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 301–400 of 409
Implications of Fail-Forward in an Online Environment under Alternative Grading Schemes.
Patron, H., & Smith, W. J. (2011) · doi:10.9743/jeo.2011.1.3 · Cited by 4
Su, Y.-L. D., & Lin, D. M. (1998) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0747-5632(97)00039-3 · Cited by 4
Witari, P. S., & Mahardika, A. A. A. (2025) · Journal of English Language and Culture · doi:10.30813/jelc.v15i1.6303 · Cited by 1
“Further, Kulhavy (1977) asserts that performance-related feedback is the potential to lead to successful learning.”
InfluentialHow to Make Computer-Based Feedback More Productive: The Power of Erroneous Solutions
Wang, Z., Pei, X., Zhu, H., Gong, S., & Wang, E. (2024) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331241247592 · Cited by 5
“From a cognitive viewpoint, feedback is considered a type of information or scaffold necessary for the correction of erroneous responses (Anderson et al., 1971; Kulhavy, 1977).”
AKPINAR, M., & ÖZALP, M. T. (2023) · International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies · doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.11n.4p.272 · Cited by 4
“Kulhavy (1977) concludes that feedback in written instruc - tion enhances learning.”
BackgroundCionea, I. A., Gilmore, B. N., Machette, A. T., & Kavya, P. (2022) · Western journal of communication · doi:10.1080/10570314.2022.2135386 · Cited by 3
“Similarly, other definitions conceptualize feedback as a process to inform learners if an answer or response is correct or incorrect (Kulhavy, 1977), to highlight levels of understanding (Hattie, 1999), or to describe how successful a student was on a task (Sadler, 1989).”
BackgroundInfluentialFeedback Procedures in Computer-Assisted Instruction
Noonan, J. V. (1986) · Journal of Research on Computing in Education · doi:10.1080/08886504.1986.11008431 · Cited by 3
The Role of Giving Feedback for Academic Achievement, A Case of Bule Hora University, Ethiopia
Gonfa, B. B. (2020) · doi:10.7176/jep/11-16-01 · Cited by 3
Building Teacher Self-Efficacy Through Administrator Feedback
Gutierrez, L. T. (2018) · doi:10.31979/etd.w5yn-55tc · Cited by 2
“Kulhavy (1977) asserts that deciding to focus on feedback that is already known to the teacher or student can have little effect on criterion performance, “since there is no”
BackgroundHoo, H.-T., & Hughes, G. (2017) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-56502-0_9 · Cited by 3
Formative assessment practices in Bhutanese secondary schools and its impact on Quality of Education
Utha, K. (2015) · VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) · doi:10.5278/vbn.phd.socsci.00011 · Cited by 3
“According to Kulhavy (1977), feedback is given on two cases: correct answer or incorrect answer.”
BackgroundMethodvan Kessel, M., Campen, C. K. K.-V., de Jonge, M., Molenaar, I., & Saab, N. (2026) · Comput. Educ. · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2026.105615 · Cited by 2
Student Feedback Use During Cross-Age Peer Tutoring
Swanson, E., Mauer, E., Shanahan, E., Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2026) · The Elementary school journal · doi:10.1086/739254 · Cited by 2
The Pretesting Effect: Exploring the Impact of Feedback and Final Test Timing
Mera, Y., Dianova, N., & Marin-Garcia, E. (2025) · Journal of Cognition · doi:10.5334/joc.455 · Cited by 4
“Additionally, Kulhavy (1977) noted that delayed feedback might be less effective when participants are unable to provide any response, particularly in difficult tasks or those involving unfamiliar information, as often occurs in pretesting.”
Ataş, A. H., Cengiz, B. C., & Çelik, B. (2024) · Sakarya University Journal of Education · doi:10.19126/suje.1475474 · Cited by 6
Filtering Essays by Means of a Software Tool
Seifried, E., Lenhard, W., & Spinath, B. (2017) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/0735633116652407 · Cited by 2
“…to the functions listed by Gibbs and Simpson (2004), feedback might be particularly beneficial for students who are not performing well because feedback might serve to correct errors (e.g., Kulhavy, 1977), develop understanding through explanations, or encourage students to continue studying.”
