The DOI matches its Crossref record; 256 of the 257 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory.
Abstract
Since the beginning of the century, feedback interventions (FIs) produced negative—but largely ignored—effects on performance. A meta-analysis (607 effect sizes; 23,663 observations) suggests that FIs improved performance on average (d =.41) but that over '/3 of the FIs decreased perfor-mance. This finding cannot be explained by sampling error, feedback sign, or existing theories. The authors proposed a preliminary FI theory (FIT) and tested it with moderator analyses. The central assumption of FIT is that FIs change the locus of attention among 3 general and hierarchically organized levels of control: task learning, task motivation, and meta-tasks (including self-related) processes. The results suggest that FI effectiveness decreases as attention moves up the hierarchy closer to the self and away from the task. These findings are further moderated by task characteristics that are still poorly understood. To relate feedback directly to behavior is very confusing. Results are contradictory and seldom straight-forward. (Ilgen, Fisher, & Taylor, 1979, p. 368) The effects of manipulation of KR [knowledge of results] on motor learning...reveal... some violent contradictions to earlier beliefs about KR, and some glaring absences in our knowledge. (Salmoni, Schmidt, & Walter, 1984, p. 378). Feedback does not uniformly improve performance. (Balcazar,
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
“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).”
From Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom (2004) · cites this paper as 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.”
From Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom (2004) · cites this paper as Kluger & DeNisi, 1996
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).”
From The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research (2020) · cites this paper as Kluger and DeNisi, 1996
In the citing paper
“One of the most consistent findings about the power of feedback is the remarkable variability of effects.”
From The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research (2020) · cites this paper as Kluger and DeNisi, 1996
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)”
From The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research (2020) · cites this paper as 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).”
From The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies (2020) · cites this paper as Kluger and DeNisi 1996
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.”
From Why grades engender performance-avoidance goals: The mediating role of autonomous motivation. (2011) · cites this paper as Kluger & DeNisi, 1996
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.”
From No more ‘business as usual’ with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention (2014) · cites this paper as [10]
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”
From No more ‘business as usual’ with audit and feedback interventions: towards an agenda for a reinvigorated intervention (2014) · cites this paper as [10]
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).”
From The Next Black Box of Formative Assessment: A Model of the Internal Mechanisms of Feedback Processing (2022) · cites this paper as Kluger and DeNisi, 1996
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.”
From The Next Black Box of Formative Assessment: A Model of the Internal Mechanisms of Feedback Processing (2022) · cites this paper as Kluger and DeNisi (1996)
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).”
From The Next Black Box of Formative Assessment: A Model of the Internal Mechanisms of Feedback Processing (2022) · cites this paper as 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).”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as 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”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Kluger & DeNisi, 1996
In the citing paper
“Nevertheless, feedback does not always result in student improvement, and may in some cases inhibit learning rather than promote it.”
From Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback (2021) · cites this paper as Kluger & DeNisi, 1996
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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [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.”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“but it is no less important to learning, and is influenced by feedback [28, 34, 45].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Feedback intervention theory [28] posits that feedback which threatens self-esteem is much less likely to be effective.”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [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].”
From Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education. (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“The results showed greater effectiveness with increasing frequency of the feedback,”
From Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (2012) · cites this paper as Kluger 1996
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.”
From Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes (2012) · cites this paper as Kluger 1996
Citations
Cites
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.98.2.224 · Cited by 21,995
Russell, J. A. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0077714 · Cited by 16,334
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Hammer, T. H., Anderson, J. F., Gurdon, M. A., Jick, T. D., Petit, A., Stern, R. N., Schwartz, H., Vardi, Y., & Dunnette, M. D. (1977) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391755 · Cited by 11,947
Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect.
Higgins, E. T. (1987) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.94.3.319 · Cited by 7,219
Social cognitive theory of self-regulation
Bandura, A. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-l · Cited by 6,875
The Cognitive Structure of Emotions
Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571299 · Cited by 6,208
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Bourne, L. E. (1977) · Cited by 4,328
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research.
Metcalfe, A., & Rosenthal, R. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348600 · Cited by 4,249
Tosi, H. L. (1991) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4278976 · Cited by 4,147
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 1,033
Resident Duty Hours: Enhancing Sleep, Supervision, and Safety
Ulmer, C. C., Wolman, D. M., & Johns, M. M. E. (2009) · Cited by 481
Keith, N., & Fresé, M. (2005) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.677 · Cited by 511
360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness.
Brett, J. F., & ATWATER, L. E. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.930 · Cited by 505
The changing signs in the relationships among self-efficacy, personal goals, and performance.
Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., & Williams, A. A. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.605 · Cited by 474
Stajković, A. D., Lee, D., & Nyberg, A. J. (2009) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0015659 · Cited by 504
Shute, V. J. (2007) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2007.tb02053.x · Cited by 482
Lambert, M. J., & Shimokawa, K. (2011) · Psychotherapy · doi:10.1037/a0022238 · Cited by 464
Giving feedback in clinical settings
Cantillon, P., & Sargeant, J. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.a1961 · Cited by 460
Singh, J. (1998) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299806200305 · Cited by 465
Goal Regulation Across Time: The Effects of Feedback and Affect.
Ilieș, R., & Judge, T. A. (2005) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.453 · Cited by 482
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
Formative Assessment: A Meta-Analysis and a Call for Research
Kingston, N. M., & Nash, B. (2011) · Educational Measurement Issues and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x · Cited by 443
Fast, N. J., Burris, E. R., & Bartel, C. A. (2014) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0393 · Cited by 440
Social comparison processes in organizations
Greenberg, J., Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2006) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.006 · Cited by 434
Assessment, feedback and the alchemy of learning
Watling, C., & Ginsburg, S. (2018) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.13645 · Cited by 461
Denisi, A., & Pritchard, R. (2006) · Management and Organization Review · doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2006.00042.x · Cited by 463
Self-citationCheng, A., Nadkarni, V., Mancini, M. B., Hunt, E. A., Sinz, E. H., Merchant, R. M., Donoghue, A. J., Duff, J. P., Eppich, W., Auerbach, M. A., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000583 · Cited by 461
Using learning analytics to scale the provision of personalised feedback
Pardo, A., Jovanovic, J., Dawson, S., Gašević, D., & Mirriahi, N. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12592 · Cited by 425
Gamification in assessment: Do points affect test performance?
Attali, Y., & Arieli‐Attali, M. (2014) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.12.012 · Cited by 463
The Handbook of Behavior Change
Hagger, M. S., Cameron, L. D., Hamilton, K., Hankonen, N. E., & Lintunen, T. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318 · Cited by 446
The Influence of Affect on Beliefs, Preferences, and Financial Decisions
Kuhnen, C. M., & Knutson, B. D. (2011) · Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis · doi:10.1017/s0022109011000123 · Cited by 423
Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., Schuelke, M. J., Ruark, G. A., & Mumford, M. D. (2009) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.008 · Cited by 439
Using normative social influence to promote conservation among hotel guests
Schultz, W. P., Khazian, A. M., & Zaleski, A. C. (2008) · Social Influence · doi:10.1080/15534510701755614 · Cited by 444
Data-informed curriculum reform: Which data, what purposes, and promoting and hindering factors
Schildkamp, K., & Kuiper, W. (2010) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.007 · Cited by 406
A META-ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION ON TASK PERFORMANCE, 1975-95.
Stajković, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1997) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256929 · Cited by 425
Understanding household energy consumption behavior: The contribution of energy big data analytics
Zhou, K., & Yang, S. (2015) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.001 · Cited by 406
The Effect of Evaluation on Teacher Performance
Taylor, E. S., & Tyler, J. H. (2012) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.102.7.3628 · Cited by 405
Yeager, D. S., Purdie-Vaughns, V. J., Garcia, J., Apfel, N. H., Brzustoski, P., Master, A., Hessert, W. T., Williams, M. E., & Cohen, G. L. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/a0033906 · Cited by 432
Ivers, N. M., Sales, A., Colquhoun, H., Michie, S., Foy, R., Francis, J. J., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2014) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-9-14 · Cited by 400
Mechanisms of motivation–cognition interaction: challenges and opportunities
Braver, T. S., Krug, M. K., Chiew, K. S., Kool, W., Westbrook, J. A., Clement, N. J., Adcock, R. A., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M., Carver, C. S., et al. (2014) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-014-0300-0 · Cited by 452
BONNER, S. E., Hastie, R., Sprinkle, G. B., & Young, S. M. (2000) · Journal of Management Accounting Research · doi:10.2308/jmar.2000.12.1.19 · Cited by 415
Predicting Student Performance from LMS Data: A Comparison of 17 Blended Courses Using Moodle LMS
Conijn, R., Snijders, C. C. P., Kleingeld, A., & Matzat, U. (2016) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2016.2616312 · Cited by 430
The differential effects of CEO narcissism and hubris on corporate social responsibility
Tang, Y., Mack, D. Z., & Chen, G. (2017) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2761 · Cited by 394
Brown, B. C., Gude, W. T., Blakeman, T., van der Veer, S. N., Ivers, N. M., Francis, J., Lorencatto, F., Presseau, J., Peek, N. B., & Daker‐White, G. (2019) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-019-0883-5 · Cited by 409
Bayesian Estimation and Inference
Zyphur, M. J., & Oswald, F. L. (2013) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206313501200 · Cited by 415
A review of feedback models and typologies: Towards an integrative model of feedback elements
Panadero, E., & Lipnevich, A. A. (2022) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100416 · Cited by 389
Feedback Strategies for Interactive Learning Tasks
Narciss, S. (2007) · doi:10.4324/9780203880869.ch11 · Cited by 389
