Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes

IF 5.1 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2025-02-23 DOI:10.1111/jcal.13112

Ute Mertens, Marlit A. Lindner

{"title":"Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes","authors":"Ute Mertens, Marlit A. Lindner","doi":"10.1111/jcal.13112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Educational assessments increasingly shift towards computer-based formats. Many studies have explored how different types of automated feedback affect learning. However, few studies have investigated how digital performance feedback affects test takers' ratings of affective-motivational reactions during a testing session.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>In this within-subject experiment, 97 university students completed a multiple-choice treatment test including 36 challenging fact-based science tasks (biology, chemistry, and physics). The test items were presented with different types of computer-based feedback (i.e., <i>elaborated feedback</i> [EF] and multiple-try feedback, i.e., <i>Answer-Until-Correct</i> [AUC]) and compared to a no-feedback control condition. Outcome measures were students' self-reported affective-motivational responses and their performance in the treatment and in a recall posttest.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Feedback positively affected performance. EF enhanced students' recall performance in a posttest more than AUC feedback. Yet, error correction, as measured by the number of corrected responses in the posttest, did not differ between the two feedback conditions. Regarding affective-motivational outcomes, both EF and AUC feedback affected students similarly and were more beneficial than no feedback. This effect was further moderated by the item-level response correctness. Following correct responses, the affective-motivational impact of feedback was substantial and positive. In contrast to earlier findings, automated feedback did not have detrimental affective-motivational effects after incorrect responses. Although the emotional benefit of AUC and EF feedback was reduced after incorrect responses, students' affect remained more positive compared to when they received no feedback.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Feedback effects on emotions and motivation varied by feedback type and the correctness of test-takers' responses.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.13112","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.13112","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Educational assessments increasingly shift towards computer-based formats. Many studies have explored how different types of automated feedback affect learning. However, few studies have investigated how digital performance feedback affects test takers' ratings of affective-motivational reactions during a testing session.

Method

In this within-subject experiment, 97 university students completed a multiple-choice treatment test including 36 challenging fact-based science tasks (biology, chemistry, and physics). The test items were presented with different types of computer-based feedback (i.e., elaborated feedback [EF] and multiple-try feedback, i.e., Answer-Until-Correct [AUC]) and compared to a no-feedback control condition. Outcome measures were students' self-reported affective-motivational responses and their performance in the treatment and in a recall posttest.

Results

Feedback positively affected performance. EF enhanced students' recall performance in a posttest more than AUC feedback. Yet, error correction, as measured by the number of corrected responses in the posttest, did not differ between the two feedback conditions. Regarding affective-motivational outcomes, both EF and AUC feedback affected students similarly and were more beneficial than no feedback. This effect was further moderated by the item-level response correctness. Following correct responses, the affective-motivational impact of feedback was substantial and positive. In contrast to earlier findings, automated feedback did not have detrimental affective-motivational effects after incorrect responses. Although the emotional benefit of AUC and EF feedback was reduced after incorrect responses, students' affect remained more positive compared to when they received no feedback.

Conclusion

Feedback effects on emotions and motivation varied by feedback type and the correctness of test-takers' responses.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于计算机的答案直到正确和详细的反馈：对情感动机和绩效结果的影响

教育评估日益转向以计算机为基础的形式。许多研究探索了不同类型的自动反馈如何影响学习。然而，很少有研究调查数字表现反馈如何影响测试期间考生对情感动机反应的评分。方法在本实验中，97名大学生完成了包括36个具有挑战性的基于事实的科学任务（生物、化学和物理）的多项选择题处理测试。测试项目被提供了不同类型的基于计算机的反馈（即详细反馈[EF]和多次尝试反馈，即回答-直到正确[AUC]），并与无反馈控制条件进行比较。结果测量是学生自我报告的情感动机反应，以及他们在治疗和回忆后测中的表现。结果反馈对成绩有积极影响。EF比AUC反馈更能提高学生在后测中的回忆表现。然而，在两种反馈条件下，通过后测中纠正的回答数量来衡量的纠错量并没有差异。在情感动机结果方面，EF和AUC反馈对学生的影响相似，并且比没有反馈更有益。项目级反应正确性进一步缓和了这一效应。在正确的回答之后，反馈的情感动机影响是实质性的和积极的。与早期的研究结果相反，在错误的回答后，自动反馈并没有产生有害的情感动机效应。虽然在错误的回答后，AUC和EF反馈的情绪收益降低，但学生的情绪仍比没有反馈时更积极。结论反馈对情绪和动机的影响因反馈类型和考生回答的正确性而异。

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 Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

6.00%

发文量

116

期刊介绍： The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope