The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider
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
“It is somewhat surprising that most studies that examine the effect of peer assessment tend to only assess the impact on the assessee and not the assessor (van Popta et al. 2017).”
From The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies (2020) · cites this paper as van Popta et al. 2017
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“V an Popta et al. (2017) argue that the cognitive processes involved in peer assessment, such as evaluating, explaining, and suggesting, similarly play out in online and offline environments.”
From The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies (2020) · cites this paper as V an Popta et al. (2017)
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
Assessment and Classroom Learning
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998) · Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice · doi:10.1080/0969595980050102 · Cited by 8,152
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070600572090 · Cited by 5,846
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
Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities
Topping, K. (1998) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170598 · Cited by 2,173
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
The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review
Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079912331379935 · Cited by 1,206
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Corgan, 2004, Making your online course successful, Business Education Forum, 58, 51
- Nicol, 2013, Peer review: Putting feedback processes in students' hands, Perspectives on Pedagogy and Practice, 4, 111
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies
Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3 · Cited by 446
Elshami, W., Taha, M. H., Abuzaid, M., Saravanan, C., Kawas, S. A., & Abdalla, M. E. (2021) · Medical Education Online · doi:10.1080/10872981.2021.1920090 · Cited by 426
Huisman, B., Saab, N., van Driel, J., & van den Broek, P. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1424318 · Cited by 318
Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of education 4.0
Mukul, E., & Büyüközkan, G. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122664 · Cited by 368
The development of student feedback literacy: the influences of teacher feedback on peer feedback
Han, Y., & Xu, Y. (2019) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2019.1689545 · Cited by 207
Metadata
- Authors
- van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R. L., & Simons, P. R.-J.
- Affiliations
- HAN University of Applied Sciences (NL)
- Open University of the Netherlands (NL)
- Venue
- Educational Research Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 20
- Pages
- 24-34
- ISSN
- 1747-938X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2535628851
- Semantic Scholar
- 32d4380c5c75679f86fd9eb0982f501fbf574150
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 29 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 52.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Educational Research Review (publishedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion)
- DSpace (Open University in the Netherlands) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- 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
- peer feedback, online learning, cognitive processes, online peer assessment
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
