The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Feedback in Written Instruction
Abstract
When students respond to an instructional communication, telling them whether or not their answer is correct increases the amount of material remembered on a later test (Anderson, Kulhavy, & Andre, 1971; Gilman, 1969; Meyer, 1960). Unfortunately, the mechanisms responsible for such facilitation are frequently misunderstood, and one can find numerous examples in both research and instructional development where feedback is used inappropriately, neutralizing any positive effects it might have on student performance. The main purpose of this paper is to provide an integration of the work done on feedback processes, especially as these results apply to written lessons and the design of instructional materials. Finally, this discussion makes no attempt to cover the more task specific literature dealing with motor learning, simple concept acquisition, or paired-associates, since excellent reviews already exist in these areas (Adams, 1968; Ammons, 1956; Bilodeau, 1966; Bourne, 1966; Renner, 1964).
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
“However, feedback that immediately supplies learners with correct answers can be limiting for many learners. Once answers are revealed, learners often disengage from deep thinking and simply copy the solutions (Kulhavy, 1977), a tendency that is especially detrimental to learners' agency in problem-solving contexts.”
From Assessing the Impact and Underlying Pathways of Sequenced AI feedback on Student Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Kulhavy, 1977
In the citing paper
“During the learning process, immediate provision of correct answers may encourage students to copy the answer without fully engaging in understanding (Kulhavy, 1977).”
From Assessing the Impact and Underlying Pathways of Sequenced AI feedback on Student Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Kulhavy, 1977
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 64
- Adams JA, 1968, Psychological Bulletin, 70, 486, 10.1037/h0026741 · DOI
- Ammons RB, 1956, Journal of General Psychology, 54, 279, 10.1080/00221309.1956.9920284 · DOI
- Anderson RC, 1967, Annual Review of Psychology, 18, 129, 10.1146/annurev.ps.18.020167.001021 · DOI
- 10.3102/00346543040003349 · DOI
- 10.3102/00028312004004345 · DOI
- Anderson RC, 1971, Journal of Educational Research, 62, 148
- Anderson RC, 1972, Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 186, 10.1037/h0032653 · DOI
- Angell GW, 1949, Journal of Educational Research, 42, 391, 10.1080/00220671.1949.10881704 · DOI
- Annet J, 1964, Educational technology
- Bilodeau IM, 1966, Acquisition of skill
- Bisbicos EE, 1965, Journal of Programmed Instruction, 3, 15
- Block JH, 1974, Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 962, 10.1037/h0021542 · DOI
- Bourne LE, 1966, Human conceptual behavior
- Brackbill Y, 1964, Psychology in the Schools, 1, 148
- Buss AH, 1956, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 288, 10.1037/h0046140 · DOI
- Buss AH, 1956, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52, 283, 10.1037/h0045981 · DOI
- Buss AH, 1954, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 433, 10.1037/h0054709 · DOI
- Elley WB, 1966, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 36, 296, 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1966.tb01882.x · DOI
- Feldhusen JF, 1962, Journal of Educational Research, 55, 461, 10.1080/00220671.1962.10882854 · DOI
- Gilman DA, 1969, Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 503, 10.1037/h0028501 · DOI
- Hansen JB, 1974, Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 247, 10.1037/h0036280 · DOI
- Holland JG, 1961, The analysis of behavior
- Homme LE, 1960, Teaching machines and programmed learning: A source book, 486
- Hough JB, 1963, Phi Delta Kappan, 44, 286
- Kaess W, 1960, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 12, 10.1037/h0041471 · DOI
- Karraker RJ, 1967, Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 11, 10.1037/h0024113 · DOI
- Kaufman RA, 1963, Journal of Programmed Instruction, 2, 21
- Krumboltz JE, 1962, Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 250, 10.1037/h0040448 · DOI
- Kulhavy RW, 1972, Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 505, 10.1037/h0033243 · DOI
- Kulhavy RW, 1975, Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 5, 146, 10.3758/BF03333229 · DOI
- Kulhavy RW, 1972, Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 81, 10.1037/h0032348 · DOI