BackgroundMcGrail, E., McGrail, J. P., & Rieger, A. (2016) · Literacy research, practice and evaluation · doi:10.1108/s2048-045820160000007008
Koehler, N. A., Thompson, A. D., Correia, A., & Hagedorn, L. S. (2014) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9357-2 · Cited by 2
“…timing, there is substantial disagreement among researchers on whether the feedback should be given immediately after answering each test question (Keller 1983) or it should be delayed, which will give errors a chance to dissipate (Kulhavy 1977; Kulhavy and Anderson 1972; Kulhavy and Stock 1989).”
BackgroundConceptual versus Procedural Feedback in the Training of a Home Medical Device
Fiesler, C., McLaughlin, A., Fisk, A., & Rogers, W. (2003) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/154193120304701507 · Cited by 2
“Feedback’s chief instructional significance is its ability to correct errors (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundBrokken, F. B., & Been, P. (1993) · doi:10.1177/089443939301100306 · Cited by 2
“According to Kulhavy (1977), the primary function of feedback is not to provide extra motivation but rather to provide extra information: the student is apparently interested in information about the (in)correctness of the response to an exercise.”
BackgroundResultEnhancing computer‐based lessons for effective speech education
Hemphill, M. R., & Standerfer, C. C. (1987) · doi:10.1080/03634528709378673 · Cited by 2
Reconstruction of Text and Feedback
Langer, P., Keenan, V. C., & Medosch-Schonbeck, C. M. (1986) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1986.58.1.259 · Cited by 3
Written Feedback Strategies Used by Special Education Teachers
Cohen, S. B., Perkins, V. L., & Newmark, S. (1985) · doi:10.1177/088840648500800402 · Cited by 2
“Other researchers (Kulhavy, 1977; Mims & Gholson, 1977; Perkins, 1983; Schroth, 1970) agree that feedback following an error is”
BackgroundResultTeaching Young Deaf People: An Instructional Strategy
Decaro, J., & Blake, R. S. (1981) · American Annals of the Deaf · doi:10.1353/aad.2012.1062 · Cited by 2
Maintaining Stability of Achievement in an Individualized Instructional System
Langer, P. (1979) · doi:10.2466/pr0.1979.45.1.211 · Cited by 2
Selected references related to the practice of instructional development: A place to start
Durzo, J. J., Diamond, R., & Doughty, P. L. (1979) · Journal of Instructional Development · doi:10.1007/bf02904344 · Cited by 2
Computer-based education: Research, theory, and development
Hall, K. (1978) · ECTJ · doi:10.1007/bf02766577 · Cited by 2
Carrillo-López, P., Dios, R. M., & Moral-García, J. (2022) · Specijalna Edukacija i Rehabilitacija · doi:10.5937/specedreh21-36486 · Cited by 2
Trabelsi, S. (2018) · International Journal of Language & Linguistics · doi:10.30845/ijll.v5n4p5 · Cited by 2
“The understanding of why they made mistakes and how to correct such mistakes helps students correct their mistakes and increase their achievement (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundFormative Assessment Strategies: Levels of Use by High School English and Mathematics Teachers
Hauser, D. L. (2015) · ISU Red - Research and eData (Illinois State University) · doi:10.30707/etd2015.hauser.d
“A simplistic purpose or function of feedback is to correct errors (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundInfluentialShaikh, K., Zuberi, A., & Venkatesh, V. (2012) · Revue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · doi:10.7202/1012899ar · Cited by 2
“Some models of the instructional effects of feedback (Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik & Morgan, 1991; Kulhavy, 1977; Mory, 2004; Schimmel, 1988) have also considered cognitive load and task complexity.”
BackgroundCrețu, R., & Negovan, V. (2012) · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.202 · Cited by 2
Using repeated testing and variable encoding to promote transfer of learning
Butler, A. C. (2009) · Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) · doi:10.7936/k7tq5znx · Cited by 1
“Thus, providing feedback is one way to enhance learning from tests because it enables test-takers to correct errors (Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan, 2001; Kulhavy, 1977; Kulhavy & Stock, 1989) and maintain correct responses (Butler, Karpicke, & Roediger, 2008).”
BackgroundCollege Students' Responses to Automated Feedback on Self-Regulated Learning
Yu, E. C., Lui, A., Andrade, H., Akhmedjanova, D., Franklin, D., & Bryer, J. (2023) · Educational Assessment · doi:10.1080/10627197.2026.2727839 · Cited by 2
Kiziltepe, F., Tavasli, B., Cicikler, B., & Karataş, S. (2026) · Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.17718/tojde.1643181 · Cited by 1
“This type of feedback addresses the accuracy of the student’s response to an assignment and offers guidance for improvement (Azevedo & Bernard, 1995; Cohen, 1985; Kulhavy, 1977).”
