Factors influencing responsiveness to feedback: On the interplay between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes.
Open accessAbstract
Self-appraisal has repeatedly been shown to be inadequate as a mechanism for performance improvement. This has placed greater emphasis on understanding the processes through which self-perception and external feedback interact to influence professional development. As feedback is inevitably interpreted through the lens of one's self-perceptions it is important to understand how learners interpret, accept, and use feedback (or not) and the factors that influence those interpretations. 134 participants from 8 health professional training/continuing competence programs were recruited to participate in focus groups. Analyses were designed to (a) elicit understandings of the processes used by learners and physicians to interpret, accept and use (or not) data to inform their perceptions of their clinical performance, and (b) further understand the factors (internal and external) believed to influence interpretation of feedback. Multiple influences appear to impact upon the interpretation and uptake of feedback. These include confidence, experience, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable. Importantly, however, each could have a paradoxical effect of both increasing and decreasing receptivity. Less prevalent but nonetheless important themes suggested mechanisms through which cognitive reasoning processes might impede growth from formative feedback. Many studies have examined the effectiveness of feedback through variable interventions focused on feedback delivery. This study suggests that it is equally important to consider feedback from the perspective of how it is received. The interplay observed between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes reinforces the notion that there is no simple recipe for the delivery of effective feedback. These factors should be taken into account when trying to understand (a) why self-appraisal can be flawed, (b) why appropriate external feedback is vital (yet can be ineffective), and (c) why we may need to disentangle the goals of performance improvement from the goals of improving self-assessment.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This qualitative focus-group study explores how learners and physicians interpret, accept, and use external feedback, emphasizing that confidence, experience, fear of appearing unknowledgeable, and cognitive reasoning processes interact to shape receptivity. It concludes there is no simple recipe for effective feedback delivery because feedback is always filtered through the recipient’s self-perceptions.
Key findings
- Across 134 participants in 17 focus groups—53 undergraduate learners, 32 postgraduate learners, and 49 physicians—multiple influences affected feedback interpretation and uptake, including confidence, experience, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable; each could paradoxically both increase and decrease receptivity.
- Experience, especially the number of cases seen, was directly linked to confidence, but confidence was fragile and could enable learners to seek/accept corrective feedback while also guarding them against critical feedback; fear of “looking stupid” was described as motivational.
- Uptake depended on perceived credibility of the feedback source, including whether the source had observed performance, understood the recipient’s role, and acted from beneficence/non-maleficence; solo practice was noted as limiting access to collegial feedback.
- Participants’ comments suggested hot cognition (emotion, self-serving bias) and cold cognition (confirmation bias, memory/attention limits) can bias interpretation; they tended to infer ability from how often they had experienced a case/task, with little mention of the quality of those experiences, and some trusted positive outcomes while discounting negative ones.
Methods
- Qualitative focus-group study nested in a larger 5-country study; purposive sampling recruited learners and physicians from 8 health professional training/continuing competence programs: 3 undergraduate (midwifery and MD), 2 postgraduate medical residency, and 3 practicing physician (family physicians and internists) programs.
- Conducted 2 focus groups for 7 programs and 3 for the 8th; groups were about 1.5 h, recorded and transcribed, semi-structured, with open-ended questions on self-assessment and formal reflective activities.
- Analysis was iterative and team-based: initial coding structure, independent open coding, comparison through teleconference/email, at least five team members analyzing each transcript, constant comparison, face-to-face and two-day meetings, and construction of a preliminary conceptual diagram; this paper reports a more detailed analysis of data on use/non-use of external feedback.
Limitations
- The paper states that studying self-judgment by asking participants to discuss their knowledge/performance is counter-intuitive, but argues the results reinforce the need to study these issues this way.
- The paper states that researchers themselves are prone to interpretation biases, especially confirmation bias, and aimed to minimize this by having multiple team members independently generate themes; it also draws confidence from unanticipated themes and alignment with independent social psychology literature.
- The text makes evident, and the paper acknowledges, that the methodology does not allow assessment of the accuracy of participants’ interpretations or the prevalence of actual bias; the research design did not allow assessment of the accuracy of participants’ statements.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 13 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingown data
Less prevalent but nonetheless important themes suggested mechanisms through which cognitive reasoning processes might impede growth from formative feedback.
“Less prevalent but nonetheless important themes suggested mechanisms through which cognitive reasoning processes might impede growth from formative feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Learners described trying to assess their competence in challenging situations in relation to the risk to the patient and the ramifications of appearing incompetent to others if they called for help.
“They described trying to assess their competence in these challenging situations vis-a-vis the risk to the patient and the ramifications of appearing incompetent to others if they called for help.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Multiple influences appear to impact upon the interpretation and uptake of feedback.
“Multiple influences appear to impact upon the interpretation and uptake of feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Experience was treated as a fundamental determinant of whether or not one is able to perform certain tasks.
“Experience was treated as a fundamental determinant of whether or not one is able to perform certain tasks.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Confidence gets in the way because people think they have to project it.
