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 601–700 of 1,033
Learning, Training, and Development in Organizations
Salas, E., Weaver, S. J., & Shuffler, M. L. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199928309.013.0011 · Cited by 113
Choi, J. N. (2006) · Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1348/096317906x110250 · Cited by 112
Conceptual Issues in Research on Stress and Health
Semmer, N. K., McGrath, J. E., & Beehr, T. A. (2004) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420039702.ch1 · Cited by 112
The Impact of Time Pressure and Information on Negotiation Process and Decisions
Stuhlmacher, A. F., & Champagne, M. V. (2000) · Group Decision and Negotiation · doi:10.1023/a:1008736622709 · Cited by 111
Self-schemas and the theory of planned behaviour
Sheeran, P., & Orbell, S. (2000) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/1099-0992(200007/08)30:4 · Cited by 131
Ward, M. K., & Pond, S. B. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.070 · Cited by 111
Classes That Click: Fast, Rich Feedback to Enhance Student Learning and Satisfaction
Chen, J. C., Whittinghill, D. C., & Kadlowec, J. A. (2010) · Journal of Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01052.x · Cited by 111
Theobald, M., & Bellhäuser, H. (2022) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100872 · Cited by 111
Sparr, J. L., & Sonnentag, S. (2008) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/13594320802077146 · Cited by 111
Feedback signals in the caudate reflect goal achievement on a declarative memory task
Tricomi, E. M., & Fiez, J. A. (2008) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.066 · Cited by 113
Self-Regulation in Organizational Settings
Vancouver, J. B. (2000) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50039-1 · Cited by 114
Teunissen, P. W., & Dornan, T. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39434.601690.ad · Cited by 110
Kerssen‐Griep, J., Trees, A. R., & Hess, J. A. (2008) · Communication Education · doi:10.1080/03634520802027347 · Cited by 113
The interactive role of performance appraisal reactions and regular feedback
Kuvaas, B. (2011) · Journal of Managerial Psychology · doi:10.1108/02683941111102164 · Cited by 110
Amir, O., & Dan Ariely, C. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/a0012857 · Cited by 124
Grossman, P., Loeb, S., Cohen, J. J., Hammerness, K. M., Wyckoff, J., Boyd, D. J., & Lankford, H. (2010) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w16015 · Cited by 116
RESPONSE TO ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK: THE EFFECTS OF GRADES, PRAISE, AND SOURCE OF INFORMATION
Lipnevich, A. A., & Smith, J. K. (2008) · ETS Research Report Series · doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2008.tb02116.x · Cited by 109
School performance feedback systems: Conceptualisation, analysis, and reflection
Visscher, A. J., & Coe, R. (2003) · School Effectiveness and School Improvement · doi:10.1076/sesi.14.3.321.15842 · Cited by 109
Brockner, J., Heuer, L. B., Magner, N. R., Folger, R. G., Umphress, E. E., van den Bos, K., Vermunt, R. C., Magner, M., & Siegel, P. A. (2003) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/s0749-5978(02)00531-9 · Cited by 109
The Effect of Feedback Sign on Task Performance Depends on Self-Concept Discrepancies.
Vancouver, J. B., & Tischner, E. C. (2004) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1092 · Cited by 113
Sedikides, C., & Hepper, E. G. D. (2009) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00231.x · Cited by 108
Gonzalez-Mule, E. N., Courtright, S. H., DeGeest, D. S., Seong, J. Y., & Hong, D. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314535443 · Cited by 116
Practicing Physicians' Needs for Assessment and Feedback as Part of Professional Development
Sargeant, J. M., Bruce, D., & Campbell, C. M. (2013) · Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · doi:10.1002/chp.21202 · Cited by 108
An Open Repository and analysis tools for fine-grained, longitudinal learner data.