López-Solà, I., & Lillo-Fuentes, F. (2025) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/13621688251368653 · Cited by 1
Liu, Y., Ouyang, M., Peng, W., Zhang, W., Lu, K., He, Y., Zeng, X., & Yuan, J. (2024) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs14010036 · Cited by 1
“Feedback refers to the procedures used to inform a learner whether a response is correct or incorrect [14].”
Two-way Feedback with the Use of Digital Tools in the Classroom: Effect Size
Kalimullina, A. (2023) · Education and Self Development · doi:10.26907/esd.18.4.08 · Cited by 1
“Это подтверждает другие исследования о положительном влиянии обратной связи на учебные результаты (например, Kluger & DeNisi, 1996; Kulhavy, 1977).”
Metacognitive unawareness of feedback influences future memory prediction but not postdiction
Soe, K. T. T., Jiang, Y., Wang, J., Yu, Y., & Guo, Y. (2023) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-023-04507-2 · Cited by 1
“The authors assumed that the second AB trial opportunity might improve the probability of the response disposition and that the response might happen without interference (Kulhavy, 1977; Kulhavy & Anderson, 1972 ).”
Burt, J. S., Leggett, J. M. I., Chalmers, K. A., & Boulton, P. A. (2021) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658211.2021.1988645 · Cited by 1
“Learners study feedback for longer when it corrects an error made with high confidence (Kulhavy & Stock, 1989) and hypercorrection studies suggest that such feedback is surprising (Fazio & Marsh, 2009).”
BackgroundThe Relationship between Coaches’ Positive and Negative Feedback, Self-efficacy, and Exercise Flow
Kong, S., & Kwon, J. (2018) · doi:10.35277/kama.2018.20.3.43 · Cited by 1
Iwaki, N., & Tanaka, S. (2018) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2018.05.002 · Cited by 1
“cipants spend more time looking at corrective feedback in cases associated with higher confidence (Kulhavy & Stock, 1989; Kulhavy, 1977).”
Efficacy of critiques in an apparel design studio
Hwang, C., Zhang, L., Rorah, W., Thompson, K. M., & Sanders, E. A. (2018) · International Journal of Fashion Design Technology and Education · doi:10.1080/17543266.2017.1389995 · Cited by 1
“Kulhavy (1977) reported that feedback acts to confirm correct answers, helping students to understand what they know.”
BackgroundTHE USE OF ENGLISH READERS IN IMPROVING STUDENTS’ INTERCULTURAL COMPETENCE: TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVE
Singh, M. K. A., & Marsani, F. N. A. (2016) · Malaysian Journal of Languages and Linguistics (MJLL) · doi:10.24200/mjll.vol5iss2pp13-24 · Cited by 1
“This was also supported by Kulhavy, (1977) whereby if students were exposed to unfamiliar topics and subjects during the learning process, teachers’ feedback alone will not have a significant effect on their students’ intercultural knowledge and behaviour.”