“The dominant influence appeared to be confidence, which allows one to hear potentially threatening appraisals but also gets in the way because people think they have to project it.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data
Some participants were cognizant that confidence alone could be an unreliable indicator of ability.
“Some participants were cognizant that confidence alone could be an unreliable indicator of ability.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Participants noted the emotional nature of seeking/receiving feedback.
“In terms of hot cognition, participants noted the emotional nature of seeking/receiving feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participants' responses suggested a paradox: one needed to achieve a particular level of comfort, experience, and confidence prior to being prepared to ask for or receive corrective feedback.
“In fact, participants’ responses suggested a paradox in that one needed to achieve a particular level of comfort, experience, and confidence prior to being prepared to ask for or receive corrective feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Student participants discounted feedback provided by supervisors and others if they had not actually observed their performance.
“Student participants discounted feedback provided by supervisors and others if they had not actually observed their performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participants' statements indicated requiring confidence prior to being prepared to receive feedback.
“(1) participants’ statements about requiring confidence prior to being prepared to receive feedback”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
When conflict arises between external data and one's own self-appraisal, attempts to reconcile the dissonance are variable and complex.
“Through all this it was clear that, when conflict arises between external data and one’s own self-appraisal, attempts to reconcile the dissonance are variable and complex.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Confidence in one's abilities, both in terms of its fragility and participants' desire for it, was a major theme when considering both trainees' and physicians' statements regarding the role of feedback.
“Indeed, confidence in one’s abilities, both in terms of its fragility and participants’ desire for it was a major theme when considering both trainees’ and physicians’ statements regarding the role of feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Physicians indicated a need to get over the feeling of shock before the information could be utilized.
“They further indicated a need to get over that feeling before the information could be utilized.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
Participants valued feedback mechanisms that maintained confidence.
“Importantly, however, confidence was fragile and participants valued feedback mechanisms that maintained confidence in a way that is reminiscent of the self-efficacy literature’s demonstration of the value of positive feedback (Bandura 1997; Teunissen et al. 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
Experience (the number of times doing an activity) was directly linked to developing a sense of confidence.
“Experience (i.e., the number of times doing an activity) was directly linked to developing a sense of confidence.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Wanting to develop and improve was balanced with fears of 'looking stupid.'
“Wanting to develop and improve was balanced with fears of “looking stupid,””
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Confidence allows one to hear potentially threatening appraisals.
“The dominant influence appeared to be confidence, which allows one to hear potentially threatening appraisals but also gets in the way because people think they have to project it.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
The dominant influence on interpretation of external feedback and its assimilation with self-perceptions appeared to be confidence.
“The dominant influence appeared to be confidence, which allows one to hear potentially threatening appraisals but also gets in the way because people think they have to project it.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
While participants wanted feedback from others, a number of statements implied that the desire could often be construed as wanting reassurance (as a source of confidence building rather than as a behaviour correction strategy).
“While participants clearly wanted feedback from others a number of statements implied that the desire could often be construed as wanting reassurance (i.e., as a source of confidence building rather than as a behaviour correction strategy).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Confidence was fragile.
“Importantly, however, confidence was fragile and participants valued feedback mechanisms that maintained confidence in a way that is reminiscent of the self-efficacy literature’s demonstration of the value of positive feedback (Bandura 1997; Teunissen et al. 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The likelihood of external information being utilized was thought to depend on the perceived credibility of the source.
“The likelihood of such external information being utilized was very clearly thought to depend on the perceived credibility of the source, another dominant theme in the data.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Emphasis was placed on the perceived accuracy of the feedback.
“Emphasis was placed on the perceived accuracy of the feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Many participants made overarching statements about their confidence in their experience and 'knowing enough.'
“many participants made overarching statements about their confidence in their experience and “knowing enough.””
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Respondents had reasons to doubt the veracity of the external feedback they received.
“Throughout this discussion it appeared that respondents had any number of reasons to doubt the veracity of the external feedback received”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Without experience, some participants indicated discomfort with collecting feedback and concern about the negative impact it could have on their self-efficacy.
“Without experience some participants indicated discomfort with collecting feedback and concern about the negative impact it could have on their self-efficacy.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
A dominant theme derived from participants' responses is that they tended to draw inferences about their ability from a count of how often they had experienced the specific case/task previously.
“A dominant theme derived from participants’ responses is that they tended to draw inferences about their ability from a count of how often they had experienced the specific case/task previously.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participant interviews suggested that cold cognition (limitations of memory/attention) is also involved.
“Indeed, participant interviews suggested that cold cognition (i.e., limitations of memory/attention) is also involved.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Participants' statements indicated a tendency to broadly attribute negative events to external factors like 'headaches' and 'other circumstances.'
“as seemed to be demonstrated by the few participants whose statements indicated a tendency to broadly attribute negative events to external factors like “headaches” and “other circumstances”.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Many instances of both positive and negative feedback were discounted by virtue of being perceived as non-credible.