Koedinger, K. R., Cunningham, K., Skogsholm, A., & Leber, B. (2008) · Educational Data Mining · Cited by 108
Understanding the motivational effects of procedural and informational justice in feedback processes
Roberson, Q. M., & Stewart, M. M. (2006) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1348/000712605x80146 · Cited by 108
Johnson, C., Keating, J. L., Boud, D. J., Dalton, M., Kiegaldie, D., Hay, M., McGrath, B. P., McKenzie, W. A., Nair, K., Nestel, D., et al. (2016) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0613-5 · Cited by 108
Promoting Deep and Durable Learning in the Online Classroom
Hacker, D. J., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2000) · New Directions for Teaching and Learning · doi:10.1002/tl.848 · Cited by 108
Using synchronous peer tutoring system to promote elementary students’ learning in mathematics
Tsuei, M. (2011) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.025 · Cited by 107
Froehlich, D. E., Beausaert, S. A. J., Segers, M. S. R., & Gerken, M. (2014) · Career Development International · doi:10.1108/cdi-11-2013-0139 · Cited by 115
HR analytics and performance appraisal system
Sharma, A., & Sharma, T. (2017) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-04-2016-0084 · Cited by 107
Fong, C., Schallert, D., Williams, K., Williamson, Z. H., Warner, J. R., Lin, S.-J., & Kim, Y. W. (2018) · Thinking Skills and Creativity · doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2018.02.014 · Cited by 95
Lee, H. W., & Kim, E. (2019) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.21970 · Cited by 107
Changing Behavior Using the Health Action Process Approach
Schwarzer, R., & Hamilton, K. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108677318.007 · Cited by 114
Assessing individual differences in achievement motivation with the Implicit Association Test
Brunstein, J. C., & Schmitt, C. H. (2004) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2004.01.003 · Cited by 107
Observer ratings of instructional quality: Do they fulfill what they promise?
Praetorius, A., Lenske, G., & Helmke, A. (2012) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.03.002 · Cited by 107
The effect of team feedback and guided reflexivity on team performance change
Gabelica, C., den Bossche, P. V., Mæyer, S. D., Segers, M. S. R., & Gijselaers, W. (2014) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.09.001 · Cited by 117
Promoting Work Motivation in Organizations
Wegge, J., Jeppesen, H. J., Weber, W., Pearce, C. L., da Silva, S. A., Pundt, A., Jønsson, T., Wolf, S., Wassenaar, C. L., Unterrainer, C., et al. (2010) · Journal of Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000025 · Cited by 114
Shute, V. J., Hansen, E. G., & Almond, R. G. (2008) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.3233/irg-2008-18(4)02 · Cited by 107
Performance management: Putting research into action.
Smither, J. W., & London, M. (2009) · Cited by 107
Schönwetter, D. J., Lavigne, S. E., Mazurat, R., & Nazarko, O. M. (2006) · Journal of Dental Education · doi:10.1002/j.0022-0337.2006.70.6.tb04118.x · Cited by 108
Brooks, C., Carroll, A., Gillies, R. M., & Hattie, J. (2019) · The Australian journal of teacher education · doi:10.14221/ajte.2018v44n4.2 · Cited by 105
Coutifaris, C. V., & Grant, A. M. (2021) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2021.1498 · Cited by 120
Profiling work motivation of project workers
Dwivedula, R., & Bredillet, C. N. (2009) · International Journal of Project Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.09.001 · Cited by 105
Feedback and organizations: Feedback is good, feedback-friendly culture is better.
