Feedback specificity, learning opportunities, and learning

Although increasing feedback specificity is generally beneficial for immediate performance, it can undermine certain aspects of the learning needed for later, more independent performance. The results of the present transfer experiment demonstrate that the effects of increasing feedback specificity on learning depended on what was to be learned, and these effects were partially mediated through the opportunities to learn how to respond to different task conditions during practice. More specific feedback was beneficial for learning how to respond to good performance and detrimental for learning how to respond to poor performance. The former relationship was partially mediated by feedback specificity's effect on learning opportunities during practice. The results have implications for designing feedback interventions and training to maximize the learning of various aspects of a task.     

Contextual interference and augmented feedback: is there an additive effect for motor learning?

Learning to perform a skilled behavior is affected by the context of the practice session and the frequency of augmented feedback. We studied the combined effect of these variables in the acquisition of a ballistic, bi-directional lever movement pattern involving four different target locations as measured by performance in practice, retention, and transfer tests. Augmented feedback was presented in either an every-trial or a faded schedule during random and blocked practice. Consistent with the contextual interference effect, the blocked practice group produced lower errors in acquisition, but the random practice group outperformed the blocked practice group in both retention and transfer. In contrast, faded feedback did not have a beneficial effect on learning and degraded learning when provided during blocked practice. While the results were consistent with previous findings of random and blocked practice, they were not consistent with previous findings of reduced feedback frequencies.     

The Interactive Effects of Task and External Feedback on Practice Performance and Learning

The interactions of task and external feedback on practice performance and learning were examined. While external feedback was consistently beneficial to performance during practice, regardless of the availability of feedback from the task, it was detrimental to learning when the task provided little feedback. External feedback benefited learning only when feedback was also available from the task. In addition, task feedback benefited learning, partially due to its effects on error detection and correction skills. Results suggest the importance of examining the simultaneous provision of feedback from different sources, studying the role of task feedback in learning, and more cleanly assessing learning to avoid confounding it with transient performance improvements.     

Increased Sensitivity to Changes in Visual Feedback With Practice

In recent work investigating motor learning, the focus has been on the effect of modifying feedback at different levels of learning. Results suggest that learning is specific to the practiced conditions and that this specificity increases with practice. In a replication and extension of this previous work, 3 groups (N = 30 subjects) practiced a sequential positioning movement: Controls performed 300 trials with visually presented on-line kinematic feedback, whereas the other 2 groups, low practice (LP) or high practice (HP), performed, respectively, 50 or 300 trials without feedback. Pretest and posttest sessions of 10 trials each were performed with the on-line feedback. All groups improved with practice. It was apparent that the HP group exhibited more of a performance decrement in the postest than the LP group did, suggesting that motor learning is the process of forming an increasingly specific sensorimotor representation. These results have implications for motor learning paradigms, models of motor learning, and training.     

Feedback and intention during motor-skill learning: a connection with prospective memory

The intention to complete an action in the future can improve the learning of this action, but it is unknown whether this effect persists when feedback is manipulated during encoding. In Experiment 1, participants were instructed to learn a motor skill with or without intending to reproduce this learning in the future, and feedback on their movements was administrated by self-decision, that is, participants asked for feedback whenever they wanted it. The results showed that intention increased the frequency with which feedback was requested, but did not improve motor performance. In Experiment 2, participants had to learn the task with high or few feedbacks, which they could not control. In these conditions, intention was beneficial in promoting motor learning only for a low feedback schedule. We suggest that the beneficial effect of intention on learning can be overshadowed or emphasised by the feedback processing during encoding. These findings are discussed in light of theories surrounding prospective memory.     

Achievement Goals,Feedback, and Task Performance

Prior research indicates that instructions to focus attention on learning versus performance and the nature of feedback provided have distinct implications for subsequent task performance. We first examined how assigned learning and performance goals and feedback valence interact to determine performance change. Individuals with learning goal instructions performed better after negative feedback but worse after positive feedback. In Study 2, we found that implicit theory, an individual difference that is antecedent to general goal orientation, interacted with learning/performance goal instructions to influence performance change after negative feedback. In both studies, goal instructions influenced performance attributions and affective states, but these variables did not mediate the effects of the goal instructions or performance feedback. We discuss the implications of these results for academic and employment settings.     