- Kulhavy RW, 1975, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 45, 47, 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1975.tb02294.x · DOI
- Kulhavy RW, Chapter in Encyclopedia of Instructional Development
- Kulhavy RW, 1976, Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 522, 10.1037/0022-0663.68.5.522 · DOI
- Lublin SC, 1965, Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 295, 10.1037/h0022790 · DOI
- Markowitz N, 1966, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 452, 10.1037/h0023643 · DOI
- McDonald FJ, 1962, Journal of Educational Research, 55, 502, 10.1080/00220671.1962.10882860 · DOI
- Melching WH, 1966, National Society for Programmed Instruction Journal, 5, 14
- Merrill MD, 1965, Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 225, 10.1037/h0022471 · DOI
- 10.3102/00028312003004251 · DOI
- Meyer SR, 1960, Teaching machines and programmed learning
- 10.2466/pr0.1961.9.3.717 · DOI
- 10.2466/pr0.1964.14.2.407 · DOI
- More AJ, 1969, Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 339, 10.1037/h0028318 · DOI
- O’Day EF, 1971, Programmed instruction: Techniques and trends
- Porter DA, 1957, Harvard Educational Review, 27, 126
- Renner KE, 1964, Psychological Bulletin, 61, 341, 10.1037/h0048335 · DOI
- Roe AA, 1962, Journal of Educational Research, 55, 407, 10.1080/00220671.1962.10882847 · DOI
- 10.2466/pr0.1965.17.2.535 · DOI
- Sassenrath JM, 1975, Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 894, 10.1037/0022-0663.67.6.894 · DOI
- Sassenrath JM, 1968, Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 69, 10.1037/h0025512 · DOI
- Sassenrath JM, 1969, Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 174, 10.1037/h0027618 · DOI
- Smith KU, 1966, Cybernetic principles of learning and educational design
- Skinner BF, 1968, The technology of teaching
- Sturges PT, 1969, Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 11, 10.1037/h0026638 · DOI
- Sturges PT, 1972, Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 32, 10.1037/h0032158 · DOI
- Sturges PT, 1968, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 357, 10.1037/h0026377 · DOI
- Sullivan HJ, 1967, Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 165, 10.1037/h0024579 · DOI
- 10.3102/00028312008001135 · DOI
- Surber JR, 1975, Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 170, 10.1037/h0077003 · DOI
- Talyzina NF, 1973, Instructional Science, 2, 243, 10.1007/BF00119056 · DOI
- Travers RMW, 1964, Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 167, 10.1037/h0048319 · DOI
- Underwood BJ, 1968, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 50, 10.1037/h0026157 · DOI
- Wentling TL, 1973, Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 50, 10.1037/h0034820 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 409
Evidence for Cognitive Science Principles that Impact Learning in Mathematics
Booth, J. L., McGinn, K. M., Barbieri, C., Begolli, K. N., Chang, B. L., Miller‐Cotto, D., Young, L. K., & Davenport, J. L. (2017) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-805086-6.00013-8 · Cited by 52
“The study of feedback—in the form of reinforcement—dates back to Skinner’s assertion that it reinforces behavior (Kulhavy, 1977), but feedback itself is considered to be “instructionally powerful” (Cohen, 1985, p. 33) for many contexts, not just behavior.”
BackgroundBeauchemin, N., Charland, P., Karran, A. J., Boasen, J., Tadson, B., Sénécal, S., & Léger, P. (2024) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1416683 · Cited by 53
“Previous research has indicated that providing the correct answer to a question, irrespective of whether it was answered correctly, is essential in enhancing the retention of information and avoiding future mistakes (Butler et al., 2008; Kulhavy, 1977).”
Seeing Eye-to-Eye? Staff and Student Views on Feedback
Bevan, R. J., Badge, J., Cann, A., Willmott, C. J. R., & Scott, J. J. A. (2008) · Bioscience Education · doi:10.3108/beej.12.1 · Cited by 45
“…that feedback may not necessarily be effective because although the guidance offered can be accepted, it can also be modified or rejected (Kulhavy, 1977) Both staff and students, therefore, accepted the variability in extent of use of feedback, with staff ultimately feeling that once…”
BackgroundAgrawal, R., Knodler, M., Fisher, D., & Samuel, S. (2018) · Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · doi:10.1177/0361198118758311 · Cited by 43
“This means that the errors become truly salient events and can motivate further learning (26).”
