Adaptive Feedback in Computer-Based Instruction: Effects of Response Certitude on Performance, Feedback-Study Time, and Efficiency

This study compared the effects of response-certitude adaptive and non-adaptive feedback within a computer-based lesson of verbal information and defined concept tasks. Effects were measured on student performance, feedback-study time, and lesson efficiency. Undergraduates were randomly assigned to one of two treatments—one in which amount of feedback information varied according to a combined assessment of response correctness and student's response certainty level, and another in which feedback information did not vary. Results indicate that effects of adaptive feedback were not significantly different from non-adaptive feedback on student performance. Feedback-study times for low certitude responses were significantly higher than for other response combinations. In terms of feedback efficiency, adaptive feedback was significantly more efficient than non-adaptive feedback, but for overall lesson efficiency, non-adaptive feedback was significantly more efficient. Results are discussed in light of past research and implications for future studies are presented.

[1]  R. W. Kulhavy,et al.  Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude , 1989 .

[2]  J. Metcalfe.  Feeling of knowing in memory and problem solving. , 1986 .

[3]  Raymond W. Kulhavy,et al.  Feedback and Response Confidence. , 1976 .

[4]  E. Mory.  The use of informational feedback in instruction: Implications for future research , 1992 .

[5]  Raymond W. Kulhavy,et al.  Feedback and content review in programmed instruction , 1979 .

[6]  John V. Dempsey,et al.  Feedback, Retention, Discrimination Error, and Feedback Study Time , 1993 .

[7]  Thomas Andre,et al.  Level of Adjunct Question, Type of Feedback, and Learning Concepts by Reading. , 1988 .

[8]  D. Gilman.  Comparison of Several Feedback Methods for Correcting Errors by Computer-Assisted Instruction. , 1969 .

[9]  R. W. Kulhavy,et al.  Feedback processing and error correction , 1987 .

[10]  John Merrill,et al.  Levels of questioning and forms of feedback: instructional factoars in courseware design , 1987 .

[11]  Robert M. Gagné,et al.  Planning and Authoring Computer-Assisted Instruction Lessons , 1981 .

[12]  John V. Dempsey,et al.  The effects of four methods of immediate corrective feedback on retention, discrimination error, and feedback study time in computer-based instruction , 1988 .

[13]  S. Wager.  The effect of immediacy and type of informative feedback on retention in a computer-assisted task , 1983 .

[14]  Linda K. Swindell.  Certitude and the Constrained Processing of Feedback. , 1992 .

[15]  Menucha Birenbaum,et al.  Effects of “On‐Line” Test Feedback on the Seriousness of Subsequent Errors , 1987 .

[16]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  FEEDBACK PROCEDURES IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED ARITHMETIC INSTRUCTION , 1973 .

[17]  R. W. Kulhavy.  Feedback in Written Instruction , 1977 .

[18]  G. S. Hanna.  Effects of Total and Partial Feedback in Multiple-Choice Testing Upon Learning , 1976 .

[19]  Raymond W. Kulhavy,et al.  Written Feedback: Response Certitude and Durability. , 1990 .

[20]  John V. Dempsey.  Using the Rational Set Generator with Computer-Based Instruction for Creating Concept Examples; A Template for Instructors. , 1986 .

[21]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  The Instructional Effect of Feedback in Test-Like Events , 1991 .