The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“This is consistent with the research of Nelson and Schunn (2009); Henderson et al. (2019), who found that feedback quality is strongly associated with specificity.”
From Impact of AI assistance on student agency (2024) · cites this paper as Nelson and Schunn (2009)
In the citing paper
“That students used the improvement category kindness to a lesser extent than the improvement suggestions specificity, justification, and constructivity, resonates well with studies that have found that the affective features of feedback has less impact on student improvement than cognitive features (Hattie & Timperley, 2007;Nelson & Schunn, 2009).”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Nelson & Schunn, 2009
In the citing paper
“That student's sensemaking of the feedback correlates with their experience of its usefulness is known from previous studies and relates to the problem of the feedback gap (Jonsson, 2013;Nelson & Schunn, 2009).”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Nelson & Schunn, 2009
In the citing paper
“in a study of peer feedback using 1,073 feedback segments from an online peer review system (SWoRD), Nelson and Schunn (2009) found that student's comprehension of the feedback was the only significant mediator for student implementation.”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Nelson and Schunn (2009)
In the citing paper
“In particular, they found that students were more likely to understand the feedback if it offered concrete solutions, a location of the problem(s), or if the feedback included a summary.”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Nelson and Schunn (2009)
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905 · cited 2×
“are most important, such as goals (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Hattie & Timperley, 2007 ) and”
Background(1999) · Cited by 12,812
A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.95.2.256 · Cited by 9,745
Motivational processes affecting learning.
Dweck, C. S. (1986) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.41.10.1040 · Cited by 6,971
Axten, N., Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1973) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2063712 · Cited by 6,886
Newell, A. (1972) · Cited by 6,222
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Schema induction and analogical transfer
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6 · Cited by 3,010 · cited 2×
“For example, feedback without explanations can improve performance, but not learning (Chi et al. 1989) and the use of examples can influence whether feedback affects learning or performance or both (Gick and Holyoak 1980; 1983).”
BackgroundHandbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology
(2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410609519 · Cited by 2,744
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Hayes, J. R., Flower, L., Schriver, K. A., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in applied psycholinguistics, Volume II: Reading, writing, and language processing (pp. 176–240). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Pressey, S. L. (1926). A simple device which gives tests and scores—and teaches. School and Society, 23, 373–376.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143
Winstone, N. E., Nash, R. A., Parker, M., & Rowntree, J. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538 · Cited by 884
Impact of AI assistance on student agency
Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Sadiq, S., Gašević, D., & Siemens, G. (2024) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104967 · Cited by 548
“Research has shown that being specific and detailed in feedback increases implementation and is more valuable than generic praises or criticisms (Henderson et al., 2019; Nelson & Schunn, 2009).”
BackgroundResultGuo, K., & Wang, D. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12146-0 · Cited by 449
Students’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work
Kaufman, J. H., & Schunn, C. D. (2010) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6 · Cited by 335
Self-citationDigital support for academic writing: A review of technologies and pedagogies
Strobl, C., Ailhaud, E., Benetos, K., Devitt, A., Kruse, O., Proske, A., & Rapp, C. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.005 · Cited by 298
Wilson, J., & Czik, A. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.05.004 · Cited by 297
Peer reviewers learn from giving comments
Cho, Y. H., & Cho, K. (2011) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1 · Cited by 294
Feedback sources in essay writing: peer-generated or AI-generated feedback?
Banihashem, S. K., Kerman, N. T., Noroozi, O., Moon, J., & Drachsler, H. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00455-4 · Cited by 282
Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback
Lu, J., & Law, N. W. Y. (2011) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-011-9177-2 · Cited by 272
Feedback on feedback practice: perceptions of students and academics
Mulliner, E., & Tucker, M. (2017) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1103365 · Cited by 261
Unravelling peer assessment: Methodological, functional, and conceptual developments
Strijbos, J.-W., & Sluijsmans, D. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.002 · Cited by 223
Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x · Cited by 181
Self-citationCheng, K.-H., Liang, J.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.001 · Cited by 174
Relations between scripted online peer feedback processes and quality of written argumentative essay
Noroozi, O., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2016) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.05.002 · Cited by 176
Noroozi, O., Kirschner, P. A., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2017) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-017-9400-z · Cited by 183
Patchan, M. M., Schunn, C. D., & Correnti, R. J. (2016) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000103 · Cited by 165
Self-citationLatifi, S., Noroozi, O., & Talaee, E. (2021) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13054 · Cited by 163
From feedback to revisions: Effects of feedback features and perceptions
Wu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2019) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101826 · Cited by 147
Self-citationValdivia, I. M. Á., Espasa, A., & Guasch, T. (2011) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2010.510182 · Cited by 138
Wu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2020) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/0002831220945266 · Cited by 150
Self-citationPeer feedback as an aid to learning – What do we want? Feedback. When do we want it? Now!
