The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Structuring peer assessment: Comparing the impact of the degree of structure on peer feedback content
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Peer feedback on wikis, for example, was shown to facilitate the improvement of writing essays and peer feedback content quality (Al Abri etal., 2021; Gielen & De Wever, 2015; Xiao & Lucking, 2008).”
From Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gielen & De Wever, 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The selected studies on online peer feedback have identified comprehension outcomes such as conceptual understanding, elaboration (Gielen & De Wever, 2015), and ability to justify (Zhan, 2020).”
From Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gielen & De Wever, 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Peer feedback activities in asynchronous discussion environments were found to promote students' conceptual understanding, while structured peer assessment was shown to improve the quality and focus of peer feedback elaborations (Gielen”
From Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gielen & De Wever, 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Peer feedback activities in asynchronous discussion environments were found to promote students' conceptual understanding, while structured peer assessment was shown to improve the quality and focus of peer feedback elaborations (Gielen”
From Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature (2024) · cites this paper as Gielen & De Wever, 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Gielen and De Wever (2015) contend that peer assessment becomes significantly more effective when peer feedback is scripted.”
From The Exam Autopsy: An Integrated Post-Exam Assessment Model (2019) · cites this paper as Gielen and De Wever (2015)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“They collected data from 168 first-year undergraduate students who completed a wiki assignment in three cycles of three weeks each.”
From The Exam Autopsy: An Integrated Post-Exam Assessment Model (2019) · cites this paper as Gielen & De Wever, 2015
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“This study also confirms earlier findings that practice is an important component in peer assessment implementations (Gielen and De Wever 2015; Liu and Carless 2006).”
From Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills (2018) · cites this paper as Gielen and De Wever 2015
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
Hapeman, D. E., & Agresti, A. (1991) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1991.10484817 · Cited by 9,407
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152 · cited 4×
“Inspired by a large body of research (Shute, 2008; Strijbos, et al., 2012; Kulhavy & Wager, 1993; Van den Berg, et al., 2003; Cho & McArthur, 2010; Black & William, 1998; Kluger & Denisi, 1996), this study opted to distinguish elaborations between using informative and suggestive elaborations to…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialKluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Shute, V. J. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307313795 · Cited by 4,631
Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems
Sadler, D. R. (1989) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00117714 · Cited by 4,285
Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment
Biggs, J. (1996) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/bf00138871 · Cited by 4,084
Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology
(2013) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410609519 · Cited by 2,744
Client-Centered Therapy: Its Current Practice, Implications and Theory
Rogers, C. R. (1951) · Cited by 2,416
Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment
Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. A. (2013) · Cited by 2,402
Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities
Topping, K. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170598 · Cited by 2,173
Client-centered therapy; its current practice, implications, and theory.
Miles, D. W. (1952) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0053095 · Cited by 2,122
(2010) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412961288.n40 · Cited by 2,028
Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology
Jonassen, D. H., Spector, M. J., Driscoll, M., Merrill, M. D., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Driscoll, M. P. (2008) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203880869 · Cited by 1,692
Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design
Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2012.691462 · Cited by 1,636 · cited 1×
“The shift from ‘assessment of learning’ towards ‘assessment for learning’ requires learners to be actively involved in all phases of the assessment process (Dysthe, 2004; Boud & Molloy, 2013).”
Background(2003) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2003.s28 · Cited by 1,578
Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society
Boud, D. (2000) · Studies in Continuing Education · doi:10.1080/713695728 · Cited by 1,545
The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543061002213 · Cited by 1,313
Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education
Evans, C. (2013) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654312474350 · Cited by 1,143
Beyond feedback: developing student capability in complex appraisal
Sadler, D. R. (2010) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930903541015 · Cited by 1,138
Formative Assessment: Revisiting the Territory
Sadler, D. R. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050104 · Cited by 1,107
Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction
Mayer, R. E., & Alexander, P. A. (2011) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203839089 · Cited by 969
Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review
Wever, B. D., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Keer, H. V. (2005) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.005 · Cited by 940
Differential engagement of self-reactive influences in cognitive motivation
Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1986) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90028-2 · Cited by 933
Cognitive Perspectives on Peer Learning
O’Donnell, A. M., & King, A. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410603715 · Cited by 879
Learning‐oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications
Carless, D. R. (2007) · Innovations in Education and Teaching International · doi:10.1080/14703290601081332 · Cited by 746
Methodological Issues in the Content Analysis of Computer Conference Transcripts
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000) · AUSpace (Athabasca University) · Cited by 722
Butler, R. (1987) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.474 · Cited by 690
The Evolution of Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning
Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1 · Cited by 638
The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance
Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x · Cited by 602
Interaction in cooperative groups : the theoretical anatomy of group learning
Hertz-Lazarovits, R., & Miller, N. (1992) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · Cited by 580
Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude
Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. (1989) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/bf01320096 · Cited by 579
Collaboration Scripts – A Conceptual Analysis
Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9007-2 · Cited by 561
Content analysis: What are they talking about?
Strijbos, J.-W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2005) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002 · Cited by 545
Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions
van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004 · Cited by 536
Toward a script theory of guidance in computer-supported collaborative learning
Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Stegmann, K., & Wecker, C. (2013) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.748005 · Cited by 525
Topping, K., & Ehly, S. (1998) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410603678 · Cited by 504
Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL?
van den Berg, E., Blijleven, P. J., Koertshuis, E., & Tebbe, N. M. (2002) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 498
A One-Way Components of Variance Model for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529465 · Cited by 482
Student revision with peer and expert reviewing
Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. A. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006 · Cited by 470
Formative Peer Assessment of Academic Writing Between Postgraduate Students
Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/713611428 · Cited by 449
Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts
Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hämäläinen, R., Häkkinen, P., & Fischer, F. (2007) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9014-4 · Cited by 432
Strijbos, J.-W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008 · Cited by 399
Feedback Strategies for Interactive Learning Tasks
Narciss, S. (2007) · doi:10.4324/9780203880869.ch11 · Cited by 389
Feedback Sign Effect on Motivation: Is it Moderated by Regulatory Focus?