“we saw many instances of both positive and negative feedback being discounted by virtue of it being perceived as non-credible.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Many participant comments make it clear that feedback is generally desired.
“Indeed, many participant comments make it clear that feedback is generally desired”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
The observed interplay between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes reinforces the notion that there is no simple recipe for the delivery of effective feedback.
“The interplay observed between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes reinforces the notion that there is no simple recipe for the delivery of effective feedback.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation
The extent to which feedback is deemed valuable is dependent, in part, on the degree to which the feedback can be reconciled with one's self-assessments.
“the extent to which feedback is deemed valuable is dependent, in part, on the degree to which the feedback can be reconciled with one’s self-assessments (Sargeant et al. 2008).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Sargeant et al. 2008 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Premisecitation
Any feedback that is delivered will be interpreted through the filters with which the receiver views the world of practice, the feedback provider, and his/her own abilities.
“any feedback that is delivered will be interpreted through the filters with which the receiver views the world of practice, the feedback provider, and his/her own abilities.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked - Interpretationreasoning
Receivers/seekers of feedback were in a vulnerable position with respect to losing patients, harming patients, or losing face with peers, supervisors, trainees, or oneself.
“giving a general sense that receivers/seekers of feedback were in a vulnerable position either with respect to losing patients, harming patients, or losing face with peers, supervisors, trainees, or oneself.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Participants' statements revealed potentially biased reasoning about their own performance.
“In other instances, the doubt indicated by participants’ statements revealed potentially biased reasoning.”
- Also stated in: § Mechanisms guiding (and potentially biasing) interpretation of external feedback · hedged
“their choice of words were sometimes suggestive of ways in which reasoning about one’s own performance could be led astray.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Mechanisms guiding (and potentially biasing) interpretation of external feedback · hedged
- Interpretationown data
Considering the recipient's interpretation of feedback is necessary if one hopes to alter the focal behaviour.
“thus reinforcing the notion that one must consider the recipient’s interpretation of the feedback conveyed if one hopes to alter the focal behaviour.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Participants' statements were reminiscent of the human tendency to attribute negative outcomes to situational factors while attributing positive outcomes to one's own skill.
“Adding to the potential for bias were statements reminiscent of the tendency humans have to attribute negative outcomes to situational (external) factors while attributing positive outcomes to one’s own skill.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Confidence may lessen the extent to which external feedback inconsistent with one's self-appraisals is deemed credible.
“Additionally, that same confidence may lessen the extent to which external feedback that is inconsistent with one’s self-appraisals is deemed credible.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Most studies of the influence of feedback on performance have focused upon strategies through which feedback can be delivered.
“Most studies of the influence of feedback on performance have focused upon strategies through which feedback can be delivered (Shute 2008).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Shute 2008 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationown data
One is likely to be more open to feedback within the context of an established environment of trust in which the feedback provider presents from a position of beneficence and non-maleficence.
“(2) the notion that one is likely to be more open to feedback within the context of an established environment of trust in which the feedback provider presents from a position of beneficence and non-maleficence”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Experience, confidence, fear, and biases inherent in cognitive reasoning processes can impact upon one's response to feedback (for better or worse) regardless of which strategy is used.
“That experience, confidence, fear, and biases inherent in cognitive reasoning processes can impact upon one’s response to feedback (for better or worse) regardless of which strategy is used leads us to believe it is equally if not more important to consider how feedback is received and data are interpreted.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Participants' statements suggested they remained of the opinion that at some fundamental level they were able to judge for themselves whether or not they are fit to practice in specific situations.
“These statements suggested that they remained of the opinion that at some fundamental level they were able to judge for themselves whether or not they are fit to practice in specific situations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Receiving feedback is not an emotionally neutral task.
“That receiving feedback is not an emotionally neutral task requires us to consider the psychological immune system”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Feedback appears most likely to be perceived as worthy of attention and action when delivered from a clear position of beneficence that allows the learner to maintain their self-concept.
“Feedback appears most likely to be perceived as worthy of attention and action when delivered from a clear position of beneficence that allows the learner to maintain their self-concept.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The psychological immune system (cognitive mechanisms that protect the subject from negative emotions) is one reason participants' stated desire for feedback may translate into feedback not being sought (avoidance) or not being recognized as valuable when available (discounting).
“as described by Gilbert and Wilson (2000), as one of the reasons whereby participants’ stated desire for feedback may still, in some circumstances, translate into feedback not being sought (i.e., avoidance) or in its not being recognized as valuable when it is available (i.e., discounting).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Gilbert and Wilson (2000)
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning
Accurate self-assessment may not be the causal path to performance improvement.
“as the latter may not be the causal path to the former.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
How feedback is perceived and discussed will determine how feedback is interpreted and adopted.