BackgroundMory, E. (1994) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/ym7u-g8un-8u5h-hd8n · Cited by 42
“One current view of feedback [ 111 suggests that a critical component in the feedback process is the learner’s own metacognitive perception of whether his or her answer is correct-a term referred to as respome confidence [8, 12, 131 or response certitude [ 1 11.”
BackgroundResultA longitudinal perspective on inductive reasoning tasks. Illuminating the probability of change
Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. M. (2010) · Learning and Instruction · doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.08.004 · Cited by 44
Feedback: How Does It Function?.
Bardwell, R. (1981) · doi:10.1080/00220973.1981.11011792 · Cited by 41
Feedback and content review in programmed instruction
Kulhavy, R. W., Yekovich, F. R., & Dyer, J. W. (1979) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/0361-476x(79)90062-6 · Cited by 41
Self-citationTeaching and Rehabilitation of Handwriting for Children in the Digital Age: Issues and Challenges
Bonneton-Botté, N., Miramand, L., Bailly, R., & Pons, C. (2023) · Children · doi:10.3390/children10071096 · Cited by 45
“Feedback on performance can be accepted, modified, or rejected by the individual [86] and thus may have a positive or negative effect on learning [87].”
BackgroundMikula, B. D., & Heckler, A. F. (2017) · Physical Review Physics Education Research · doi:10.1103/physrevphyseducres.13.010122 · Cited by 55
Feedback-related brain activity predicts learning from feedback in multiple-choice testing
Ernst, B., & Steinhauser, M. (2012) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-012-0087-9 · Cited by 41
“Whereas feedback in decision-making tasks has been viewed as a reinforcer (Frank & Claus, 2006; Holroyd & Coles, 2002), feedback in memory tasks has been viewed as a source of information for learning (Bangert-Drowns et al., 1991; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundEffects of complex feedback on computer-assisted modular instruction
Gordijn, J., & Nijhof, W. (2002) · Comput. Educ. · doi:10.1016/s0360-1315(02)00025-8 · Cited by 40
Webb, J. M., Diana, E. M., Luft, P., Brooks, E. W., & Brennan, E. L. (1997) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220679709597526 · Cited by 40
Weighing Up Exercises on Phrasal Verbs: Retrieval Versus Trial‐and‐Error Practices
Strong, B., & Boers, F. (2019) · Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12579 · Cited by 73
Feedback influences children's reasoning about math equivalence: A meta-analytic review
Fyfe, E. R., & Brown, S. A. (2017) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2017.1359208 · Cited by 56
“Corrective feedback is theorised to benefit learning via error correction, specifically by strengthening correct responses, weakening incorrect responses and facilitating the generation of correct alternatives (e.g., Clariana, Wagner, & Murphy, 2000; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundMathematics practice without feedback: A desirable difficulty in a classroom setting
Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2017) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-016-9401-1 · Cited by 37
Jiménez, E. G. (2015) · RELIEVE - Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa · doi:10.7203/relieve.21.2.7546 · Cited by 94
“…a diferencia de los procesos físicos, cuando lo que se evalúa es el aprendizaje, el retorno de información al alumno a partir del análisis de los resultados no garantiza la modificación de su proceso de aprendizaje (Kulhavi, 1977; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Hounsell, Mccune, Litjens & Hounsell, 2005).”
The benefits of computer-generated feedback for mathematics problem solving.
Fyfe, E. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2016.03.009 · Cited by 36
“This feedback can promote the correction of errors (Kulhavy, 1977) and increase motivation (Mory, 2004).”
BackgroundBridging the Gap between Expert-Novice Differences
Ifenthaler, D. (2010) · Journal of Research on Technology in Education · doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782564 · Cited by 50
“However, the empirical evidence regarding the effects of different types of feedback is rather inconsistent and somewhat contradictory (e.g. Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan, 1991; Clariana, 1993; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Kulhavy, 1977; Mory, 2004).”
