witnesses' confidence in the accuracy of their identification decision and their judgements concerning the witnessing experience. Fifty‐seven children (11–12 years) and 55 adults (17–39 years) viewed a video of a robbery and attempted to identify the culprit from a photo lineup. The culprit was not present. Participants received confirming feedback, disconfirming feedback, or no feedback on the accuracy of their identification. The confidence judgements and recollections of witnessing conditions of both children and adults were influenced by confirming and in some instances, disconfirming feedback. These findings imply that confidence and memory reports are easily distorted by non‐specific feedback and investigators should be sensitive to this particularly when dealing with vulnerable witnesses such as children. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests

Two experiments investigated how the type and timing of feedback influence learning from a multiple-choice test. First, participants read 12 prose passages, which covered various general knowledge topics (e.g., The Sun) and ranged between 280 and 300 words in length. Next, they took an initial six-alternative, multiple-choice test on information contained in the passages. Feedback was given immediately for some of the multiple-choice items or after delay for other items. Participants were either shown the correct answer as feedback (standard feedback) or were allowed to keep answering until the correct answer was discovered (answer-until-correct feedback). Learning from the test was assessed on a delayed cued-recall test. The results indicated that delayed feedback led to superior final test performance relative to immediate feedback. However, type of feedback did not matter: discovering the correct answer through answer-until-correct feedback produced equivalent performance relative to standard feedback. This research suggests that delaying the presentation of feedback after a test is beneficial to learning because of the spaced presentation of information.     

Delaying feedback promotes transfer of knowledge despite student preferences to receive feedback immediately

Educators and researchers who study human learning often assume that feedback is most effective when given immediately. However, a growing body of research has challenged this assumption by demonstrating that delaying feedback can facilitate learning. Advocates for immediate feedback have questioned the generalizability of this finding, suggesting that such effects only occur in highly controlled laboratory settings. We report a pair of experiments in which the timing of feedback was manipulated in an upper-level college engineering course. Students practiced applying their knowledge of complex engineering concepts on weekly homework assignments, and then received feedback either immediately after the assignment deadline or 1 week later. When students received delayed feedback, they performed better on subsequent course exams that contained new problems about the same concepts. Although delayed feedback produced superior transfer of knowledge, students reported that they benefited most from immediate feedback, revealing a metacognitive disconnect between actual and perceived effectiveness.     

Extinction of conservation and transitivity of weight

This study attempted to determine whether children will relinquish their belief in Piagetian concepts upon presentation of disconfirming evidence. Two age groups were tested: third- and fourth-grade, and sixth-grade. Conservation of weight and transitivity of weight were the concepts examined; the discrepant feedback consisted of three trials with either non-conservation or nontransitivity outcomes. Resistance or extinction was inferred from the subject's explanations for the outcomes, his responses on subsequent trials, and his performance on a one-month delayed posttest. Conservation subjects showed only moderate resistance by any of these measures; furthermore, there was no evidence of a developmental increase in resistance. Transitivity subjects, in contrast, were much less likely than conservers to change their judgments on either the initial or the delayed test; they also showed the expected developmental increase in resistance to extinction. The results are interpreted as indicating that Piagetian concepts may vary in the extent to which they entail feelings of logical necessity.     

Can eyewitnesses correct for external influences on their lineup identifications? The actual/counterfactual assessment paradigm

Real-world eyewitnesses are often asked whether their lineup responses were affected by various external influences, but it is unknown whether they can accurately answer these types of questions. The witness-report-of-influence mental-correction model is proposed to explain witnesses' reports of influence. Two experiments used a new paradigm (the actual/counterfactual paradigm) to examine eyewitnesses' abilities to report accurately on the influence of lineup manipulations. Eyewitnesses were administered either confirming feedback or no feedback (Experiment 1, n = 103), or a cautionary instruction or no cautionary instruction (Experiment 2, n = 114). Eyewitnesses then gave actual responses (retrospective confidence, view, and attention measures in Experiment 1; identification decision in Experiment 2) as well as counterfactual responses stating how they would have responded in the alternative condition. Results across both studies showed an asymmetric estimation of influence pattern: Eyewitnesses who received an influencing manipulation estimated significantly less of a change in their responses than eyewitnesses who did not receive an influencing manipulation. A 48-hr delay between actual and counterfactual responses did not moderate any effects. Results are explained by witnesses' implicit theories of influence.     