“How feedback is perceived and discussed will determine how feedback is interpreted and adopted (Hattie and Timperley 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hattie and Timperley 2007 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning
Cognitive tendencies identified in many other domains as biasing our reasoning in a personally adaptive manner must be considered in determining how feedback is used/interpreted.
“Rather, it simply points out that the cognitive tendencies that have been readily identified in many other domains as biasing our reasoning in a personally adaptive manner must be considered in determining how feedback is used/interpreted.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The interplay between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes appears to create a complex mixture that reinforces the notion that there is no simple recipe for the delivery of feedback.
“By way of summary, the interplay between fear (of looking stupid or of negative feedback), confidence (as derived from experience and influencing one’s willingness to seek/accept feedback), and reasoning processes (with their emotional and analytic aspects of hot and cold cognition, respectively) appears to create a complex mixture that reinforces the notion that there is no simple recipe for the”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Removing the emotion from the situation is unlikely to completely overcome the difficulties inherent in incorporating feedback.
“Removing the emotion from the situation, however, is unlikely to completely overcome the difficulties inherent in incorporating feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- May combine two claims. 21
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 30
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataEach of confidence, experience, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable could have a paradoxical effect of both increasing and decreasing receptivity to feedback.
“Importantly, however, each could have a paradoxical effect of both increasing and decreasing receptivity.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataParticipants' interpretations of external feedback, both formal and informal, fell into several categories: (1) the interplay between experience, confidence, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable; (2) influences upon accessing, interpreting and using feedback; and (3) mechanisms guiding (and potentially biasing) interpretation of external feedback.
“The ways in which participants interpreted external feedback, both formal and informal, fell into several categories. We discuss these as (1) the interplay between experience, confidence, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable; (2) influences upon accessing, interpreting and using feedback; and (3) mechanisms guiding (and potentially biasing) interpretation of external feedback.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataSome participants argued that lack of humility (the willingness to disclose one's limitations) is a fundamental problem with some individuals' practice.
“Some argued that lack of humility (i.e., the willingness to disclose one’s limitations) is a fundamental problem with some individuals’ practice.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataExperience alone seemed to contribute to confidence and a sense of comfort.
“That is, experience alone seemed to contribute to confidence and a sense of comfort.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataConfidence, experience, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable are influences on the interpretation and uptake of feedback.
“These include confidence, experience, and fear of not appearing knowledgeable.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataThere remain fundamental differences of opinion across all groups with respect to how much learners and physicians should disclose to their patients, their colleagues, or themselves about their limitations.
“there remain fundamental differences of opinion across all groups with respect to how much learners and physicians should disclose to their patients, their colleagues, or themselves about their limitations.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
Findingown dataBoth the absolute number of cases one has seen and the occurrence of specific experiences were thought to play a guiding role.
“Both the absolute number of cases one has seen and the occurrence of specific experiences were thought to play a guiding role.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataLittle was mentioned in terms of the quality of either the experience or of the information gained from these experiences.
“However, little was mentioned in terms of the quality of either the experience or of the information gained from these experiences.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataFor learners, experience was generally viewed positively, was desired, and generally led to increased confidence.
“For learners, experience was generally viewed positively, was desired, and generally led to increased confidence.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).
Findingown dataOther participants argued that one should not disclose lack of knowledge to patients because desirable features of practice include independence and the projection of confidence.
“Others argued that one should not disclose this lack of knowledge to patients as desirable features of practice to be strived for include independence and the projection of confidence.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataPhysicians were susceptible to fear of not appearing knowledgeable and suggested that the fear of appearing not to know is a motivational factor.
“physicians too were susceptible to fear of not appearing knowledgeable and suggested that the fear of appearing not to know is a motivational factor”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataParticipants did not value confidence at all costs; many spoke of the risk of becoming over-confident and described how one's confidence needs to be informed by honest and humble self-appraisals.
“That is not to say that participants valued confidence at all costs as many did speak of the risk of becoming over-confident and described how one’s confidence needs to be informed by honest and humble self-appraisals of how they are doing”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataSome noted that the lack of opportunity to readily engage in collegial interactions creates difficulty in solo practice and limits access to external feedback.
“Some noted that the lack of opportunity to readily engage in collegial interactions creates difficulty “when you are in … solo practice” [Physician K7] and limits access to external feedback.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataA number of physicians spoke of the need to be shaken out of a prior belief and used emotionally-tied words like "shock" to express the feeling that first arises when discovering that there was a weakness in their performance.
“A number of physicians spoke of the need to be shaken out of a prior belief and used emotionally-tied words like “shock” to express the feeling that first arises when discovering that there was a weakness in their performance.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataConfidence and experience appeared to work in two ways: by enabling participants to ask for and accept feedback and, for some, guarding them against feedback that might be critical in nature.
“That is, confidence and experience appeared to work in two ways: By enabling participants to ask for and accept feedback and, for some, guarding them against feedback that might be critical in nature.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Findingown dataSome participants expressed views suggesting a tendency to trust positive outcomes/feedback while discounting negative ones.
