The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.

In the citing paper

“A comprehensive review of research studies of feedback showed that feedback improved performance in 60% of them.In the cases where it was not helpful, the feedback turned out to be merely a judgment or grading with no indication of how to improve (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996).”

In the citing paper

“The need to motivate pupils is evident, but it is often assumed that this is best done by offering such extrinsic rewards as merits, grades, gold stars and prizes.There is ample evidence that challenges this assumption.”

In the citing paper

“The inclusion criteria are comparable to the criteria that were used to include meta-analyses in the Visible Learning research syntheses but allow to exclude studies from meta-analyses that encompass both an educational and a non-educational context (Wiersma, 1992; Kluger and DeNisi, 1996; Standley, 1996).”

In the citing paper

“One of the most consistent findings about the power of feedback is the remarkable variability of effects.”

In the citing paper

“The existing research has identified several relevant moderators like timing and specificity of the goals and task complexity (Kluger and DeNisi, 1996)”

In the citing paper

“However, the efficacy of peer assessment, like traditional feedback, is likely to be contingent on a range of factors including characteristics of the learning environment, the student, and the assessment itself (Kluger and DeNisi 1996; Ossenberg et al. 2018).”

In the citing paper

“Kluger and DeNisi (1996), in their presentation of feedback intervention theory, used grading as an example of an external intervention likely to render metatask processes concerning self-goals, such as performance goals, salient at the expense of task-related goals.”

In the citing paper

“but when A&F comes from a regulatory body, the recipient may be more likely to activate affective processes (e.g., distress) which distract attention from the specific task requiring change.”

In the citing paper

“Feedback intervention theory [10] suggests that feedback that captures the recipient’s attention and directs it toward a specific behaviour is more likely to be successful”

In the citing paper

“This crucial aspect of formative assessment that has been often discussed but too rarely studied is students' responses to feedback, or the internal mechanisms involved in the reception of feedback and their influences on learning and achievement (Butler and Winne, 1995;Kluger and DeNisi, 1996;Shute, 2008;Draper, 2009;Bennett, 2011;Dann, 2014;Panadero and Lipnevich, 2021).”

In the citing paper

“For example, Kluger and DeNisi (1996) reported a mean effect size of 0.41 for formative feedback on performance, but 38% of these effects were negative.”

In the citing paper

“For example, norm-referenced feedback promotes maladaptive attributional thinking (e.g., attributing failure to lack of ability) that demotivates efforts on subsequent tasks (Kluger and DeNisi, 1996).”

In the citing paper

“there is evidence that assessment enhances performance when self-efficacy is high and impedes performance when self-efficacy is low (Beckmann, Beckmann, & Elliott, 2009;Birney, Beckmann, Beckmann, & Double, 2017;Kluger & DeNisi, 1996).”

In the citing paper

“Variations in the effect of feedback have been related to content, form and timing of the feedback, and studies have indeed found variations based on these factors”

In the citing paper

“Nevertheless, feedback does not always result in student improvement, and may in some cases inhibit learning rather than promote it.”

In the citing paper

“General information unrelated to the performance, comments about a good or poor performance or compliments are less effective than specific comments [27, 28].”

In the citing paper

“Kluger and DeNisi’s feedback intervention theory, derived from their meta-analysis of over 130 studies of feedback interventions in various settings, also posits that feedback becomes less effective as attention shifts away from the task and toward the individual; in short, feedback that is threatening to self-esteem is unlikely to be effective [28].”

In the citing paper

“feedback is most effective when directed at the task level and may assist in ‘deep processing and mastery of tasks’ when it is about processing of tasks or self-regulation.”

In the citing paper

“Grades are a clear and non-nuanced form of feedback which can trigger both promotion and prevention responses in trainees [28].”

In the citing paper

“positive feedback is more effective in motivating performance improvement for learners in promotion focus, while negative feedback is more useful in motivating performance improvement for learners in prevention focus [28].”

In the citing paper

“but it is no less important to learning, and is influenced by feedback [28, 34, 45].”

In the citing paper

“Feedback intervention theory [28] posits that feedback which threatens self-esteem is much less likely to be effective.”

In the citing paper

“According to Kluger and de Nisi’s meta-analysis, some feedback recipients feel content to be ‘good enough’ or become helpless when told they are not making the grade, to the detriment of their performance [28].”

In the citing paper

“There is evidence that feedback becomes less effective as its focus moves away from the task and toward the self [13, 28].”

In the citing paper

“There are studies which have found learner preferences for group feedback [90] and for individual feedback [1] and it is clear that the context matters [28].”

In the citing paper

“The results showed greater effectiveness with increasing frequency of the feedback,”

In the citing paper

“Feedback Intervention Theory (Kluger 1996), which suggests that feedback that directs attention towards acceptable and familiar tasks (as opposed to those that generate emotional responses or cause deep self‐reflection) seem most likely to lead to improvement.”