Effects of immediacy of feedback on estimations and performance

We investigated the role of anticipation of feedback in performance and estimation about own performance. We submitted 155 participants to a test of verbal aptitude, and we requested them to give estimations of their own performance and the performance of other participants. There were two treatments: immediate feedback and delayed feedback. Participants in the immediate‐feedback group were informed that they would receive feedback on their performance immediately after finishing the test, whereas participants in the delayed‐feedback group were informed that they would receive feedback a week after taking the test. The immediate‐feedback group performed better than the delayed‐feedback group. Furthermore, the former underestimated their own performance. On the other hand, participants on the delayed‐feedback group made unbiased estimations. We present a mathematical model based on construal‐level theory, decision affect theory, temporal discounting, and Moore and Healy's model of overestimation. The model suggests that the source of differences in performance and in estimations of own performance is a construal of the feedback situation that modifies the expected utility of the task.     

The Moderating Effect of Ecphoric Experience on Post‐identification Feedback: A Critical Test of the Cues‐based Inference Conceptualization

Confidence inflation from confirming post‐identification feedback is greater when the eyewitness is inaccurate than when the eyewitness is accurate, which is evidence that witnesses infer their confidence from feedback only to the extent that their internal cues are weak. But the accurate/inaccurate asymmetry has alternative interpretations. A critical test between these interpretations was conducted by including disconfirming feedback conditions. Student participants (n = 404) witnessed a mock crime, had either a strong or weak ecphoric experience when making their line‐up identifications, and subsequently received no feedback, confirming feedback, or disconfirming feedback. Consistent with a cues‐based conceptualization of the feedback effect, disconfirming feedback influenced witnesses with weak ecphoric experiences more than witnesses with strong ecphoric experiences, ironically increasing the confidence‐accuracy relation. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Delayed versus immediate feedback in children’s and adults’ vocabulary learning

We investigated whether the superior memory performance sometimes seen with delayed rather than immediate feedback was attributable to the shorter retention interval (orlag to test) from the last presentation of the correct information in the delayed condition. Whetherlag to test was controlled or not, delayed feedback produced better final test performance than did immediate feedback, which in turn produced better performance than did no feedback at all, when we tested Grade 6 children learning school-relevant vocabulary. With college students learning GRE-level words, however, delayed feedback produced better performance than did immediate feedback (and both were better than no feedback) when lag to test was uncontrolled, but there was no difference between the delayed and immediate feedback conditions when the lag to test was controlled.     

On the Presumption of Evidentiary Independence: Can Confessions Corrupt Eyewitness Identifications?

ABSTRACT— A confession is potent evidence, persuasive to judges and juries. Is it possible that a confession can also affect other evidence? The present study tested the hypothesis that a confession will alter eyewitnesses' identification decisions. Two days after witnessing a staged theft and making an identification decision from a lineup that did not include the thief, participants were told that certain lineup members had confessed or denied guilt during a subsequent interrogation. Among those participants who had made a selection but were told that another lineup member confessed, 61% changed their identifications. Among those participants who had not made an identification, 50% went on to select the confessor when his identity was known. These findings challenge the presumption in law that different forms of evidence are independent and suggest an important overlooked mechanism by which innocent confessors are wrongfully convicted: Potentially exculpatory evidence is corrupted by a confession itself.     

Error feedback and the acquisition of geographical representations

Three training conditions were compared in a task of learning locations of cities on a map: One in which participants could avoid errors by searching for the name of the correct city, and two others in which either immediate feedback after each response or delayed feedback after all responses had been made was given. Learners who received feedback only after placing all the cities on the map performed more poorly overall during training but outperformed the other two groups in both immediate and delayed tests. This advantage is interpreted as evidence of differential development of relational knowledge and application of cognitive effort across training conditions. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Postidentification feedback effects on face recognition confidence: evidence for metacognitive influences

Information given to witnesses after an identification decision greatly alters their impressions of the original event and importantly, their identification confidence. Two experiments investigated the possibility that the effect of feedback on confidence may be altered according to the strength of the witness's cues to accuracy. Experiment 1 used a manipulation of exposure duration to alter recognition accuracy prior to the delivery of confirming, disconfirming or no feedback. While the feedback effect was not different across exposure duration conditions, decisions that were made more quickly were less likely to show large changes in confidence due to feedback. Experiment 2 manipulated the distinctiveness of faces and showed that the effects of feedback on confidence, and on the resolution of the confidence judgement, were more pronounced when disconfirming feedback was given for distinctive faces and when confirming feedback was given for typical faces. These studies showed that the impressions that participants formed of their likely accuracy might moderate the effects of feedback on decision confidence. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing

Multiple-choice tests are used frequently in higher education without much consideration of the impact this form of assessment has on learning. Multiple-choice testing enhances retention of the material tested (the testing effect); however, unlike other tests, multiple-choice can also be detrimental because it exposes students to misinformation in the form of lures. The selection of lures can lead students to acquire false knowledge (Roediger & Marsh, 2005). The present research investigated whether feedback could be used to boost the positive effects and reduce the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Subjects studied passages and then received a multiple-choice test with immediate feedback, delayed feedback, or no feedback. In comparison with the no-feedback condition, both immediate and delayed feedback increased the proportion of correct responses and reduced the proportion of intrusions (i.e., lure responses from the initial multiple-choice test) on a delayed cued recall test. Educators should provide feedback when using multiple-choice tests.     

Delayed,But Not Immediate,Feedback After Multiple-Choice Questions Increases Performance on a Subsequent Short-Answer,But Not Multiple-Choice,Exam: Evidence for the Dual-Process Theory of Memory

Three experiments, two performed in the laboratory and one embedded in a college psychology lecture course, investigated the effects of immediate versus delayed feedback following a multiple-choice exam on subsequent short answer and multiple-choice exams. Performance on the subsequent multiple-choice exam was not affected by the timing of the feedback on the prior exam; however, performance on the subsequent short answer exam was better following delayed than following immediate feedback. This was true regardless of the order in which immediate versus delayed feedback was given. Furthermore, delayed feedback only had a greater effect than immediate feedback on subsequent short answer performance following correct, confident responses on the prior exam. These results indicate that delayed feedback cues a student's prior response and increases subsequent recollection of that response. The practical implication is that delayed feedback is better than immediate feedback during academic testing.     

The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: a meta-analytic review

Many studies have examined the accuracy of predictions of future memory performance solicited through judgments of learning (JOLs). Among the most robust findings in this literature is that delaying predictions serves to substantially increase the relative accuracy of JOLs compared with soliciting JOLs immediately after study, a finding termed the delayed JOL effect. The meta-analyses reported in the current study examined the predominant theoretical accounts as well as potential moderators of the delayed JOL effect. The first meta-analysis examined the relative accuracy of delayed compared with immediate JOLs across 4,554 participants (112 effect sizes) through gamma correlations between JOLs and memory accuracy. Those data showed that delaying JOLs leads to robust benefits to relative accuracy (g = 0.93). The second meta-analysis examined memory performance for delayed compared with immediate JOLs across 3,807 participants (98 effect sizes). Those data showed that delayed JOLs result in a modest but reliable benefit for memory performance relative to immediate JOLs (g = 0.08). Findings from these meta-analyses are well accommodated by theories suggesting that delayed JOL accuracy reflects access to more diagnostic information from long-term memory rather than being a by-product of a retrieval opportunity. However, these data also suggest that theories proposing that the delayed JOL effect results from a memorial benefit or the match between the cues available for JOLs and those available at test may also provide viable explanatory mechanisms necessary for a comprehensive account.     

Enhancing the quantity and accuracy of eyewitness memory via initial memory testing

Previous studies have demonstrated the benefits of initial memory testing in terms of “inoculating” eyewitness memory against forgetting. The aim of the present study was to determine to what extent and under which conditions such testing may also enhance the accuracy of subsequent retrieval. Two aspects of interpolated testing were manipulated: the mode of interpolated testing (forced verbatim vs. free level) and its timing (immediate vs. delayed). After witnessing a target event, participants were questioned about event details either immediately or after a 48-h delay, and were either required to respond at the verbatim level or were given control over the grain size of their responses. Verbatim memory for event details was finally tested 72 h after the event under both standard forced-report conditions and free-report conditions. Immediate interpolated testing was found to improve both memory quantity and memory accuracy on the final test, whereas delayed interpolated testing improved only memory quantity (and to a lesser extent). Although the mode of interpolated testing affected performance on the initial test, it had no effect on either memory quantity or memory accuracy on the final test. Practical implications with regard to eyewitness questioning are discussed.     