Judgments of learning are significantly higher following feedback on relatively good versus relatively poor trials despite no actual learning differences

Studies have consistently shown that prospective metacognitive judgments of learning are often inaccurate because humans mistakenly interpret current performance levels as valid indices of learning. These metacognitive discrepancies are strongly related to conditions of practice. Here, we examined how the type of feedback (after good versus poor trials) received during practice and awareness (aware versus unaware) of this manipulation affected judgments of learning and actual learning. After each six-trial block, participants received feedback on their three best trials or three worst trials and half of the participants were made explicitly aware of the type of feedback they received while the other half were unaware. Judgments of learning were made at the end of each six-trial block and before the 24-h retention test. Results indicated no motor performance differences between groups in practice or retention; however, receiving feedback on relatively good compared to relatively poor trials resulted in significantly higher judgments of learning in practice and retention, irrespective of awareness. These results suggest that KR on relatively good versus relatively poor trials can have dissociable effects on judgments of learning in the absence of actual learning differences, even when participants are made aware of their feedback manipulation.     

A Field Study of the Effects of Gradually Terminated Public Feedback on Housekeeping Performance1

Recent studies have shown that more feedback is not always better. A multiple baseline across‐groups design was used to assess the impact of infrequent (at gradually increasing intervals), publicly posted housekeeping feedback on the housekeeping level. The housekeeping performance of 3 road maintenance areas and I garage was monitored over a 6‐ to 17‐month period. The increases in performance were equivalent to studies giving more frequent housekeeping feedback at a fixed‐interval schedule. The length of feedback interval was not significantly correlated to the change in housekeeping index. The results suggest that after a learning period, the frequency at which feedback is provided may not be a critical factor. The appropriateness of feedback frequency may be affected by learning level (i. e., the information value of feedback at that particular time).     

Meta-analysis of the reduced relative feedback frequency effect on motor learning and performance

A fundamental motor learning principle conveyed in textbooks is that augmented terminal feedback frequency differentially affects motor learning and performance. The guidance hypothesis predicts that relative to a reduced frequency of feedback, providing learners with feedback following every practice trial enhances practice performance but degrades subsequent motor learning. This change in effectiveness for each relative feedback frequency is called a reversal effect, and because it is thought that practice variables can have distinct impacts on learning and performance, delayed retention tests are considered the gold standard in motor learning research. The objectives of this meta-analysis were to a) synthesize the available evidence regarding feedback frequency, performance, and motor learning to test whether there are significant changes in effectiveness from acquisition and immediate retention to delayed retention, b) evaluate potential moderators of these effects, and c) investigate the potential influence of publication bias on this literature. We screened 1662 articles found in PubMed and PsycINFO databases as well as with reference tracing and a targeted author search. A final sample of 61 eligible papers were included in the primary analysis (k = 75, N = 2228). Results revealed substantial heterogeneity but no significant moderators, high levels of uncertainty, and no significant effect of reduced feedback frequency at any time point. Further, multilevel analyses revealed no evidence of a significant change in effect from acquisition or immediate retention to delayed retention. Z-curve analysis suggested the included studies were severely underpowered. These results suggest that robust evidence regarding feedback frequency and motor learning is lacking.     

Enhancing the learning of sport skills through external-focus feedback

The authors examined how the effectiveness of feedback for the learning of complex motor skills is affected by the focus of attention it induces. The feedback referred specifically either to body movements (internal focus) or to movement effects (external focus). In Experiment 1, groups of novices and advanced volleyball players (N = 48) practiced "tennis" serves under internal-focus or external-focus feedback conditions in a 2 (expertise) x 2 (feedback type) design. Type of feedback did not differentially affect movement quality, but external-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy of the serves than internal-focus feedback during both practice and retention, independent of the level of expertise. In Experiment 2, the effects of relative feedback frequency as a function of attentional focus were examined. A 2 (feedback frequency: 100% vs. 33%) x 2 (feedback type) design was used. Experienced soccer players (N = 52) were required to shoot lofted passes at a target. External-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy than internal-focus feedback did. In addition, reduced feedback frequency was beneficial under internal-focus feedback conditions, whereas 100% and 33% feedback were equally effective under external-focus conditions. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of effect-related, as opposed to movement-related, feedback and also suggest that there is a need to revise current views regarding the role of feedback for motor learning.     