“some expressed views that suggested a tendency to trust positive outcomes/feedback while discounting negative ones”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataConfidence appeared tenuous, and loss of confidence in response to particular events is something that needs to be overcome.
“Yet, confidence appeared tenuous and participants’ comments also made it clear that loss of confidence in response to particular events is something that needs to be overcome.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown data'Shock' is a common initial response to feedback that one must try deliberately to overcome to avoid shrinking away from tasks or situations in which performance was sub-optimal.
“(3) the “shock” described as a common initial response that one must try deliberately to overcome to avoid shrinking away from tasks or situations in which performance was sub-optimal.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataFamily physicians commented on critical consultants who did not understand the family physician's role and patients who lacked the medical knowledge or insight required to objectively judge care.
“Family physicians likewise commented on critical consultants who did not understand the family physician’s role and patients who lacked the medical knowledge or insight required to objectively judge care.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe need to believe that feedback was delivered from a position of beneficence and non-maleficence was equally important, and that belief often developed as a result of strong relationships between the feedback deliverer and recipient.
“Equally important was the need to believe that the feedback was delivered from a position of beneficence and non-maleficence, that belief often developing as a result of strong relationships being established between the feedback deliverer and recipient.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataNoticeable by its absence was indication of the quality of those experiences in terms of what information was provided or what was actually learned.
“That would seem appropriate, but noticeable by its absence was indication of the quality of those experiences in terms of what information was provided or what was actually learned.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe problem is often that feedback is simply unavailable or truly of insufficient quality.
“and that the problem is often that feedback is simply unavailable or truly of insufficient quality.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductnone givenAt least five team members analyzed each transcript and participated in continually informing the coding structure and its revision.
“At least five team members analyzed each transcript and participated in this process, continually informing the coding structure and its revision.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationAccurate external feedback is crucial if one hopes to facilitate improvement.
“The general conclusion from all of this effort is that accurate external feedback is crucial if one hopes to facilitate improvement (Sargeant et al. 2010).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Sargeant et al. 2010
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductcitationHigh levels of team member engagement and interaction through all stages of analysis enhanced the rigour of the analysis.
“High levels of team member engagement and interaction through all stages of analysis enhanced its rigour (Liamputtong and Ezzy 2005) as did the collaboration of team members from a variety of backgrounds.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Liamputtong and Ezzy 2005
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataThemes were initially determined independently by open-coding transcripts and then comparing interpretations through group discussions.
“We determined themes initially independently by open-coding transcripts and then comparing interpretations through group discussions conducted by teleconference and email.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationPerformance gains often occur without altering individuals' self-perceptions; the two become aligned because performance increases to meet perceptions.
“performance gains often occur without altering individuals’ self-perceptions, the two becoming aligned because performance increases to meet perceptions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Kruger and Dunning’s (1999) source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenDifferences in interpretation were resolved through discussion and re-examining transcripts and coded data.
“We resolved differences in interpretation through discussion and re-examining transcripts and coded data.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown dataThe analysis was conducted iteratively as a team.
“We conducted the analysis iteratively as a team.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductnone givenThe methodology used in this study does not allow a statement to be made regarding the accuracy of the participants' interpretations or the prevalence of actual 'bias.'
“The methodology used in this study does not allow a statement to be made regarding the accuracy of the participants’ interpretations or the prevalence of actual “bias.””
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningIt is equally if not more important to consider how feedback is received and data are interpreted.
“it is equally if not more important to consider how feedback is received and data are interpreted.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationown dataTrusting positive feedback while discounting negative feedback can potentially increase confidence by not accounting for the fact that positive outcomes can arise by chance just as readily as negative outcomes.
“thereby potentially increasing confidence by not accounting for the fact that positive outcomes can arise by chance just as readily as can negative outcomes.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Positive outcomes can arise by chance just as readily as negative outcomes.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationResearchers in social psychology have identified two broad classes of influences sometimes described as 'hot cognition' and 'cold cognition.'
“Growing out of the classic work of Tversky and Kahneman (1974), researchers in this field have identified two broad classes of influences sometimes described as “hot cognition” and “cold cognition” (Gilovich 1991).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Tversky and Kahneman (1974) source
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Gilovich 1991
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningEducators may be best served by separating the goal of performance improvement from the goal of accurate self-assessment.
“This further suggests that we, as educators, may be best served by separating the goal of performance improvement from the goal of accurate self-assessment”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningAny effort to improve performance and overcome reliance on often flawed personal judgments must be considered in the context of what receivers believe provides important guidance regarding the credibility of that feedback.
“As such, any effort to improve performance and overcome reliance on often flawed personal judgments must be considered in the context of what receivers believe provides important guidance regarding the credibility of that feedback.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Feedback is never provided in a vacuum.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningIf one hopes to convey feedback that is perceived as credible, an effort must be made to tailor feedback in a manner that will be interpretable and palatable through the lens of the recipient's perceptions.