de Jong, K., Conijn, J. M., Gallagher, R. A. V., Reshetnikova, A. S., Heij, M., & Lutz, M. C. (2021) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102002 · Cited by 417
Chen, Z., Lam, W., & Zhong, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.202 · Cited by 380
The Role of Classroom Assessment in Teaching and Learning
Shepard, L. A. (2001) · Cited by 380
Safety climate and beyond: A multi-level multi-climate framework
Zohar, D. M. (2007) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2007.03.006 · Cited by 377
Learning from failures: Why it May Not Happen
Baumard, P., & Starbuck, W. H. (2005) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2005.03.004 · Cited by 377
Stajković, A. D., & Luthans, F. (2003) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00147.x · Cited by 399
Audit and feedback and clinical practice guideline adherence: Making feedback actionable
Hysong, S. J., Best, R. G., & Pugh, J. A. (2006) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-1-9 · Cited by 371
Bashshur, M. R., & Oc, B. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314558302 · Cited by 369
Strijbos, J.-W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2009) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008 · Cited by 399
Can Charisma Be Taught? Tests of Two Interventions
Antonakis, J., Fenley, M., & Liechti, S. (2011) · Academy of Management Learning and Education · doi:10.5465/amle.2010.0012 · Cited by 395
Schmidt, A. M., & Ford, J. K. (2003) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00156.x · Cited by 381
Meglino, B. M., & Korsgaard, M. A. (2004) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.946 · Cited by 377
Researching feedback dialogue: an interactional analysis approach
Ajjawi, R., & Boud, D. J. (2015) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1102863 · Cited by 364
Peterson, R. S., & Behfar, K. J. (2003) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/s0749-5978(03)00090-6 · Cited by 363
Rewards and creative performance: A meta-analytic test of theoretically derived hypotheses.
Byron, K., & Khazanchi, S. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0027652 · Cited by 386
The effects of feedback on energy conservation: A meta-analysis.
Karlin, B., Zinger, J. F., & Ford, R. (2015) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0039650 · Cited by 361
Formative assessment and feedback for learning in higher education: A systematic review
Morris, R., Perry, T., & Wardle, L. (2021) · Review of Education · doi:10.1002/rev3.3292 · Cited by 358
A goal orientation model of feedback-seeking behavior
Vandewalle, D. (2003) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2003.11.004 · Cited by 374
DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF INCENTIVE MOTIVATORS ON WORK PERFORMANCE.
Stajković, A. D., & Luthans, F. (2001) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069372 · Cited by 355
Designing experiments that generalize
Highhouse, S. (2009) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/1094428107300396 · Cited by 353
Rewarding creativity: when does it really matter?
Baer, M., Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (2003) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(03)00052-3 · Cited by 352
The Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE)
Schneider, S., Beege, M., Nebel, S., Schnaubert, L., & Rey, G. D. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09626-5 · Cited by 395
McCalley, L. T., & Midden, C. J. H. (2002) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0167-4870(02)00119-8 · Cited by 349
Guidelines: The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of feedback for clinical education.
Lefroy, J., Watling, C., Teunissen, P. W., & Brand, P. (2015) · Perspectives on Medical Education · doi:10.1007/s40037-015-0231-7 · Cited by 347
Feedback on assessment: students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness
Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. L. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930701292548 · Cited by 345
The Grateful Workplace: A Multilevel Model of Gratitude in Organizations
Fehr, R., Fulmer, A., Awtrey, E. C., & Miller, J. (2016) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2014.0374 · Cited by 361
The assessment of professional competence: building blocks for theory development
van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Schuwirth, L., Scheele, F., Driessen, E. W., & Hodges, B. D. (2010) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.04.001 · Cited by 356
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
Self-citationAntecedents and Outcomes of Informal Learning Behaviors: a Meta-Analysis
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S., & Orvis, K. A. (2018) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-017-9492-y · Cited by 289
OECD (2010) · Educational research and innovation · doi:10.1787/9789264086487-en · Cited by 418
(2007) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 334
Does Team Training Work? Principles for Health Care
Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Weaver, S. J., & King, H. B. (2008) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00254.x · Cited by 332
Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations
Demircioğlu, M. A., & Audretsch, D. B. (2017) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.004 · Cited by 331
Du, J., Zou, Z., Shi, Y., & Zhao, D. F. (2017) · Automation in Construction · doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2017.10.009 · Cited by 327
Integrating leadership development and succession planning best practices
Groves, K. S. (2007) · Journal of Management Development · doi:10.1108/02621710710732146 · Cited by 326
Kun, Á., & Gadanecz, P. (2019) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-019-00550-0 · Cited by 387
Hope: A New Positive Strength for Human Resource Development
Luthans, F., & Jensen, S. M. (2002) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484302013003 · Cited by 349
The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests.
Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.13.4.273 · Cited by 321
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. S. (1998) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep10772989 · Cited by 314
Self-citationDevelopment of a core confidence-higher order construct.
Stajković, A. D. (2006) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1208 · Cited by 310
Consequences of Positive and Negative Feedback: The Impact on Emotions and Extra‐Role Behaviors
Belschak, F. D., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2009) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00336.x · Cited by 307
Meta-Analysis: Audit and Feedback Features Impact Effectiveness on Care Quality
Hysong, S. J. (2009) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181893f6b · Cited by 306
Sargeant, J., Lockyer, J., Mann, K., Holmboe, E., Silver, I., Armson, H., Driessen, E., MacLeod, T., Yen, W., Ross, K., et al. (2015) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000809 · Cited by 306
Teacher assessment literacy: a review of international standards and measures
DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2015) · Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability · doi:10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6 · Cited by 351
How positive and negative feedback motivate goal pursuit.
Fishbach, A., Eyal, T., & Finkelstein, S. R. (2010) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00285.x · Cited by 304
TEAM INCENTIVES: EVIDENCE FROM A FIRM LEVEL EXPERIMENT
Bandiera, O., Barankay, I., & Imran Rasul, A. (2013) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1111/jeea.12028 · Cited by 304
Encouraging pro-environmental behaviours: A review of methods and approaches
Grilli, G., & Curtis, J. A. (2020) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110039 · Cited by 304
Changing Behavior Using the Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.002 · Cited by 346
Rosen, C. C., Levy, P. E., & Hall, R. J. (2006) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.211 · Cited by 302
Team development interventions: Evidence-based approaches for improving teamwork.
Lacerenza, C. N., Marlow, S. L., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. (2018) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000295 · Cited by 346
(2009) · ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 300
A Meta-Analysis of Negative Feedback on Intrinsic Motivation
Fong, C. J., Patall, E. A., Vasquez, A. C., & Stautberg, S. (2019) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-018-9446-6 · Cited by 299
Slemp, G. R., & Vella‐Brodrick, D. (2013) · International Journal of Wellbeing · Cited by 299
Bridging the Rigour–Relevance Gap in Management Research: It's Already Happening!
Hodgkinson, G. P., & Rousseau, D. M. (2009) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00832.x · Cited by 307
Eduardo Salas, A., Bowers, C. A., & Rhodenizer, L. G. (1998) · International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0803_2 · Cited by 299
Reflection: a link between receiving and using assessment feedback
Sargeant, J. M., Mann, K. V., van der Vleuten, C. P., & Metsemakers, J. F. (2009) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-008-9124-4 · Cited by 296
Effectiveness of job search interventions: A meta-analytic review.
Liu, S., Huang, J. L. W., & Wang, M. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0035923 · Cited by 329
Peer reviewers learn from giving comments
Cho, Y. H., & Cho, K. (2011) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1 · Cited by 294
The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment
Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., Levin, D., & Grant, T. (2011) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20440 · Cited by 308
Tournaments Without Prizes: Evidence from Personnel Records
Vidal, J. B. I., & Nossol, M. (2009) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1110.1383 · Cited by 293
Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation
Tiefenbeck, V., Goette, L. F., Degen, K., Tasic, V., Fleisch, E., Lalive, R., & Staake, T. (2016) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2016.2646 · Cited by 319
The Pearls and Perils of Identifying Potential
Silzer, R. F., & Church, A. H. (2009) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01163.x · Cited by 290
A Review of Feedback Models and Theories: Descriptions, Definitions, and Conclusions
Lipnevich, A. A., & Panadero, E. (2021) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2021.720195 · Cited by 368
Metadata
- Authors
- Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A.
- Affiliations
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- ORCID
- Kluger, Avraham N.
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 1996-03
- Volume
- 119
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 254-284
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2030441548
- Semantic Scholar
- 97cce81ca813ed757e1e76c0023865c7dbdc7308
- Cited by
- 5,882
- References
- 257
- Citations by year
- 2026: 273 · 2025: 264 · 2024: 235 · 2023: 286 · 2022: 287 · 2021: 369 · 2020: 432 · 2019: 344 · 2018: 302 · 2017: 334 · 2016: 317 · 2015: 354 · 2014: 261 · 2013: 252 · 2012: 221
- FWCI
- 36.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Human Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Keywords
- feedback interventions, performance improvement, feedback effectiveness, feedback intervention theory, task learning, task motivation, knowledge of results, motor learning, task characteristics
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