The Role of Concurrent Feedback in Learning to Walk Through Sliding Doors

Concurrent feedback is defined as information about performance given to participants during the execution of an action. This article investigates whether concurrent feedback is beneficial or detrimental to the learning of an ecologically relevant task. Eighteen participants were asked to walk through a virtual corridor and they practiced over 1110 trials to adjust their walking speed so as to pass through sliding doors that opened and closed at a frequency of 1 Hz. Concurrent feedback informed them about the possible need to accelerate or decelerate. Performance of participants who received concurrent feedback on 66% of the practice trials (on average) did not differ significantly from performance of participants who did not receive concurrent feedback. Furthermore, participants of both of these groups significantly outperformed participants who received concurrent feedback on all practice trials. These results are discussed in relation to the perceptual-motor mechanisms that underlie the control of the action. Also discussed are implications for future research, including the use of self-controlled feedback and the use of multisensory training programs.     

The Interactive Effects of Goal Orientation and Feedback Specificity on Task Performance

This study examined the impact of goal orientation and feedback specificity on performance. Ninety undergraduate management students completed 3 phases of a computerized management decision-making simulation in conditions of low, moderate, or high feedback specificity. Learning orientation interacted with feedback specificity to predict performance in Phase 1, such that feedback specificity had a greater impact on performance for persons low in learning orientation. Performance orientation interacted with feedback specificity to predict performance in Phase 3, such that feedback specificity had a greater impact on performance for persons high in performance orientation.     

反馈延迟与掩蔽类型对知觉类别学习的影响

通过两个实验探讨反馈延迟与掩蔽类型对知觉类别学习的影响。实验1光栅掩蔽条件下,采用2（类别结构：基于规则vs.信息整合）×2（延迟反馈：500vs.3000ms）被试间实验设计,实验2采用同样的实验设计,保持延迟反馈时间不变,但改掩蔽类型为黑屏掩蔽。结果发现：（1）光栅掩蔽条件下,反馈延迟削弱信息整合类别结构的成绩,不影响基于规则类别学习,内隐外显类别结构之间存在分离效应。（2）黑屏掩蔽条件下,信息整合与基于规则类别结构的成绩均不受到延迟反馈的影响,分离效应消失。实验说明“无关因素”掩蔽影响知觉类别学习,知觉噪音与标准噪音在反馈延迟影响知觉类别学习中起到重要作用,COVIS模型理论关于延迟反馈时间影响知觉类别学习的解释具有局限性。     

Enhancing the Learning of Sport Skills Through External-Focus Feedback

The authors examined how the effectiveness of feedback for the learning of complex motor skills is affected by the focus of attention it induces. The feedback referred specifically either to body movements (internal focus) or to movement effects (external focus). In Experiment 1, groups of novices and advanced volleyball players (N = 48) practiced “tennis” serves under internal-focus or external-focus feedback conditions in a 2 (expertise) × 2 (feedback type) design. Type of feedback did not differentially affect movement quality, but external-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy of the serves than internal-focus feedback during both practice and retention, independent of the level of expertise. In Experiment 2, the effects of relative feedback frequency as a function of attentional focus were examined. A 2 (feedback frequency: 100% vs. 33%) × 2 (feedback type) design was used. Experienced soccer players (N = 52) were required to shoot lofted passes at a target. External-focus feedback resulted in greater accuracy than internal-focus feedback did. In addition, reduced feedback frequency was beneficial under internal-focus feedback conditions, whereas 100% and 33% feedback were equally effective under external-focus conditions. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of effect-related, as opposed to movement-related, feedback and also suggest that there is a need to revise current views regarding the role of feedback for motor learning.     

Feedback specificity,information processing,and transfer of training

This study examines the effects of feedback specificity on transfer of training and the mechanisms through which feedback can enhance or inhibit transfer. We used concurrent verbal protocol methodology to elicit and operationalize the explicit information processing activities used by 48 trainees performing the Furniture Factory computer simulation. We hypothesized and found support for a moderated mediation model. Increasing feedback specificity influenced the exposure trainees had to different task conditions and negatively affected their levels of explicit information processing. In turn, explicit information processes and levels of exposure to different task conditions interacted to impact transfer of training. Those who received less specific feedback relied more heavily on explicit information processing and had more exposure to the challenging aspects of the task than those who received more specific feedback, which differentially affected what they learned about the task. We discuss how feedback specificity and exposure to different task conditions may prime different learning processes.     