“If one hopes to convey feedback that is perceived as credible an effort must be made to tailor feedback in a manner that will be interpretable and palatable through the lens of the recipient’s perceptions.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
PremisecitationThe adaptive nature of positive self-efficacy makes it such that in many circumstances we are better off maintaining a positive outlook regarding our own abilities.
“The argument laid out above, however, is meant to highlight that the adaptive nature of positive self-efficacy (Dweck 1999) makes it such that in many circumstances we are better off maintaining a positive outlook regarding our own abilities.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Dweck 1999
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataExperience determines confidence, which becomes a double-edged sword.
“That experience determines confidence, therefore, becomes a double-edged sword.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningFeedback providers must learn to take into account the self-perceptions of the individual being assessed.
“While most teaching around feedback focuses on delivery, feedback providers must learn to take into account the self-perceptions of the individual being assessed.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
Interpretationown dataThe results of this study reinforce the need to study these issues in this way.
“The results of this study, however, reinforce the need to study these issues in this way.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).
Study design and conductreasoningA variety of methodologies have yielded similar conclusions across disparate domains, providing evidence of triangulation.
“That a variety of methodologies have yielded similar conclusions across disparate domains can be seen as providing evidence of triangulation”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
Study design and conductreasoningThe triangulation strengthens claims that the results are meaningful and add to our understanding of how some basic psychological issues may impact upon professional self-regulation.
“thus strengthening claims that the results are meaningful and add to our understanding of how some basic psychological issues may impact upon professional self-regulation.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenThe researchers themselves are prone to biases in their interpretation of participant responses, with the tendency to confirm one's preconceptions being an obvious concern.
“A greater limitation of the research reported here is that the researchers themselves are prone to biases in their interpretation of participant responses, the tendency to confirm one’s preconceptions providing one obvious concern.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataAs experience accumulates, one gains both confidence and a greater capacity to discount corrective feedback as a result of having a greater personal database of cases on which to draw as 'evidence' that the skill has been achieved and that the source of the feedback must be biased or misinformed.
“As experience accumulates, however, one gains both confidence and a greater capacity to discount corrective feedback as a result of having a greater personal database of cases on which to draw as “evidence” that the skill has been achieved and that the source of the feedback (be it a person or a test or some other dataset) must be biased in some way or misinformed about the receiver’s abilities.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductreasoningThe researchers aimed to minimize this problem by having multiple team members read the transcripts and independently generate themes/ideas rather than relying on the perceptions of one individual.
“We aimed to minimize this problem by having multiple team members read the transcripts and independently generate themes/ideas rather than relying on the perceptions of one individual.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
Interpretationown dataThe interviews and theoretical perspective help us understand the complex variety of ways in which feedback, when received, can be interpreted in ways that can lead to it falling on deaf ears despite the best intentions of all involved.
“Rather, the interviews and this theoretical perspective merely help us to understand the complex variety of ways in which feedback, when received, can be interpreted in ways that can lead to it falling on deaf ears despite the best intentions of all involved.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationPrevious work in both clinical and lay domains has suggested that, when left to our own devices, we judge ourselves to have achieved proficiency when the rate at which we are learning from additional experiences declines rather than judging proficiency based on the actual level of performance achieved.
“Previous work in both clinical and lay domains has suggested that, when left to our own devices, we judge ourselves to have achieved proficiency when the rate at which we are learning from additional experiences declines (i.e., rather than judging proficiency based on the actual level of performance achieved; Eva 2009).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Eva 2009 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductown dataMany of the themes identified were not anticipated to present themselves in this dataset.
“At the same time, we draw confidence from the fact that many of the themes identified were not anticipated to present themselves in this dataset.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Focus group participants’ retrospective reports accurately reflect the processes they use to interpret, accept, and use external feedback.
“The data analyzed to address these issues were collected as part of a larger qualitative study that took place across 5 countries using focus groups aimed at determining participants’ perceptions of a variety of formal reflective activities (Sargeant et al. 2010).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The factors influencing interpretation and uptake of feedback identified in this sample are relevant to health professional learners and physicians beyond the study participants.
“Multiple influences appear to impact upon the interpretation and uptake of feedback.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Positive outcomes can arise by chance just as readily as negative outcomes.
“positive outcomes can arise by chance just as readily as can negative outcomes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Feedback is never provided in a vacuum.
“Feedback is never provided in a vacuum.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Invested, credible supervisors and a supportive, open culture are integral to positive learning and coaching in medicine and education.
“Invested, credible supervisors 2,4-7 and a supportive, open culture [33][34][35][36] are integral to positive learning and coaching in medicine 8 and education.16,19”
From The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use? (2018) · cites this paper as [8]
Feedback needs to be tailored to the trainee's perceptions.
“Feedback needs to be tailored to the trainee’s perceptions [2].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [2]
The impact of formative feedback depends on the strength of the trainee's desire to improve and their confidence in their ability to do so.