BackgroundPost-questioning, concept mapping and feedback: a distance education field experiment
Bernard, R. M., & Naidu, S. (1992) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.1992.tb00309.x · Cited by 36
Promoting Independent Learning in the Middle Grades: The Role of Instructional Support Practices
Thomas, J. W. (1993) · The Elementary school journal · doi:10.1086/461741 · Cited by 35
“The positive effect of performance feedback on learning and on adolescents' subsequent test performance is generally acknowledged (Crooks, 1988; Kulhavy, 1977; Rudman et al., 1980).”
BackgroundStrategies for Correcting Students' Wrong Responses
Meyer, L. A. (1986) · The Elementary school journal · doi:10.1086/461491 · Cited by 35
Seo, Y., & Eom, M. (2021) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare9030243 · Cited by 34
“Fourth, providing feedback is an important factor for learning; in particular, correction feedback has a positive effect on the promotion of self-efficacy [22,32].”
BackgroundFeedback Effects on Oral Reading Errors of Children with Learning Disabilities
Perkins, V. L. (1988) · Journal of Learning Disabilities · doi:10.1177/002221948802100412 · Cited by 34
Effects of “On‐Line” Test Feedback on the Seriousness of Subsequent Errors
Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K. (1987) · Journal of Educational Measurement · doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1987.tb00270.x · Cited by 34
“As Kulhavy (1977) stated,”
Sonne, M. W. L. (2010) · Occupational Ergonomics · doi:10.3233/oer-2012-0194 · Cited by 34
“In situations where the interpretation of knowledge is not correct, providing feedback has been proven to be effective in correcting performance (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundCogliano, M., Bernacki, M. L., & Kardash, C. M. (2020) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000624 · Cited by 46
Fryer, L. K., & Leenknecht, M. J. M. (2023) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09787-5 · Cited by 32
“However, beginning in the 1960s and 1970s, the effect of feedback on student’s achievement was recognised and actively researched (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundInfluentialBenefits of additional online practice opportunities in higher education
Schwerter, J., Dimpfl, T., Bleher, J., & Murayama, K. (2021) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2021.100834 · Cited by 43
Feedback, Retention, Discrimination Error, and Feedback Study Time
Dempsey, J. (1993) · Journal of Research on Computing in Education · doi:10.1080/08886504.1993.10782053 · Cited by 32
The Influence of Instructional Conditions on Student Learning and Achievement.
Anania, J. (1983) · Evaluation in Education · doi:10.1016/0191-765x(83)90002-2 · Cited by 32
The effect of explanations on mathematical reasoning tasks
Norqvist, M. (2017) · International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/0020739x.2017.1340679 · Cited by 44
“In a study on feedback, Kulhavy [48] found that easily available feedback prompted students to copy answers rather than to go through an elaborate process of reasoning.”
BackgroundDie Gestaltung von Feedback in computergestützten Lernumgebungen: Modelle und Befunde
Musch, J. (1999) · Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie · doi:10.1024//1010-0652.13.3.148 · Cited by 26
Thomas, J. W., Bol, L., & Warkentin, R. (1991) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/bf00132292 · Cited by 31
“The effectiveness of feedback on learning and on subsequent test performance is generally ackowledged (Crooks 1988; Kulhavy 1977 ), and has been suggested as a key ingredient in college-level courses that promote more effective study practices (Light 1990).”
BackgroundSummative and Formative Feedback
Brookhart, S. M. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316832134.005 · Cited by 47
Rand, J. (2017) · Research in Education · doi:10.1177/0034523717697519 · Cited by 30
“…refers to as ‘old paradigm’ thinking: ‘any of the numerous procedures that are used to tell a learner if an instructional response is right or wrong’ (Kulhavy, 1977: 211), and contemporary thinking: as ‘a process in which students engage with feedback from various sources and make use of it to…”
BackgroundToward consilience in the use of task-level feedback to promote learning
Butler, A. C., & Woodward, N. R. (2018) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/bs.plm.2018.09.001 · Cited by 43
Modifying Academic Performance in the Grade School Classroom
Klein, R. (1979) · Progress in behavior modification · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-535608-4.50012-9 · Cited by 30
An analysis of in-game feedback provided by coaches in an Australian Football League competition
Mason, R. J., Farrow, D., & Hattie, J. (2020) · Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy · doi:10.1080/17408989.2020.1734555 · Cited by 29
Clicking Their Way to Success: Using Student Response Systems as a Tool for Feedback
Hedgcock, W. M., & Rouwenhorst, R. (2014) · Journal for advancement of marketing education · doi:10.63963/001c.150540 · Cited by 29
“Students who receive feedback before they have formulated their own answer do not learn as much as students that formulate their own answer before they are provided with feedback (Kulhavy 1977).”