A IMPORTÂNCIA DO FEEDBACK E DAS CRENÇAS DE AUTOEFICÁCIA DO ALUNO NA AQUISIÇÃO DE LÍNGUA ESTRANGEIRA
Fluminhan, C. S. L., Murgo, C., & Fluminhan, A. (2015) · Colloquium humanarum · doi:10.5747/ch.2015.v12.n4.h232 · Cited by 1
Tester og testtilbakemeldinger som direkte bidragsytere til dypere læring blant studenter
Herrebrøden, H. (2014) · Uniped · doi:10.3402/uniped.v37.23327
Mora, D. M., & Granados, L. F. M. (2009) · doi:10.22490/25391887.622 · Cited by 1
Aides à l’apprentissage et retour pédagogique dans les sites d’apprentissage des langues en ligne
Ollivier, C., & Weiss, G. (2003) · ASp · doi:10.4000/asp.1238 · Cited by 1
The Quality of Software for Computer-Based Literacy Learning
Winser, B., & Cheung, W. (1996) · doi:10.1177/003368829602700206 · Cited by 1
“Feedback can be understood as a reinforcement, increasing the likelihood that the learner will perform the same (i.e. correct) behaviour again (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundLearner-controlled situation with distance education
Boulet, M. (1995) · ACM Symposium on Applied Computing · doi:10.1145/315891.315900 · Cited by 1
Causal Models in the Acquisition and Instruction of Programming Skills
Reiser, B. (1992) · doi:10.21236/ada248761 · Cited by 1
“Furthermore, if students can ask for the right answer, then reduced feedback may lead to a strategy of relying too heavily on the feedback rather than engaging in the reasoning to construct answers themselves, which is generally viewed as a less effective learning strategy (e.g., Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan…”
BackgroundImmediate, Sustained, and Cumulative Effects of an Instructional System on Mathematics Achievement
Hannafin, M. (1983) · doi:10.1080/00220671.1983.10885504 · Cited by 1
“Various components of instruction such as the use of objectives, the effects of practice, and the effects of feedback have been studied exhaustively during the past 20 years (F?rst, 1981; Kibler, Cegala, Miles, & Barker, 1974; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundNeudecker, A. (2021) · doi:10.25656/01:23653 · Cited by 1
“Zunächst die Feedback-Definition von Raymond W. Kulhavy aus dem Jahr 1977 (vgl. Kulhavy 1977, 211): “[...] the term ‘feedback’ is used in a generic sense to describe any of the numerous procedures that are used to tell a learner if an instructional response is right or wrong.”
Danışman Geribildiriminden Öğrenileni Anlamlandırma: Afganistan’da Bir Eylem Araştırması
Demirci, U. (2020) · doi:10.47356/turkishstudies.38850 · Cited by 1
Sustainability by design : motivating pro-environmental action and improving waste diversion
Zelenika, I. (2018) · Joint Conference of the Information Retrieval Communities in Europe · doi:10.14288/1.0372969 · Cited by 1
“Decades of research in cognitive psychology show that feedback facilitates learning and improves task performance by correcting errors (e.g., Anderson et al., 1971; Butler et al., 2007; Kulhavy, 1977, Mory, 2004; Shute, 2008).”
Compete With Yourself (CWY): Maximising Learning Gain in Schools
Gandhi, S. (2017) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-56502-0_11 · Cited by 1
The Enhancing Effect of Retrieval on Subsequent Encoding: Understanding Test-Potentiated Learning
Arnold, K. M. (2013) · Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) · doi:10.7936/k7gt5kmv · Cited by 1
“Experiments that involve testing with feedback are often not designed to measure testpotentiated learning because they typically ask a different kind of question (e.g., for reviews see Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, Kulik, & Morgan, 1991; Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundElemental Learning and the Pyramid of Fidelity
Dempsey, J. V. (2010) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-61520-717-6.ch004 · Cited by 1
Sources of interference when testing for students' learning from sentences
Ghatala, E., Levin, J., Davis, J., & Truman, D. L. (1981) · doi:10.1016/0361-476x(81)90029-1 · Cited by 1
Assessing the Impact and Underlying Pathways of Sequenced AI feedback on Student Learning
Cao, J., Zhao, C. Q., Schunn, C., McLaughlin, E. A., Lin, J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.07469
Defining the Learner Feedback Experience
Crisp, E. A., & Bonk, C. (2018) · TechTrends · doi:10.1007/s11528-018-0264-y
“…been reported in multiple K-12 and postsecondary studies from the past 25 years (Black and Wiliam 1998; Fraser et al. 1987; Pennebaker et al. 2013) as well as several comprehensive literature reviews (Fraser et al. 1987; Gibbs and Simpson 2004; Hattie 2015; Jaehnig and Miller 2007; Kulhavy 1977).”
BackgroundInfluentialLet Me Teach You: Pedagogical Foundations of Feedback for Language Models
Borges, B., Tandon, N., Käser, T., & Bosselut, A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.00279
“Kulhavy and Stock (1989) Refer to a previous definition of feedback, whereby feedback is considered "any of the numerous procedures that are used to tell a learner if an instructional response is right or wrong" (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThe dynamics of teaching at a distance in Tanzania: reflections from the field
Bhalalusesa, E. P. (2006) · doi:10.1080/02680510500472213
Dowden, T., Getenet, S., Parkes, F., Luetz, J. M., Chang, H., J-F, Leach, T., & Albion, P. (2026) · Education sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci16050793
“Indeed, it has been long known that students variously accept, modify, or reject feedback (e.g., Kulhavy, 1977).”