“The impact of formative feedback will depend on the strength of the trainee’s desire to improve and their confidence in their ability to do so [2].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [2]
The interpretation and acceptance of feedback is influenced by a complex interplay of emotions, including confidence and fear.
“Eva showed that the interpretation and acceptance of feedback was influenced by a complex interplay of emotions, including confidence and fear, and highlighted the importance of allowing the learner to maintain their self-concept when delivering feedback [2].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [2]
Cites
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835 · see citing works
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810 · see citing works
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650 · see citing works
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905 · see citing works
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121 · Cited by 7,731 · see citing works
Shute, V. J. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307313795 · Cited by 4,631 · see citing works
(2021) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781788976954.00014 · Cited by 4,030 · see citing works
Ericsson, K. A. (2004) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200410001-00022 · Cited by 2,988 · see citing works
Davis, D. A., Mazmanian, P. E., Fordis, M., Van Harrison, R., Thorpe, K. E., & Perrier, L. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.296.9.1094 · Cited by 2,375 · see citing works
Flawed Self-Assessment: Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace
Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x · Cited by 1,865 · see citing works
An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters
Makoul, G. T., & Clayman, M. L. (2005) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.010 · Cited by 1,639 · see citing works
Feeling and thinking: the role of affect in social cognition
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-5959 · Cited by 1,387 · see citing works
Proctor, R. W., & Capaldi, E. J. (2006) · doi:10.1002/9780470773994.ch8 · Cited by 1,014 · see citing works
How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life
Gilovich, T. D. (1991) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,005 · see citing works
Self-Assessment in the Health Professions: A Reformulation and Research Agenda
Eva, K. W., & Regehr, G. (2005) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200510001-00015 · Cited by 992 · see citing works
Self-citationRelationship-centered Care. A Constructive Reframing
Beach, M. C., & Inui, T. S. (2006) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00302.x · Cited by 714 · see citing works
Test-enhanced learning in medical education
Larsen, D. P., Butler, A. C., & Roediger III, H. L. (2008) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03124.x · Cited by 610 · see citing works
On Grief and Grieving: Finding the Meaning of Grief through the Five Stages of Loss
Sogie-Thomas, B. (2006) · Journal of the National Medical Association · Cited by 555 · see citing works
Gopher, D., & Koriat, A. (1999) · Cited by 550 · see citing works
Continuing Medical Education and the Physician as a Learner
Mazmanian, P. E., & Davis, D. A. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.9.1057 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
“I'll never play professional football” and other fallacies of self-assessment
Eva, K. W., & Regehr, G. (2008) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.150 · Cited by 452 · see citing works
Self-citationOn Grief and Grieving: Finding the Meaning of Grief Through the Five Stages of Loss
Kübler-Ross, E., & Kessler, D. R. (2005) · Cited by 442 · see citing works
Frequent Augmented Feedback Can Degrade Learning: Evidence and Interpretations
Schmidt, R. A. (1991) · Tutorials in Motor Neuroscience · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-3626-6_6 · Cited by 378 · see citing works
Assessing Our Own Competence: Heuristics and Illusions
Bjork, R. A. (1999) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1480.003.0023 · Cited by 340 · see citing works
The processes and dimensions of informed self-assessment: A conceptual model.
Sargeant, J., Armson, H., Chesluk, B., Dornan, T., Eva, K., Holmboe, E., Lockyer, J., Loney, E., Mann, K., & van der Vleuten, C. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181d85a4e · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Self-citationThe effect of testing on skills learning
Kromann, C. B., Jensen, M. L., & Ringsted, C. (2009) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03245.x · Cited by 315 · see citing works
Boud, D. J. (1999) · Social Work Education · doi:10.1080/02615479911220131 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
How residents learn: qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities
Teunissen, P. W., Scheele, F., Scherpbier, A. J. J. A., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Boor, K., van Luijk, S. J., & van Diemen-Steenvoorde, J. A. A. M. (2007) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02778.x · Cited by 298 · see citing works
Tutorials in Motor Neuroscience
Requin, J., & Stelmach, G. E. (1991) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-3626-6 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
An investigation of medical student reactions to feedback: a randomised controlled trial
Boehler, M. L., Rogers, D. A., Schwind, C. J., Mayforth, R. D., Quin, J. A., Williams, R. G., & Dunnington, G. L. (2006) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02503.x · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Learners’ choices and beliefs about self-testing
Kornell, N., & Son, L. K. (2009) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658210902832915 · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Kennedy, T. J. T., Regehr, G., Baker, G. R., & Lingard, L. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b128 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Roizen, M. F. (2008) · Yearbook of Anesthesiology and Pain Management · doi:10.1016/s1073-5437(08)70774-5 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
“Directed” self-assessment: Practice and feedback within a social context
Sargeant, J., Mann, K., van der Vleuten, C., & Metsemakers, J. (2008) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.155 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Self-citationKennedy, T. J. T., Regehr, G., Baker, G. R., & Lingard, L. A. (2009) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03382.x · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Feedback, the various tasks of the doctor, and the feedforward alternative
Kluger, A. N., & Van Dijk, D. (2010) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03849.x · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Caution--Praise Can Be Dangerous.
