Timing of feedback and verbal learning.
Abstract
A meta-analysis of findings on feedback timing and human verbal learning showed that a variety of results have been obtained in 53 separate studies of the topic. Applied studies using actual classroom quizzes and real learning materials have usually found immediate feedback to be more effective than delayed. Experimental studies of acquisition of test content have usually produced the opposite result. Laboratory studies of list learning have produced a variety of results, but the variation in results seems to be related systematically to features of the studies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Previous meta-analyses have produced inconsistent results of feedback on cognitive variables.
“Previous meta-analyses have produced inconsistent results of feedback on cognitive variables (Kulik and Kulik, 1988; Bangert-Drowns et al., 1991; Azevedo and Bernard, 1995; Kluger and DeNisi, 1996; Lyster and Saito, 2010) and significant heterogeneity remains within the sub-group defined by this moderator in our analysis.”
From The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research (2020) · cites this paper as Kulik and Kulik, 1988
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 703
- Authors
- Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- Review of Educational Research
- Published
- 1988-03
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 79-97
- ISSN
- 0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-1046
- OpenAlex
- W2124699212
- Cited by
- 703
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 32.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Review of Educational Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Keywords
- feedback timing, verbal learning, immediate feedback, delayed feedback, list learning, classroom quizzes
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