Siewert, L. (2011) · Preventing School Failure Alternative Education for Children and Youth · doi:10.1080/10459880903286771 · Cited by 29
“Kulhavy (1977) indicated that a delay in feedback could also produce good retention skills.”
BackgroundInfluentialTHE EFFECTS OF IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED FEEDBACK ON SECONDARY DISTANCE LEARNERS
Lemley, D. C., Sudweeks, R., Howell, S., Laws, R., & Sawyer, O. (2007) · Quarterly review of distance education · doi:10.1108/qrde-09-2007-0007 · Cited by 29
“This implies that KR is the least effective type of feedback, followed by KCR, with elabora-tive feedback being the most effective (Bangert-Drowns et al., 1991; Clariana, Ross, & Morrison, 1991; Kulhavy, 1977; Lee-Sam-mons & Wollen, 1989; Pridemore & Klein, 1991).”
EFL Turkish University Students’ Preferences about Teacher Feedback and its Importance
Kahraman, A., & Yalvaç, F. (2015) · Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.489 · Cited by 28
Cumulative assessment: strategic choices to influence students’ study effort
Kerdijk, W., Tio, R. A., Mulder, B. F., & Cohen‐Schotanus, J. (2013) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/1472-6920-13-172 · Cited by 27
Misunderstanding Meta-Analysis
Bangert-Drowns, R. (1995) · Evaluation & the Health Professions · doi:10.1177/016327879501800305 · Cited by 28
Usability in computer documentation design: conceptual and methodological considerations
Guillemette, R. A. (1989) · IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication · doi:10.1109/47.44534 · Cited by 40
Providing immediate feedback improves recycling and composting accuracy
Luo, Y., Zelenika, I., & Zhao, J. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.061 · Cited by 32
Formative Evaluation Effects on Learning Music
Boulet, M., Simard, G., & de Melo, D. (1990) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.1990.10886002 · Cited by 27
“We used the numerous observations made by researchers (Birenbaum & Tatsuoka, 1987; Guskey, 1987; Kulhavy, 1977; Pro vencher, 1985; Sassemath, 1975; Slavin, 1987) to deter mine the types of feedback.”
MethodWritten Feedback: Response Certitude and Durability.
Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W., Hancock, T., Swindell, L., & Hammrich, P. L. (1990) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/0361-476x(90)90028-y · Cited by 27
Self-citationThe computer as a tutor ? can it adapt to the individual learner?
Hativa, N., & Lesgold, A. M. (1991) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00119686 · Cited by 22
“It is suggested (e.g., Cohen, 1985; Kulhavy, 1977 ) that minimal feedback of correct/ incorrect to a student's solution (that is, simple confirmation feedback) is much”
BackgroundLui, A. M., & Andrade, H. (2022) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2022.751549 · Cited by 43
“Feedback should close the gap between where students are and where they need to be (Kulhavy, 1977; Ramaprasad, 1983; Butler and Winne, 1995; Hattie and Timperley, 2007), ultimately improving academic achievement.”