Dweck, C. S. (1999) · The American Educator · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Diagnostic error in medical education: where wrongs can make rights
Eva, K. W. (2009) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-009-9188-9 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Self-citationTo call or not to call: a judgement of risk by pre‐registration house officers
Stewart, J. (2008) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03123.x · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Eppich, W., & Cheng, A. (2015) · Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0000000000000072 · Cited by 1,106 · see citing works
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538 · Cited by 884 · see citing works
The “educational alliance” as a framework for reconceptualizing feedback in medical education.
Telio, S., Ajjawi, R., & Regehr, G. (2015) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000560 · Cited by 572 · see citing works
Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education.
Lefroy, J., Watling, C., Teunissen, P. W., & Brand, P. (2015) · Perspectives on Medical Education · doi:10.1007/s40037-015-0231-7 · Cited by 347 · see citing works
Sargeant, J., Lockyer, J., Mann, K., Holmboe, E., Silver, I., Armson, H., Driessen, E., MacLeod, T., Yen, W., Ross, K., et al. (2015) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000809 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
Self-citationFeedback for learners in medical education: What is known? A scoping review.
Bing-You, R., Hayes, V., Varaklis, K., Trowbridge, R., Kemp, H., & McKelvy, D. (2017) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001578 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Feedback and the educational alliance: Examining credibility judgements and their consequences.
Telio, S., Regehr, G., & Ajjawi, R. (2016) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.13063 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Student Perceptions of Assessment Feedback: A Critical Scoping Review and Call for Research
Van der Kleij, F. M., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2021) · Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-020-09331-x · Cited by 189 · see citing works
The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use?
Sargeant, J., Lockyer, J. M., Mann, K., Armson, H., Warren, A., Zetkulic, M., Soklaridis, S., Könings, K. D., Ross, K., Silver, I., et al. (2018) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002131 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Self-citationRamani, S., Post, S. E., Könings, K., Mann, K., Katz, J. T., & van der Vleuten, C. (2017) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2016.1244014 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Self-citationBuilding theories of knowledge translation interventions: Use the entire menu of constructs
Brehaut, J. C., & Eva, K. W. (2012) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-114 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Self-citationBowen, L., Marshall, M., & Murdoch-Eaton, D. (2017) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001632 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Understanding responses to feedback: the potential and limitations of regulatory focus theory
Watling, C., Driessen, E., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Vanstone, M., & Lingard, L. (2012) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04209.x · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Making sense of feedback experiences: a multi‐school study of medical students' narratives
Urquhart, L. M., Rees, C. E., & Ker, J. S. (2014) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12304 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Molloy, E., & Boud, D. (2013) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12116 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Garcia, I., James, R. W., Bischof, P., & Baroffio, A. (2017) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2017.1279056 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Bakke, B. M., Sheu, L., & Hauer, K. E. (2020) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003012 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Exploring how feedback reflects entrustment decisions using artificial intelligence
Gin, B. C., ten Cate, O., O'Sullivan, P. S., Hauer, K. E., & Boscardin, C. (2022) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.14696 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Feedback in the OSCE: What Do Residents Remember?
Humphrey-Murto, S., Mihok, M., Pugh, D., Touchie, C., Halman, S., & Wood, T. J. (2016) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2015.1107487 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Grades in formative workplace‐based assessment: a study of what works for whom and why
Lefroy, J., Hawarden, A., Gay, S. P., McKinley, R. K., & Cleland, J. (2015) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12659 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
How group coaching contributes to organisational understanding among newly graduated doctors
Malling, B., de Lasson, L., Just, E., & Stegeager, N. (2020) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02102-8 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Lu, F.-I., Takahashi, S. G., & Kerr, C. (2021) · Academic Pathology · doi:10.1177/23742895211013528 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Sharing is caring: Dealing with feedback and difficult feelings.
van der Leeuw, R. M. (2014) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12545 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Eva, K. W., Armson, H., Holmboe, E., Lockyer, J., Loney, E., Mann, K., & Sargeant, J.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- University of Calgary (CA)
- American Board of Internal Medicine (US)
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Eva, Kevin W.
- Venue
- Advances in Health Sciences Education
- Published
- 2011-04-06
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15-26
- ISSN
- 1382-4996 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1677
- PMC
- PMC3274671
- OpenAlex
- W2022212199
- Cited by
- 402
- References
- 39
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 16.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Advances in Health Sciences Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Keywords
- feedback acceptance, formative feedback, self-assessment, self-confidence, feedback interpretation, professional development, health professions education, continuing competence, feedback delivery
- MeSH terms
- Fear, Feedback, Humans, Teaching, Thinking, Focus Groups, Self Efficacy, Biomedical Technology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review