Cushing, A., Abbott, S., Lothian, D., Hall, A., & Westwood, O. M. R. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.542522 · Cited by 121
Patchan, M. M., & Puranik, C. S. (2016) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.007 · Cited by 122
Incorporating AI and learning analytics to build trustworthy peer assessment systems
Darvishi, A., Khosravi, H., Sadiq, S., & Gašević, D. (2022) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13233 · Cited by 120
Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.019 · Cited by 122
Ekholm, E., Zumbrunn, S. K., & Conklin, S. (2014) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2014.974026 · Cited by 139
Online peer feedback patterns of success and failure in argumentative essay writing
Kerman, N. T., Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S. K., Karami, M., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2022) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2022.2093914 · Cited by 135
Chen, Y., Hand, B. M., & McDOWELL, L. (2013) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21067 · Cited by 115
Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog‐mediated peer feedback
Novakovich, J. (2015) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12114 · Cited by 116
Peer Feedback Improves Students’ Academic Self-Concept in Higher Education
Simonsmeier, B. A., Peiffer, H., Flaig, M., & Schneider, M. (2020) · Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s11162-020-09591-y · Cited by 135
Noroozi, O., Hatami, J., Bayat, A., van Ginkel, S., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2020) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2018.1543200 · Cited by 107
Understanding online interaction in language MOOCs through learning analytics
Martín-Monje, E., Castrillo, M. D., & Mañana-Rodríguez, J. (2018) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2017.1378237 · Cited by 98
Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature
Kerman, N. T., Banihashem, S. K., Karami, M., Er, E., van Ginkel, S., & Noroozi, O. (2024) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12273-8 · Cited by 109
Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback
Misiejuk, K., Wasson, B., & Egelandsdal, K. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658 · Cited by 98
Students generating questions as a way of learning
Aflalo, E. (2018) · Active Learning in Higher Education · doi:10.1177/1469787418769120 · Cited by 113
Yan, D., & Zhang, S. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-03543-y · Cited by 90
Peer Feedback in Learning English Writing: Advantages and Disadvantages
Bijami, M., Kashef, S. H., & Sharafi-Nejad, M. (2013) · Journal of Studies in Education · doi:10.5296/jse.v3i4.4314 · Cited by 89
Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S. K., Taghizadeh Kerman, N., Parvaneh Akhteh Khaneh, M., Babaee, M., Ashrafi, H., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2023) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2022.2034887 · Cited by 105
Gan, M. J. S., & Hattie, J. (2014) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-014-9319-4 · Cited by 87
Peer feedback to support collaborative knowledge improvement: What kind of feedback feed-forward?