BackgroundEffect of Feedback and Remediation on Students’ Achievement in Junior Secondary School Mathematics
James, A., & Folorunso, A. M. (2012) · doi:10.5539/ies.v5n5p153 · Cited by 26
Effectiveness of Web‐Based Teaching Modules: Test‐Enhanced Learning in Dental Education
Jackson, T. H., Hannum, W. H., Koroluk, L. D., & Proffit, W. R. (2011) · Journal of Dental Education · doi:10.1002/j.0022-0337.2011.75.6.tb05105.x · Cited by 23
A quest for meta-learning gains in a physics serious game
Verpoorten, D., Castaigne, J.-L., Westera, W., & Specht, M. M. (2012) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-012-9219-7 · Cited by 28
Effects of Written Feedback in Reading on Behaviorally Disordered Students
Mclaughlin, T. (1992) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.1992.9941131 · Cited by 25
“Feedback has been suggested as an important compo nent for improving performance in a variety of set tings, populations, and across several behaviors (Good & Brophy, 1984; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThe processing of informative feedback about multiple-choice test performance☆
Phye, G. D. (1979) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/0361-476x(79)90057-2 · Cited by 25
Perspectives on the design of human-computer interactions: issues and implications
Gavora, M. J., & Hannafin, M. (1994) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00897978 · Cited by 24
“Postponing feedback permits individuals to purge unimportant or poorly processed information from working memory, facilitating the delayed-retention effect ( Kulhavy, 1977 ).”
BackgroundFeedback engagement as a multidimensional construct: a validation study
Gan, Z., Wei, W., & Yu, G. (2024) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2024.2381227 · Cited by 24
“For a long time, feedback has been regarded as a strong external stimulus informing students explicitly what needs to be fixed or revised (Kulhavy 1977; Shute 2008).”
Spooner, M., Duane, C., Uygur, J., Smyth, E., Marron, B., Murphy, P., & Pawlikowska, T. R. B. (2021) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2021.1970732 · Cited by 44
Faded Versus Increasing Feedback, Task Variability Trajectories, and Transfer of Training
Goodman, J. S., & Wood, R. (2009) · Human Performance · doi:10.1080/08959280802541013 · Cited by 23
“…which responses are appropriate or inappropriate for successful performance (Adams, 1987; J. R. Anderson, 1982; Annett, 1969; Ilgen et al., 1979; Kulhavy, 1977) may lead to associative learning of those relationships displayed and memorization of which actions lead to positive outcomes but…”
BackgroundApplying Learning and Instructional Strategies in Open and Distance Learning
Naidu, S. (1994) · Distance Education · doi:10.1080/0158791940150104 · Cited by 23
Examining the Relationships between Feedback Practices and Learning Motivation
Gan, Z., He, J., Zhang, L. J., & Schumacker, R. E. (2023) · Measurement Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives · doi:10.1080/15366367.2022.2061236 · Cited by 29
“Feedback as a product can be understood as “any numerous procedures that are used to tell a learner if an instructional response is right or wrong” (Kulhavy, 1977, p. 211).”
BackgroundHinojosa, D. M. (2022) · Teaching and Teacher Education : An International Journal of Research and Studies · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2021.103582 · Cited by 22
Besser, E. D., & Newby, T. (2019) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-019-00386-2 · Cited by 22
de Villiers, R. (2013) · The International Journal of Management Education · doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2013.01.002 · Cited by 26
Riccomini, P. (2002) · doi:10.2190/hf6d-axqx-axff-m760 · Cited by 22
“Researchers have shown that corrective feedback is one of the more effective techniques for basic instruction (Bloom, 1976; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThe Pedagogy and Pleasures of Teaching a 21st‐Century Skill
Breslow, L. (2015) · European Journal of Education · doi:10.1111/ejed.12159 · Cited by 28
Critical factors about feedback: 'They told me what I did wrong; but didn't give me any feedback'.
Groves, M. A., Mitchell, M. L., Henderson, A., Jeffrey, C. A., Kelly, M., & Nulty, D. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/jocn.12765 · Cited by 21
Pictures and children’s story recall: Some questions of durability
Peng, C.-Y., & Levin, J. (1979) · doi:10.1007/bf02765314 · Cited by 21
Delayed instructional feedback may be more effective, but is this contrary to learners' preferences?
