Cited by 715Student Assessment and FeedbackIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of Feedback in a Computer-Based Learning Environment on Students’ Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis

Van der Kleij, Fabienne M., Feskens, Remco C. W., Eggen, Theo J. H. M.·2015·Review of Educational Research

Abstract

In this meta-analysis, we investigated the effects of methods for providing item-based feedback in a computer-based environment on students’ learning outcomes. From 40 studies, 70 effect sizes were computed, which ranged from −0.78 to 2.29. A mixed model was used for the data analysis. The results show that elaborated feedback (EF; e.g., providing an explanation) produced larger effect sizes (0.49) than feedback regarding the correctness of the answer (KR; 0.05) or providing the correct answer (KCR; 0.32). EF was particularly more effective than KR and KCR for higher order learning outcomes. Effect sizes were positively affected by EF feedback, and larger effect sizes were found for mathematics compared with social sciences, science, and languages. Effect sizes were negatively affected by delayed feedback timing and by primary and high school. Although the results suggested that immediate feedback was more effective for lower order learning than delayed feedback and vice versa, no significant interaction was found.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/0034654314564881

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 76 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. Black P., 1998, Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139
  2. *Bowles M. A., 2005, Effects of verbalization condition and type of feedback on L2 development in a CALL task
  3. *Cameron B., 2005, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16, 243
  4. Cohen J., 1988, Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences
  5. 10.3102/10769986006002107 · DOI · Paper page
  6. *Kim J. Y. L., 1991, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18, 14
  7. *Merril J., 1987, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14, 18
  8. Narciss S., 2004, Instructional design for multimedia learning, 181
  9. Nyquist J. B. (2003). The benefits of reconstruing feedback as a larger system of formative assessment: A meta-analysis (Unpublished master’s thesis). Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
  10. 10.3102/10769986008002157 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Resing W. C. M. (1990). Intelligentie en leerpotentieel. Een onderzoek naar het leerpotentieel van jonge leerlingen uit het basis-en speciaal onderwijs [Intelligence and learning potential: A study on the learning potential of young children in regular and special education] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  12. Shadish W. R., 1994, The handbook of research synthesis, 261
  13. Smith P. L., 2005, Instructional design
  14. *Wager S. U. (1983). The effect of immediacy and type of informative feedback on retention in a computer-assisted task (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Florida State University, Tallahassee.
  15. White H. D., 1994, The handbook of research synthesis, 41

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & Eggen, T. J. H. M.
Affiliations
  • Cito Institute for Educational Measurement and University of Twente
  • Cito Institute for Educational Measurement
  • University of Twente (NL)
Venue
Review of Educational Research
Published
2015-12
Volume
85
Issue
4
Pages
475-511
ISSN
  • 0034-6543 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1046
OpenAlex
W2110661236
Cited by
714
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 91 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 73 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 4
FWCI
155.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Review of Educational Research (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
elaborated feedback, computer-assisted instruction, learning outcomes, feedback timing, immediate feedback, delayed feedback, higher-order learning, mathematics learning

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