Social-comparative feedback affects motor skill learning

This study examined motivational effects of feedback on motor learning. Specifically, we investigated the influence of social-comparative feedback on the learning of a balance task (stabilometer). In addition to veridical feedback (error scores reflecting deviation from the target horizontal platform position) about their own performance after each trial, two groups received false normative information about the “average” score of others on that trial. Average performance scores indicated that the participant's performance was either above (better group) or below (worse group) the average, respectively. A control group received veridical feedback about trial performance without normative feedback. Learning as a function of social-comparative feedback was determined in a retention test without feedback, performed on a third day following two days of practice. Normative feedback affected the learning of the balance task: The better group demonstrated more effective balance performance than both the worse and control groups on the retention test. Furthermore, high-frequency/low-amplitude balance adjustments, indicative of more automatic control of movement, were greater in the better than in the worse group. The control group exhibited more limited learning and less automaticity than both the better and the worse groups. The findings indicate that positive normative feedback had a facilitatory effect on motor learning.     

注意和工作记忆对交错呈现优势的影响

以家族相似性图案为材料,让被试在单任务或双任务条件下以集中呈现或交错呈现的方式进行观察（实验1）或反馈（实验2）学习,记录眼动,探究注意对交错呈现优势的影响,以及工作记忆在其中的作用。发现当进行观察学习时,注意影响交错呈现优势,结果支持区别对比理论和注意衰减理论;当进行反馈学习时,注意的影响还有待进一步探究。同时,工作记忆影响交错呈现优势,但工作记忆并非完全通过影响注意从而影响交错呈现优势。     

Impact of guided exploration and enactive exploration on self-regulatory mechanisms and information acquisition through electronic search.

Following instruction in basic skills for electronic search, participants who practiced in a guided exploration mode developed stronger self-efficacy and greater satisfaction than those who practiced in a self-guided exploratory mode. Intrinsic motivation was not affected by exploration mode. On 2 post-training tasks, guided exploration participants produced more effective search strategies. expended less effort, made fewer errors, rejected fewer lines of search, and achieved higher performance. Relative lack of support for self-regulatory factors as mediators of exploration mode impacts was attributed to the uninformative feedback from electronic search, which causes most people to remain at a novice level and to require external guidance for development of self-efficacy and skills. Self-guided learning will be more effective on structured tasks with more informative feedback and for individuals with greater expertise on dynamic tasks.     

Are judgments of learning made after correct responses during retrieval practice sensitive to lag and criterion level effects?

Although successful retrieval practice is beneficial for memory, various factors (e.g., lag and criterion level) moderate this benefit. Accordingly, the efficacy of retrieval practice depends on how students use retrieval practice during learning, which in turn depends on accurate metacognitive monitoring. The present experiments evaluated the extent to which judgments of learning (JOLs) made after correct responses are sensitive to factors (i.e., lag and criterion level) that moderate retrieval practice effects, as well as which cues influence JOLs under these conditions. Participants completed retrieval practice for word pairs with either short or long lags between practice trials until items were correctly recalled 1, 3, 6, or 9 times. After the criterion trial for an item, participants judged the likelihood of recalling that item on the final test 1 week later. JOLs showed correct directional sensitivity to criterion level, with both final test performance and JOLs increasing as criterion level increased. However, JOLs showed incorrect directional sensitivity to lag, with greater performance but lower JOLs for longer versus shorter lags. Additionally, results indicated that retrieval fluency and metacognitive beliefs about criterion level--but not lag--influenced JOLs.     

Temporal order: The effect of single versus repeated presentations,practice, and verbal feedback

Whereas Hirsh and Sherrick (1961) found that experienced Os could judge correctly the temporal order of a sound and a light presented repeatedly when the interval separating them was 20 msec, Hirsh and Fraisse (1964) found that naive Os required about 60 msec for the same accuracy of performance with single presentations of the same pair. This experiment examined the effects of single vs repeated presentations, practice, and verbal feedback on performance in the judgment of temporal order. The results indicate that performance under repeated presentation is significantly better than under single presentation, that learning effects are most pronounced during the first 4 of 16 sessions, and that the effects of feedback appear to depend on the precise wording given the S on how he is to perform.