Lefevre, D., & Cox, B. (2017) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12495 · Cited by 20
The Use of Feedback in Education: A Complex Instructional Strategy
Langer, P. (2011) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/11.pr0.109.6.775-784 · Cited by 25
“as a consequence, students’ perceptions of the accuracy of their responses became a critical component of their model (Kulhavy & Stock, 1989). Given the affective reaction, subsequent decision making by both teacher and student is not simply a progression of completely rational and dispassionate logical responses. Dec…”
BackgroundLearning in a new computerized testing system
Park, J. (2005) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.436 · Cited by 20
Individual Differences: Implications for Instructional Theory, Research, and Innovation
Gehlbach, R. D. (1979) · doi:10.3102/0013189x008004008 · Cited by 20
“In a recent review of research on two types of feedback to learners during instruc tion, confirmation of correct re sponses and correction of incorrect ones, Kulhavy (1977) concluded that "the correction function is probably the most important aspect of feed back, and if one were given the choice, feedback followin…”
BackgroundMacdonald-Ross, M. (1978) · Review of Research in Education · doi:10.3102/0091732x006001229 · Cited by 20
“The whole field of research into feedback is the subject of a booklength review by Annett (1969); Kulhavy (1977) is also a valuable source.”
BackgroundUser-generated digital flashcards yield better learning than premade flashcards
Pan, S. C., Zung, I., Imundo, M. N., Zhang, X., & Qiu, Y. (2023) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/mac0000083 · Cited by 19
“…that are spaced apart in time (i.e., distributed practice; Kornell, 2009; Wissman et al., 2012) and involve retrieval practice with correct answer feedback (Glover, 1989; Kulhavy & Stock, 1989), as can occur when fl ashcards are used repeatedly for self-testing and “ fl ipped over ” to check answers.”
Types and Frequencies of Teachers' Written Instructional Feedback.
Bloom, R., & Bourdon, L. (1980) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.1980.10885272 · Cited by 19
“Kulhavy (1977) concludes that "In terms of test yield, supplying feedback after an error is probably far more important than providing confirmation.”
BackgroundE-learning with multiple-try-feedback: Can hints foster students’ achievement during the semester?
Schwerter, J., Wortha, F., & Gerjets, P. H. (2022) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-022-10105-z · Cited by 20
“In comparisons of the three types of feedback, EF has been found to be more effective than KR and KCR (Clariana et al., 1991; Kulhavy, 1977; Van der Kleij et al., 2015) showed that combining these feedback types is more effective than any specific type alone, especially with respect to higher-order…”
Levant, B., Zückert, W. R., & Paolo, A. M. (2018) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-018-9844-z · Cited by 20
Attitudes towards online feedback on writing: Why students mistrust the learning potential of models
Strobl, C. (2015) · ReCALL · doi:10.1017/s0958344015000099 · Cited by 26
“This is in stark contrast with the impact that attitudes have on the uptake, given that “feedback is not necessarily a reinforcer, because [it] can be accepted, modified, or rejected” (Hattie & Timperley, 2007: 82, drawing on Kulhavy, 1977). As early as in 1977, Kulhavy related the importance of research on students’…”
BackgroundResultAjogbeje, O. J., Ojo, A. A., & Ojo, O. (2013) · doi:10.12735/ier.v1i2p08 · Cited by 18
The influence of computerized feedback on overconfidence in knowledge
Dan, Z.-K. (1992) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/01449299208924354 · Cited by 18
Intelligent Model-Based Feedback
Ifenthaler, D. (2011) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-842-2.ch006 · Cited by 16
“However, the empirical evidence regarding the effects of different types of feedback is rather inconsistent and somewhat contradictory (e.g., Bangert-Drowns, et al., 1991; Clariana, 1993; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Kulhavy, 1977; Mory, 2004).”
BackgroundHall, M. J., & Hyodo, J. D. (2022) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/10946705221111347 · Cited by 19
The Effect of Structured Feedback on Performance: the Role of Attitude and Perceived Usefulness
Cheah, S. L., & Li, S. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12052101 · Cited by 19
“As Kulhavy noted in 1977, learners can feedback may not be accepted by learners who can in fact adapt or reject it [32].”
BackgroundKothari, R., Egan, S. J., Wade, T. D., Andersson, G., & Shafran, R. (2016) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/resprot.6378 · Cited by 14
“Cognitive theories highlight the importance of providing information that will support participants in changing their knowledge, thinking, and behavior, particularly if participants have misunderstood or mistaken elements of the intervention [32].”