Tan, J. S. H., & Chen, W. (2022) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104467 · Cited by 91
Patchan, M. M., Charney, D., & Schunn, C. D. (2009) · Journal of Writing Research · doi:10.17239/jowr-2009.01.02.2 · Cited by 81
Self-citationWu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2020) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101897 · Cited by 83
Self-citationWu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2023) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102160 · Cited by 78
Self-citationRaes, A., Vanderhoven, E., & Schellens, T. (2015) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.823930 · Cited by 78
Gielen, M., & Wever, B. D. (2015) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.012 · Cited by 80
Gielen, M., & Wever, B. D. (2015) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12096 · Cited by 78
Chan, C. K. Y., & Luo, J. J. (2021) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2021.1888074 · Cited by 87
Gao, Y., Schunn, C. D. D., & Yu, Q. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1499075 · Cited by 71
Self-citationGuo, K., Zhang, E. D., Li, D., & Yu, S. (2025) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.13540 · Cited by 69
The Effects of Giving Feedback on the Persuasive Writing of Fourth- and Fifth-Grade Students
Philippakos, Z. A. T., & MacArthur, C. A. (2016) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1002/rrq.149 · Cited by 72
Dressler, R., Chu, M.-W., Crossman, K., & Hilman, B. (2018) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2018.11.001 · Cited by 68
Noroozi, O., Banihashem, S. K., Biemans, H. J. A., Smits, M., Vervoort, M. T. W., & Verbaan, C.-L. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-11683-y · Cited by 83
EFL student engagement with giving peer feedback in academic writing: A longitudinal study
Zhang, F., Schunn, C., Chen, S., Li, W., & Li, R. (2023) · Journal of English for Academic Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101255 · Cited by 63
Self-citationPredictive Effects of Online Peer Feedback Types on Performance Quality
Yu, F. Y., & Wu, C. P. (2013) · Tamkang University Institutional Repository (TKUIR) · Cited by 63
RETRACTED: The impact of generative AI on essay revisions and student engagement
Lo, N., Wong, A., & Chan, S. (2025) · Computers and Education Open · doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100249 · Cited by 85
RetractedAutomated Assessment of the Quality of Peer Reviews using Natural Language Processing Techniques
Ramachandran, L., Gehringer, E. F., & Yadav, R. K. (2017) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-016-0132-x · Cited by 61
The role of students’ epistemic beliefs for their argumentation performance in higher education
Noroozi, O. (2022) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703297.2022.2092188 · Cited by 67
What aspects of online peer feedback robustly predict growth in students' task performance?
Zong, Z., Schunn, C. D., & Wang, Y. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2021.106924 · Cited by 61
Self-citationLee, C. (2019) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/09588221.2018.1544152 · Cited by 59
Automatically Predicting Peer-Review Helpfulness
Xiong, W., & Litman, D. J. (2011) · D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) · Cited by 59
Diefes‐Dux, H. A., Zawojewski, J. S., Hjalmarson, M. A., & Cardella, M. (2012) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00054.x · Cited by 58
A systematic review of the key components of online peer feedback practices in higher education
Gao, X., Noroozi, O., Gulikers, J., Biemans, H. J. A., & Banihashem, S. K. (2024) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100588 · Cited by 61
Chiang, C., Kasunic, A., & Savage, S. (2018) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3274306 · Cited by 59
Bolzer, M., Strijbos, J. W., & Fischer, F. (2015) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12091 · Cited by 57
Paradoxical effects of feedback in international online reciprocal peer tutoring
Topping, K. J., Dehkinet, R., Blanch, S., Corcelles, M., & Durán, D. (2012) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.002 · Cited by 56
Assessing peer and instructor response to writing: A corpus analysis from an expert survey
Anson, I. G., & Anson, C. M. (2017) · Assessing Writing · doi:10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.001 · Cited by 57
From plans to actions: A process model for why feedback features influence feedback implementation
Wu, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2021) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-021-09546-5 · Cited by 65
Self-citationThe effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions
Patchan, M. M., Hawk, B. N., Stevens, C. A., & Schunn, C. D. (2012) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9236-3 · Cited by 55
Self-citationBak, H. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.559160 · Cited by 71
Welsh, M. P. (2012) · Technology Pedagogy and Education · doi:10.1080/1475939x.2012.659884 · Cited by 54
The effects of autonomy support on student engagement in peer assessment
Yuan, J., & Kim, C. (2017) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-017-9538-x · Cited by 65
Fang, J.-W., Chang, S., Hwang, G., & Yang, G. (2021) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-021-09990-7 · Cited by 53