Van‐Dijk, D., & Kluger, A. N. (2003) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00163.x · Cited by 352
Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-36949-5_16 · Cited by 341
Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance
Podsakoff, P. M., & Farh, J. (1989) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(89)90034-4 · Cited by 305
Differentiated Instructional Strategies: One Size Doesn′t Fit All
Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2001) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 295
Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective
Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005 · Cited by 257
Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning
Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2007) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.021 · Cited by 242
Analyzing Talk in ESL Peer Response Groups: Stances, Functions, and Content
Lockhart, C., & Ng, P. (1995) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00456.x · Cited by 235
Interactive Instruction and Feedback
Dempsey, J. V., & Sales, G. C. (1993) · Educational Technology Publications eBooks · Cited by 229
Technology-Enhanced Learning. Principles and products.
Balacheff, N., Ludvigsen, S., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A., & Barnes, S. (2009) · HAL · Cited by 225
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
Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1997) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079712331381064 · Cited by 220
Peer assessment in university teaching: evaluating seven course designs
van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930500262346 · Cited by 205
Wever, B. D., Keer, H. V., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2009) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.008 · Cited by 197
Assessment of Learning in Higher Education
Fallahi, M. (2018) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5712-8.ch011 · Cited by 195
Methodological quandaries in studying process and outcomes in peer assessment
Topping, K. J. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003 · Cited by 187
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.019 · Cited by 176 · cited 4×
“For this reason, research has advocated that all responsible actors such as instructors and researchers should attempt to shed more light on the required type of structure and support an assessor needs to compile high quality peer feedback (Hovardas et al., 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialCheng, 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 · cited 1×
“Cheng, Liang, and Tsai, 2015).”
Hattie, J., & Gan, M. J. S. (2011) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203839089-22 · Cited by 172
Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection
Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.011 · Cited by 167
Salvador, C. C., Rochera, M. J., & de Gispert, I. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.015 · Cited by 144
Feedback for General Practitioners in Training: Quality, Styles, and Preferences
Prins, F. J., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., & Kirschner, P. A. (2006) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-005-3250-z · Cited by 134
Mumm, J., & Mutlu, B. (2011) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.002 · Cited by 125
Forms of assessment and their potential for enhancing learning: conceptual and cultural issues
Kennedy, K. J., Chan, J. K. S., Fok, P. K., & Yu, W. M. (2008) · Educational Research for Policy and Practice · doi:10.1007/s10671-008-9052-3 · Cited by 101
Gielen, M., & Wever, B. D. (2015) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12096 · Cited by 78
Self-citationAnseel, F., & Lievens, F. (2006) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1348/096317905x71462 · Cited by 68
Walker, M. (2014) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.898737 · Cited by 64
Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: a multiple case study
Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V., & Wray, D. (2011) · Teaching in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/13562517.2011.641008 · Cited by 40
Gielen, M., & Wever, B. D. (2012) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.450 · Cited by 39
Self-citationImproving Feedback To and From Students
(2012) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203062074-18 · Cited by 38
Fading scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning
Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2007) · Computer-supported collaborative learning/The Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference · doi:10.3115/1599600.1599739 · Cited by 34
The challenges of assessment in a new learning culture
Dysthe, O. (2007) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203942185-8 · Cited by 28
Analysis of assessment opportunities of learning spaces: On-line versus face to face methodologies
García, A. S., García-Álvarez, M. T., & Moreno, B. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.024 · Cited by 14
Key Considerations in the Design and Implementation of Effective Peer-Assisted Learning Programs
Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (1998) · doi:10.4324/9781410603678-11 · Cited by 13
Vargas-Vera, M., Nagy, M., & de Pablos, P. O. (2013) · Consultation of the Doctoral Thesis Database (TESEO) (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte) · Cited by 9
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Sluijsmans, D. (2002). Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen (unpublished doctoral dissertation).
- Strijbos, J. W., Van Goozen, B., & Prins, F. (2012, August). Developing a coding scheme for analysing peer feedback messages. In Paper presented at the EARLI-SIG 1 assessment and evaluation conference, Brussels, Belgium.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chen, J., Wang, M., Kirschner, P. A., & Tsai, C. (2018) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654318791584 · Cited by 490
Rotsaert, T., Panadero, E., & Schellens, T. (2018) · European Journal of Psychology of Education · doi:10.1007/s10212-017-0339-8 · Cited by 126
Usher, M., & Barak, M. (2017) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1405238 · Cited by 129
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
Huang, C., Tu, Y., Han, Z., Jiang, F., Wu, F. Q., & Jiang, Y. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104910 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Gielen, M., & De Wever, B.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Gielen, Mario
- ORCID
- De Wever, Bram
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-11
- Volume
- 52
- Pages
- 315-325
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W564614949
- Semantic Scholar
- 2b3df5d809754895451651688f22d4faf40099f0
- Cited by
- 122
- References
- 80
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 24.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Ghent University (BOF11/STA/026)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Keywords
- peer assessment, peer feedback, wiki-based learning, higher education, elaboration, verification
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
