Cited by 265Sport Psychology and PerformanceMotor Control and AdaptationSports and Physical Education Research

Feedback After Good Trials Enhances Learning

Chiviacowsky, Suzete, Wulf, Gabriele·2007·Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport

Abstract

Recent studies (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005) have shown that learners prefer to receive feedback after they believe they had a "good" rather than "poor" trial. The present study followed up on this finding and examined whether learning would benefit if individuals received feedback after good relative to poor trials. Participants practiced a task that required them to throw beanbags at a target with their nondominant arm. Vision was prevented during and after the throws. All participants received knowledge of results (KR) on three trials in each 6-trial block. While one group (KR good) received KR for the three most effective trials in each block, another (KR poor) received feedback for the three least effective trials in each block. There were no group differences in practice. However the KR good group showed learning advantages on a delayed retention test (without KR). These results demonstrated that learning is facilitated if feedback is provided after good rather than poor trials. The findings are interpreted as evidence for a motivational function of feedback.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02701367.2007.10599402

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Federal de Pelotas (BR)
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
Venue
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Published
2007-03
Volume
78
Issue
2
Pages
40-47
ISSN
  • 0034-5377 (ISSN-L)
  • 0270-1367
  • 2168-3824
OpenAlex
W2059254035
Cited by
265
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 21
FWCI
13.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
Keywords
feedback timing, knowledge of results, motor learning, retention, skill acquisition
MeSH terms
Adult, Clinical Trials as Topic, Feedback, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Nevada

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