Cited by 230Student Assessment and FeedbackOnline and Blended LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education

Open access
van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B.A.M., Admiraal, W.F., Simons, P.R.J.·2008·Computers & Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.001

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Van der Pol et al.'s second study showed that students agreed more with the feedback that they perceived as useful.

    “the second study showed that students agreed more with the feedback that they perceived as useful”

    From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Van der Pol et al. (2008)

  • Van der Pol et al.'s first study found that a higher perceived importance of feedback on their work by students corresponded with more revisions in their written work.

    “Their first study found that a higher perceived importance of feedback on their work by students corresponded with more revisions in their written work”

    From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Van der Pol et al. (2008)

  • Student's agreement with the feedback, and not perceived feedback usefulness, correlated with higher rate of revision.

    “Student's agreement with the feedback, and not perceived feedback usefulness, correlated with higher rate of revision.”

    From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Van der Pol et al. (2008)

  • Van der Pol et al. (2008) found that the more students agreed with the feedback, the more useful they would grade it.

    “Similarly, Van der Pol et al. (2008) found that the more students agreed with the feedback, the more useful they would grade it.”

    From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Van der Pol et al. (2008)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-12
Volume
51
Issue
4
Pages
1804-1817
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2149915933
Cited by
230
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 11
FWCI
33.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
online peer feedback, feedback uptake, feedback evaluation, annotation system, higher education

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