Baker, A., Perreault, D., Reid, A., & Blanchard, C. M. (2013) · Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · doi:10.1037/a0034691 · Cited by 105
Managing Employee Performance and Reward: Concepts, Practices, Strategies
Shields, J. L., Brown, M., Kaine, S., Dolle-Samuel, C., North‐Samardzic, A., (9896723), P. M., Johns, R., O’Leary, P., Plimmer, G., & Robinson, J. (2007) · Cited by 105
Haynes, A. S., Rowbotham, S. J., Redman, S., Brennan, S., Williamson, A. B., & Moore, G. (2018) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-018-0277-1 · Cited by 111
Bonneton-Botté, N., Fleury, S., Girard, N., Magadou, M. L., Cherbonnier, A., Renault, M., Anquetil, É., & Jamet, É. (2020) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103831 · Cited by 104
From task characteristics to learning: A systematic review
Wielenga-Meijer, E. G. A., Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A. J., & Wigboldus, D. H. J. (2010) · Scandinavian Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2009.00768.x · Cited by 113
Improving training impact through effective follow‐up: techniques and their application
Martin, H. (2010) · Journal of Management Development · doi:10.1108/02621711011046495 · Cited by 113
Villado, A. J., & Arthur, W. (2013) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0031510 · Cited by 104
Gender Gaps in Overestimation of Math Performance
Bench, S. W., Lench, H. C., Liew, J., Miner, K. N., & Flores, S. A. (2015) · Sex Roles · doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0486-9 · Cited by 120
Carton, A. M., & Lucas, B. J. (2017) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0375 · Cited by 103
Self-Regulation of Performance: Goal Establishment and Goal Revision Processes in Athletes
Williams, K. J., Donovan, J. J., & Dodge, T. L. (2000) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup1302_3 · Cited by 107
The Design and Delivery of Crew Resource Management Training: Exploiting Available Resources
Eduardo Salas, A., Rhodenizer, L. G., & Bowers, C. A. (2000) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872000779698196 · Cited by 103
On Being Exposed to Superior Others: Consequences of Self‐Threatening Upward Social Comparisons
Dominique Muller, B., & Fayant, M. (2010) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00279.x · Cited by 102
Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2010) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.007 · Cited by 113
Witt, P. L., & Kerssen‐Griep, J. (2010) · Communication Education · doi:10.1080/03634523.2010.507820 · Cited by 102
Changing principals’ leadership through feedback and coaching
Goff, P., Guthrie, J. E., Goldring, E. B., & Bickman, L. (2014) · Journal of Educational Administration · doi:10.1108/jea-10-2013-0113 · Cited by 116
Nerdinger, F. W. (2005) · Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie A&O · doi:10.1026/0932-4089.49.1.51 · Cited by 102
Connelly, S., & Ruark, G. (2010) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.07.005 · Cited by 101
Long-term effect of theory of mind on school achievement: The role of sensitivity to criticism
Lecce, S., Caputi, M., & Pagnin, A. (2013) · European Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17405629.2013.821944 · Cited by 101
Integrating Content and Structure Aspects of the Self: Traits, Values, and Self‐Improvement
Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Oppenheim‐Weller, S., Elster, A., & Gal, A. (2013) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12041 · Cited by 111
Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice
Ivers, N. M., Yogasingam, S., Lacroix, M., Brown, K. A., Antony, J., Soobiah, C., Simeoni, M., Willis, T. A., Crawshaw, J., Antonopoulou, V., et al. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000259.pub4 · Cited by 115
Adolescents’ Development of Individual Interests: A Product of Multiple Goal Regulation?
Hofer, M. (2010) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.493469 · Cited by 111
Tanana, M. J., Soma, C. S., Srikumar, V., Atkins, D. C., & Imel, Z. E. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/12529 · Cited by 100
360 Feedback from Another Angle
Bracken, D. W., Timmreck, C. W., Fleenor, J. W., & Summers, L. (2001) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.4012 · Cited by 100
Homberg, F., Vogel, R., & Weiherl, J. (2017) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/padm.12354 · Cited by 109
Tavares, W., Eppich, W., Cheng, A., Miller, S. G., Teunissen, P. W., Watling, C., & Sargeant, J. M. (2019) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002932 · Cited by 100
Han, F. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13095020 · Cited by 128
Brutus, S. (2009) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.06.003 · Cited by 100
DISPOSITIONAL INFLUENCES ON TRANSFER OF LEARNING IN MULTISTAGE TRAINING PROGRAMS
Herold, D. M., Davis, W. D., Fedor, D., & Parsons, C. (2002) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00132.x · Cited by 120