Xiang, N., Huang, X., Muthukrishnan, P., Lan, L. F., & Sharif, W. R. (2026) · International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies · doi:10.55493/5019.v15i1.5825
“The increasingly diverse landscape of language learning contexts, particularly in online and blended learning environments, presents further challenges for feedback provision (Kulhavy, 1977).”
Tapia-Ladino, M., & Ferrero, C. L. (2025) · Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana · doi:10.31819/rili-2025-234606
“En su primera conceptualización el término feedback designa el procedimiento que informa a quien está aprendiendo sobre lo correcto de sus respuestas (Kulhavy 1977).”
The effects of praise and criticism in instructor feedback on student perceptions
Gilmore, B. N., Cionea, I. A., & Machette, A. T. (2025) · Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1080/01463373.2025.2546337
“For instructors, at its most basic level, feedback is used to inform students if they completed a task correctly (Kulhavy, 1977).”
Nair, H. B. (2025) · The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas · doi:10.1080/00098655.2025.2557852
“Kulhavy (1977) further highlighted that feedback is not merely a reinforcer but a complex process where students accept, modify, or reject input.”
Assessing the Consistency of Open-Source Large Language Models for Algorithm Evaluation
Moazzez, A., Barman, A., Liang, S., Katikaneni, V., Nuli, A., Kandala, V., Kamat, K., & Boicu, M. (2024) · IEEE MIT Undergraduate Research Technology Conference (URTC) · doi:10.1109/urtc65039.2024.10937513
Türkdoğan, A., Yıldız, A., Korkusuz, E., Demi̇rkiran, A. P., Işik, B., Özcan, C., & Güçarslan, F. (2023) · Journal of Computer and Education Research · doi:10.18009/jcer.1273693
Automatic Formative and Motivational Feedback Personalized for Introductory Programming Course
de Holanda, M. T., Miranda, L. R., Macedo, F., Yamin, J. L., Dórea, C. C., Chamon, C., & Silva, D. D. (2023) · IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) · doi:10.1109/fie58773.2023.10343336 · Cited by 1
Tertiary Students’ Perceptions Of Dynamic Written Corrective Feedback In An ESL Classroom In The UAE
Mahmoud, E. (2023) · Emirati Journal of Education and Literature · doi:10.54878/6s8rz430
Escudero-Fernández, S., & Domingo, J. Á. A. (2022) · ArDIn : Arte, Diseño e Ingeniería · doi:10.20868/ardin.2022.11.4800
“La cual es definida de manera general como “ cualquiera de los numerosos procedimientos que se utilizan para decirle a un alumno si una respuesta es correcta o incorrecta ” Kulbavy (1977) citado por (Hattie & Timperley, 2007) algún tipo de feedback (Hyland, 2003) que les oriente.”
BackgroundAn Overview and Evaluation of Written Corrective Feedback in L2 Writing
Ajmal, M. (2021) · Pakistan Social Sciences Review · doi:10.35484/pssr.2021(5-i)33
“Many researchers have suggested comprehensive explanations of feedback just like the one proposed by Kulhavy (1977).”
BackgroundInfluentialMoradian, M., Ramezanzadeh, A., & Rostamian, N. (2021) · doi:10.22132/tel.2021.134980
“Conventionally, feedback has been understood as "any numerous procedures that are used to tell learners if an instructional response is right or wrong" (Kulhavy, 1977, p. 211).”
BackgroundIs Repeated Testing of Declarative Knowledge in Mathematics Moderated by Feedback?
Östergren, R., & Samuelsson, J. (2018) · Journal of Education and Culture Studies · doi:10.22158/jecs.v2n3p209
“Our results are thus in line with earlier research showing that 212 Published by SCHOLINK INC. explanation could be that the feedback is accepted, and not modified or rejected (cf. Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundResultJung, B.-S. (2016) · Korean Journal of Military Art and Science · doi:10.31066/kjmas.2016.72.3.003
Zeinolabedini, M., & Gholami, J. (2014) · Mediterranean Journal of Humanities · doi:10.13114/mjh.201428450
“Studies that have investigated the type and content of information in feedback, have however generated inconsistent findings (Kulhavy, 1977; Mory, 2004).”