BackgroundHolland, V. M., & Kaplan, J. D. (1995) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/bf00896878 · Cited by 17
Prompting and Feedback Variables in Concept Programming
Grant, L. K., McAvoy, R., & Keenan, J. B. (1982) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15328023top0903_11 · Cited by 17
LESSONS LEARNED IN DESIGNING INTELLIGENT CALL: MANAGING COMMUNICATION ACROSS DISCIPLINES
Holland, V. M. (1994) · Computer Assisted Language Learning · doi:10.1080/0958822940070304 · Cited by 17
On providing feedback to reading miscues
Hoffman, J. (1979) · Literacy Research and Instruction · doi:10.1080/19388077909557494 · Cited by 17
Nawaz, S., Srivastava, N., Yu, J., Khan, A. A., Kennedy, G., Bailey, J., & Baker, R. (2021) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-021-00242-6 · Cited by 16
“In this regard, prior research suggests that students' confidence in the knowledge they hold is an important factor that can influence their learning and learning behaviours (Kulhavy, 1977; Kulhavy et al., 1976).”
BackgroundMoments of Confusion in Simulation-Based Learning Environments
Nawaz, S., Kennedy, G., Bailey, J., & Mead, C. (2020) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2020.73.9 · Cited by 16
“Research has also established that it is not only the level of knowledge that can affect students’ learning behaviours but also their confidence in the knowledge they hold (Kulhavy, 1977; Kulhavy, Yekovich, & Dyer, 1976).”
InfluentialLearning by Solved Example Problems: Instructional Explanations Reduce Self-Explanation Activity
Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315782379-175 · Cited by 60
“Due to their feedback functions, a specific problem can occur (e.g., Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThe science of teaching science
Mostafa, T., Echazarra, A., & Guillou, H. (2018) · OECD education working papers · doi:10.1787/f5bd9e57-en · Cited by 52
“Previous research also highlights the importance of targeting feedback at the appropriate level to ensure that students relate the content of the feedback to previously acquired knowledge and skills (Hattie and Timperley, 2007; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundAssistance in computer programming learning using educational data mining and learning analytics
Fernandez-Medina, C., Pérez-Pérez, J.-R., Álvarez-García, V. M., & Paule-Ruiz, M. D. P. (2013) · Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/2462476.2462496 · Cited by 16
“In the purely instructional sense, feedback can be said to describe any communication or procedure given to inform a learner of the accuracy of a response, usually to an instructional question [5, 13, 22].”
BackgroundJiménez, E. G., Noche, M. B. G., & Gómez-Ruíz, M. Á. (2014) · Innovation, technology and knowledge management · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10804-9_9 · Cited by 19
Bernstein, B. L., & Lecomte, C. (1979) · doi:10.1037/0022-0167.26.4.295 · Cited by 16
Swart, E. K., Nielen, T. M. J., & Jong, M. T. S. (2022) · Journal of Research in Reading · doi:10.1111/1467-9817.12389 · Cited by 24
“In line with previous review studies (see e.g., Azevedo & Bernard, 1995; Hattie, 2012; Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Kulhavy, 1977; Shute, 2008; Swart, Nielen, & Sikkema-de Jong, 2019), we define feedback as individualised information in response to readers’ answers to comprehension questions about the text they read.”
ResultDeveloping our students’ level of mindfulness during these unprecedented times
Reilly, P. (2020) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.17.5.19 · Cited by 21
“Similarly, feedback is strongly associated with better learning and performance (see Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThe role of task repetition and learner self-assessment in technology-mediated task performance
Kartchava, E., & Nassaji, H. (2019) · ITL Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1075/itl.19013.kar · Cited by 17
Daniels, L. M., & Bulut, O. (2019) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12398 · Cited by 13
Metadata
- Authors
- Kulhavy, R. W.
- Affiliations
- Arizona State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kulhavy, Raymond W.
- Venue
- Review of Educational Research
- Published
- 1977-06
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 211-232
- ISSN
- 0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-1046
- OpenAlex
- W2158692302
- Cited by
- 571
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 89.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Review of Educational Research (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- feedback, written instructions, instructional materials development, student performance, memory retention, learning facilitation, feedback mechanisms, instructional communication
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