A Psychological Fidelity Approach to Simulation-Based Training: Theory, Research and Principles
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315243771-12 · Cited by 100
The Nature and Value of Formative Assessment for Learning
Blackà, P. (2003) · Improving Schools · doi:10.1177/136548020300600304 · Cited by 105
Understanding responses to feedback: the potential and limitations of regulatory focus theory
Watling, C., Driessen, E., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Vanstone, M., & Lingard, L. (2012) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04209.x · Cited by 99
de Jong, K., Timman, R., Roijen, L. H., Vermeulen, P., Kooiman, K., Passchier, J., & Busschbach, J. J. V. (2014) · Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1080/10503307.2013.871079 · Cited by 110
What makes rubrics effective in teacher-feedback? Transparency of learning goals is not enough
Wollenschläger, M., Hattie, J., Machts, N., Møller, J., & Harms, U. (2015) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.11.003 · Cited by 99
Vigilance Decrement and Enhancement Techniques: A Review
Al-Shargie, F., Tariq, U., Mir, H., Alawar, H., Babiloni, F., & Al-Nashash, H. A. (2019) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci9080178 · Cited by 110
Chatzigeorgiou, I. M., & Ανδρέου, Γ. (2020) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110187 · Cited by 99
Interactive Feedback for Learning Mathematics in a Digital Learning Environment
Barana, A., Marchisio, M., & Sacchet, M. (2021) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci11060279 · Cited by 99
A Process Model of Goal Orientation and Feedback Seeking
Park, G., Schmidt, A. M., Scheu, C. R., & DeShon, R. P. (2007) · Human Performance · doi:10.1080/08959280701332042 · Cited by 104
King, P. E., Schrodt, P., & Weisel, J. J. (2009) · Communication Education · doi:10.1080/03634520802515705 · Cited by 99
Fletcher, C., & Perry, E. L. (2012) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781848608320.n8 · Cited by 99
Dimotakis, N. E., Mitchell, D., & Maurer, T. J. (2017) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000228 · Cited by 99
Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback
Misiejuk, K., Wasson, B., & Egelandsdal, K. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106658 · Cited by 98
Effectiveness and relevance of feedback in Higher Education: A study of undergraduate students
Pereira, D., Flores, M. A., Simão, A. M. V., & Barros, A. (2016) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.03.004 · Cited by 98
See, B. H., Gorard, S. A. C., Lu, B., Dong, L., & Siddiqui, N. (2021) · Research Papers in Education · doi:10.1080/02671522.2021.1907778 · Cited by 121
Transformational leadership development
Mason, C., Griffin, M. A., & Parker, S. K. (2014) · Leadership & Organization Development Journal · doi:10.1108/lodj-05-2012-0063 · Cited by 98
User Behavior and Technology Development
Verbeek, P., & Slob, A. F. L. (2006) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5196-8 · Cited by 98
Benson, M. S., & Powell, M. B. (2015) · Psychology Public Policy and Law · doi:10.1037/law0000052 · Cited by 98
Kausel, E. E., Culbertson, S. S., & Madrid, H. P. (2016) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.07.005 · Cited by 109
Trends in Language Acquisition Research
Abbot‐Smith, K. (2013) · Trends in language acquisition research · doi:10.1075/tilar · Cited by 98
The impact of patient feedback on the medical performance of qualified doctors: a systematic review
Baines, R., de Bere, S. R., Stevens, S., Read, J. H., Marshall, M., Lalani, M., Bryce, M., & Archer, J. C. (2018) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-018-1277-0 · Cited by 97
Xing, L., Sun, J., & Jepsen, D. M. (2021) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2553 · Cited by 97
The effects of feedback format on dynamic decision making
Atkins, P. W. B., Wood, R. E., & Rutgers, P. J. (2002) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/s0749-5978(02)00002-x · Cited by 101
Sargeant, J. M., McNaughton, E., Mercer, S. W., Murphy, D., Sullivan, P., & Bruce, D. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.577287 · Cited by 97
Cavanaugh, B. J. (2012) · Education and Treatment of Children · doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0001 · Cited by 97
Dolan, P., & Metcalfe, R. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2589269 · Cited by 104
What Lies Beneath? A Process Analysis of Affective Events Theory
Ashton-James, C. E., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2007) · Research on emotion in organizations · doi:10.1016/s1746-9791(05)01102-8 · Cited by 104
Zimbardi, K., Colthorpe, K. L., Dekker, A., ENGSTROM, C. M., Bugarc̀ić, A., Worthy, P., Victor, R., Chunduri, P., Bryan‐Lluka, L. J., & Long, P. (2016) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2016.1174187 · Cited by 96
Parker, S. K., Ward, M. K., & Fisher, G. G. (2021) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2019.0057 · Cited by 106
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
