A further investigation regarding the efficacy of and preference for positive and corrective feedback

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Erik S. Godinez, Denys Brand, Caio F. Miguel, Becky Penrod
{"title":"A further investigation regarding the efficacy of and preference for positive and corrective feedback","authors":"Erik S. Godinez,&nbsp;Denys Brand,&nbsp;Caio F. Miguel,&nbsp;Becky Penrod","doi":"10.1002/jaba.1096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Although feedback is a widely used intervention for improving performance, it is unclear what characteristics individuals prefer and what is necessary for it to be effective. The purpose of this study was to systematically extend Simonian and Brand (2022) by addressing the limitations of the study and adding a best-treatment phase. During an acquisition phase, participants received either positive, corrective, or no feedback upon task completion. Nine of 10 participants mastered the task that was associated with corrective feedback, and one participant mastered the task with no feedback. Eight participants completed a preference phase in which they were provided a choice of either positive or corrective feedback when learning to play a novel game. Half of the eight participants showed a preference for corrective feedback, and the remaining participants had mixed preferences. Overall, corrective feedback was more efficacious and more preferred than positive feedback.</p>","PeriodicalId":14983,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied behavior analysis","volume":"57 4","pages":"1070-1081"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of applied behavior analysis","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jaba.1096","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although feedback is a widely used intervention for improving performance, it is unclear what characteristics individuals prefer and what is necessary for it to be effective. The purpose of this study was to systematically extend Simonian and Brand (2022) by addressing the limitations of the study and adding a best-treatment phase. During an acquisition phase, participants received either positive, corrective, or no feedback upon task completion. Nine of 10 participants mastered the task that was associated with corrective feedback, and one participant mastered the task with no feedback. Eight participants completed a preference phase in which they were provided a choice of either positive or corrective feedback when learning to play a novel game. Half of the eight participants showed a preference for corrective feedback, and the remaining participants had mixed preferences. Overall, corrective feedback was more efficacious and more preferred than positive feedback.

进一步调查积极反馈和纠正反馈的效果和偏好。
虽然反馈是一种被广泛使用的提高绩效的干预措施,但目前还不清楚个人更喜欢什么特征,以及反馈有效的必要条件是什么。本研究的目的是系统地扩展 Simonian 和 Brand(2022 年)的研究,解决研究的局限性,并增加一个最佳治疗阶段。在习得阶段,参与者在完成任务后会收到积极、纠正或无反馈。10 名参与者中有 9 人掌握了与纠正反馈相关的任务,1 人掌握了无反馈的任务。八名参与者完成了偏好阶段,在这一阶段,他们在学习玩新奇游戏时可以选择积极或纠正反馈。八名参与者中有一半倾向于纠正性反馈,其余的参与者则喜忧参半。总体而言,纠正性反馈比正面反馈更有效,也更受青睐。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of applied behavior analysis
Journal of applied behavior analysis PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
20.70%
发文量
61
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信