ResultEXPLORING NEW FRONTIERS IN SELF AND PEER ASSESSMENT
de Leeuw, J., Szumlas, B., Jordan, K., Humphry, S., & Matsumoto, L. (2014) · doi:10.11575/prism/5282
“…knowledge, whether it be domain based or metacognitive (Winne & Butler, 1994 in Hattie, 2009) then it is best understood as intertwined with instruction: “the process itself takes on the forms of new instruction, rather than informing the student solely about correctness” (Kulhavy, 1977, p. 212).”
Otero-Sotomayor, L. E. (2014) · doi:10.14483/23448350.5565
“Retroalimentación La retroalimentación se usa para describir cualquier procedimiento con el fin de informar al estudiante si su respuesta es correcta (Kulhavy, 1977).”
BackgroundThouësny, S. (2012) · doi:10.14705/rpnet.2012.000068
“Although Kulhavy (1977) reported that “delaying the presentation of feedback for a day or more leads to significant increases in what students remember on a retention test” (p. 214), more recent research has highlighted the significance of timely feedback (e.g., Denton, Madden, Roberts, & Rowe,…”
BackgroundProvencher, G. (2009) · doi:10.7202/900480ar
“Kulhavy (1977) écrit ce qui suit à ce sujet: In terms of test yield, supplying feedback after an error is probably far more important.”
BackgroundUn système pour l’analyse du temps actif d’intervention positive
Talbot, S., Drouin, D., & Lemire, V. (2009) · doi:10.7202/900467ar
Effects of feedback types on self-efficacy and Academic Achievement in English Vocabulary Learning
JooYoungJu, & Han, S.-H. (2008) · doi:10.24231/rici.2008.12.3.649
Testing Computer Programming Skills—Paper and Pencil versus a Computer and Compiler
Gomm, S., Waters, S. H., & Feng, J. (2003) · doi:10.2190/ydyd-juwb-mcwp-3nwr
“According to Kulhavy, feedback serves to confirm right responses and to correct errors [3].”
BackgroundDistance education: a way to individualize learning and teaching
Boulet, M. (1995) · SCOU · doi:10.1145/209878.209879
A Note on Feedback in Discourse Processing
Langer, P., & Keenan, V. (1993) · doi:10.2466/pr0.1993.72.3c.1392
“Kulhavy (10) previously argued that where the material is relatively easy or learners' confidence is high, little time is spent on feedback.”
BackgroundNelson, C., Hughes, B., & Virgo, R. E. (1987) · IEEE Transactions on Education · doi:10.1109/te.1987.5570531
Dial Access for Delivery of Examination Feedback
Stephens, J. F., & Warmbrod, J. R. (1984) · doi:10.3382/ps.0631912
Comments on Improving the Comprehensibility of Stories
DeGroff, L. (1984) · doi:10.2307/747658
Hanife, S., & Emrah, E. (2022) · i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching · doi:10.26634/jelt.12.4.18931
Is More Always Better? Simulating Feedback Exchange in Organizations
Fuchs, S., Rietsche, R., Aier, S., & Rivera, M. (2021) · Lecture notes in information systems and organisation · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86800-0_37
Pieper, V., & Bartels, F. (2021) · Mythen, Widersprüche und Gewissheiten der Grundschulforschung · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-31737-9_23
Preferences in Learning "Hiragana": A Comparative Study Between Mobile Apps and Paper Worksheets
Nakada, M. (2020) · ScholarWorks@UMassAmherst (University of Massachusetts Amherst) · doi:10.7275/17660612
“They concurred with Kulhavy (1977) that, typically, to delay feedback is to hinder learning, except in special experimental situations, and that immediate feedback produces a better effect than delayed feedback.”
BackgroundKhan, M. J. (2020) · Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-3062-7.ch017
Психологічні механізми навчання, що сприяють розвитку професійного мислення
Федик, А. (2020) · International Journal of Education and Science · doi:10.26697/ijes.2020.1.2
Ali, A. M. A. (2019) · CDELT Occasional Papers in the Development of English Education · doi:10.21608/opde.2019.126878
“In doing so, he intentionally provides them with "the forms of new instruction, rather than informing the student solely about the correctness" (Kulhavy, 1977, p. 212).”
BackgroundEmployees’ Responses to Positive Feedback from Customers and Managers
Tsai, H. I. (2018) · doi:10.25148/etd.fidc006839
“Kulhavy (1977) stated that feedback does not necessarily lead to better performance, however, combining the feedback with a reward system could help to enhance the impact of the positive feedback.”
Background
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