van Ginkel, S. O., Gulikers, J. T. M., Biemans, H. J. A., & Mulder, M. (2016) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1212984 · Cited by 53
Bai, B., & Wang, J. (2020) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168820971740 · Cited by 65
Wichmann, A., Funk, A., & Rummel, N. (2017) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0348-7 · Cited by 62
Learning to improve the quality peer feedback through experience with peer feedback
Zong, Z., Schunn, C. D., & Wang, Y. (2020) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2020.1833179 · Cited by 56
Self-citationNguyen, T. T. D. T., Garncarz, T., Ng, F., Dabbish, L., & Dow, S. P. (2017) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/2998181.2998319 · Cited by 56
Haro, A. V., Noroozi, O., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Banihashem, S. K. (2023) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2215822 · Cited by 67
Student teacher assessment feedback preferences: The influence of cognitive styles and gender
Evans, C., & Waring, M. (2010) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.11.011 · Cited by 50
Writing-to-Learn the Nature of Science in the Context of the Lewis Dot Structure Model
Shultz, G. V., & Gere, A. R. (2015) · Journal of Chemical Education · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00064 · Cited by 50
Zhang, Y., Pi, Z., Chen, L., Zhang, X., & Yang, J. (2021) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100950 · Cited by 53
Berndt, M., Strijbos, J.-W., & Fischer, F. (2017) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0343-z · Cited by 54
Çevik, Y. D., Haşlaman, T., & Çelık, S. (2015) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2014.12.002 · Cited by 48
Understanding the Effectiveness of Online Peer Assessment: A Path Model
Lu, J.-Y., & Zhang, Z. (2012) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/ec.46.3.f · Cited by 45
Whitelock, D. M., Twiner, A., Richardson, J. T. E., Field, D., & Pulman, S. (2015) · International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK) · doi:10.1145/2723576.2723599 · Cited by 45
The art of questioning in online learning environments: the potentialities of feedback in writing
Guasch, T., Espasa, A., & Melo, M. M. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1479373 · Cited by 46
Backward evaluation in peer assessment: A scoping review
Misiejuk, K., & Wasson, B. (2021) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104319 · Cited by 46
A Novel Approach to Examine the Impact of Web-based Peer Review on the Revisions of L2 Writers
Leijen, D. A. J. (2017) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2016.11.005 · Cited by 44
Understanding the what and when of peer feedback benefits for performance and transfer
Yu, Q., & Schunn, C. D. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107857 · Cited by 50
Self-citationZhang, F., Schunn, C. D., & Baikadi, A. (2017) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-017-9420-6
Self-citationSun, B., & Fan, T. (2021) · Studies In Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101123 · Cited by 57
Huisman, B., Admiraal, W., Pilli, O., van de Ven, M., & Saab, N. (2018) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12520 · Cited by 42
Using learning analytics to explore peer learning patterns in asynchronous gamified environments
Moon, J., McNeill, L., Edmonds, C. T., Banihashem, S. K., & Noroozi, O. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00476-z · Cited by 54
Using Google Docs for Peer-then-Teacher Review on Middle School Students’ Writing
Neumann, K. L., & Kopcha, T. J. (2019) · Computers & composition/Computers and composition · doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.102524 · Cited by 46
Aben, J. E. J., Timmermans, A. C., Dingyloudi, F., Lara, M. M., & Strijbos, J.-W. (2022) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102175 · Cited by 41
Séror, J. (2011) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 41
Deiglmayr, A. (2017) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0355-8
Dominguez, C. E., Nascimento, M. M., Payan‐Carreira, R., Cruz, G., Silva, H., Lopes, J. P., Morais, M. D. F. A., & Morais, E. (2014) · European Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1080/03043797.2014.987649 · Cited by 43
Effects of different types of instructor comments in online discussions
Kwon, K., Park, S. J., Shin, S., & Chang, C. Y. (2019) · Distance Education · doi:10.1080/01587919.2019.1602469 · Cited by 44
Effects of anonymity on online peer review in second-language writing
van den Bos, A. H., & Tan, E. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103638 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nelson, Melissa M.
- ORCID
- Schunn, Christian D.
- Venue
- Instructional Science
- Published
- 2008-04-04
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 375-401
- ISSN
- 0020-4277 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1952
- OpenAlex
- W2075371609
- Cited by
- 602
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2026: 40 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 46.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Instructional Science (publishedVersion)
- D-Scholarship@Pitt (University of Pittsburgh) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- peer feedback, writing performance, feedback implementation, problem understanding, peer review, swords
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.
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