Forgetting curves in long-term memory: evidence for a multistage model of retention.

An experimental study with 20 normal healthy young adult subjects was performed to evaluate the interaction of type of memory tasks, type of learning modalities, and length of acquisition/recall interval. Four different tasks were employed (serial learning, paired learning, rote learning, and visuolinguistic transfer), some requiring a single trial learning modality others a multitrial learning modality. Acquisition/recall intervals were immediate, intermediate (3 min), and delayed. The experimental design allowed for the comparison of effects from five different delayed recall intervals (2, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hr). Results demonstrated a specific interaction on learning rates due to different ceiling effects for the different types of memory tasks. Forgetting rates, on the other hand, demonstrated a specific effect due to type of memory tasks and learning modalities only for differences between immediate and intermediate recall. These differences remained stable during the longer intervals and were not affected by length of interval. A multistage composition of long-term retention was suggested to explain these results, and a practical indication to build experimental procedures to study memory in the clinical field was evidenced.     

The damaging effect of confirming feedback on the relation between eyewitness certainty and identification accuracy

The authors investigated eyewitnesses' retrospective certainty (see G. L. Wells & A. L. Bradfield, 1999). The authors hypothesized that extemal influence from the lineup administrator would damage the certainty-accuracy relation by inflating the retrospective certainty of inaccurate eyewitnesses more than that of accurate eyewitnesses (N = 245). Two variables were manipulated: eyewitness accuracy (through the presence or absence of the culprit in the lineup) and feedback (confirming vs. control). Confirming feedback inflated retrospective certainty more for inaccurate eyewitnesses than for accurate eyewitnesses, significantly reducing the certainty-accuracy relation (from r = .58 in the control condition to r = .37 in the confirming feedback condition). Double-blind testing is recommended for lineups to prevent these external influences on eyewitnesses.     

Delayed sensory feedback in the learning of a novel motor task

Summary Generally the therapeutical effect of EMG feedback is viewed in terms of the immediate contiguity between response and information. According to this view any feedback delay would deteriorate the result. In this article the validity of this notion has been investigated. Three groups of normal subjects were required to perform a difficult movement under three feedback conditions: immediate EMG feedback, delayed EMG feedback, and a control (no EMG feedback) condition. The results indicated a significant difference between the EMG feedback groups and the control condition. However, no such difference was found between the immediate and delayed feedback conditions. The results suggested that the immediacy of the feedback is not the main factor in EMG feedback, but the specificity of the information.This study was supported by Grant no. 15-35-03 from the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research     

反馈时间、反馈类型和掩蔽类型对概率类别学习的影响

通过操纵反馈时间(即时,延迟)、反馈类型(简单,丰富)和掩蔽类型(塔罗牌,空白矩形),考察概率类别学习的学习机制。结果发现:(1)被试的学习成绩在即时反馈条件下显著优于在延迟反馈条件下;(2)在即时反馈条件下,仅给予简单反馈,被试虽能出色地完成天气预报任务,但是不能正确地判断卡片预测晴天的概率,倾向内隐学习;(3)在其他条件下,被试能正确地判断卡片预测晴天的概率以及各卡片在天气预报任务中预测天气的重要程度,表明被试能外显地意识到这些线索的作用。综上,概率类别学习采用的是双系统学习机制,既依赖内隐学习,又依赖外显学习。     

Infants' recognition memory, forgetting, and savings.

In four experiments infants of 5–6 months of age were tested for recognition memory of briefly presented visual stimuli. In the first experiment infants showed relatively more looking at a novel picture when it was paired with a picture they had just studied for 10 or 20 sec. This differential response to novelty served as evidence of immediate recognition memory. In the second experiment these same 10- or 20-sec study times were used but were not sufficient to produce reliable evidence of memory over a long (48 hr) retention interval or even as short an interval as 40 sec. The third experiment demonstrated substantial delayed recognition if a brief reexposure of materials was introduced immediately prior to the recognition test. This reminder required less than the minimal study time found necessary to produce immediate recognition memory in Experiment 1. The results of the fourth experiment indicated that the savings effects that occurred in Experiment 3 were not solely due to familiarity with the testing procedures. The implications of savings effects in infants' memory are discussed.