Literature DB >> 19933453

Delayed versus immediate feedback in children's and adults' vocabulary learning.

Janet Metcalfe1, Nate Kornell, Bridgid Finn.   

Abstract

We investigated whether the superior memory performance sometimes seen with delayed rather than immediate feedback was attributable to the shorter retention interval (or lag to test) from the last presentation of the correct information in the delayed condition. Whether lag to test was controlled or not, delayed feedback produced better final test performance than did immediate feedback, which in turn produced better performance than did no feedback at all, when we tested Grade 6 children learning school-relevant vocabulary. With college students learning GRE-level words, however, delayed feedback produced better performance than did immediate feedback (and both were better than no feedback) when lag to test was uncontrolled, but there was no difference between the delayed and immediate feedback conditions when the lag to test was controlled.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19933453     DOI: 10.3758/MC.37.8.1077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  10 in total

1.  Delay-improved retention of a difficult task.

Authors:  Y BRACKBILL; A BRAVOS; R H STARR
Journal:  J Comp Physiol Psychol       Date:  1962-12

2.  When does feedback facilitate learning of words?

Authors:  Harold Pashler; Nicholas J Cepeda; John T Wixted; Doug Rohrer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 3.  Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis.

Authors:  Nicholas J Cepeda; Harold Pashler; Edward Vul; John T Wixted; Doug Rohrer
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Principles of cognitive science in education: the effects of generation, errors, and feedback.

Authors:  Janet Metcalfe; Nate Kornell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-04

5.  Correcting a metacognitive error: feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct responses.

Authors:  Andrew C Butler; Jeffrey D Karpicke; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting.

Authors:  Janet Metcalfe; Nate Kornell; Lisa K Son
Journal:  Eur J Cogn Psychol       Date:  2007

7.  The spacing effect in children's memory and category induction.

Authors:  Haley A Vlach; Catherine M Sandhofer; Nate Kornell
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-10-05

8.  Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing.

Authors:  Andrew C Butler; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-04

9.  Spacing one's study: evidence for a metacognitive control strategy.

Authors:  Lisa K Son
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests.

Authors:  Andrew C Butler; Jeffrey D Karpicke; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2007-12
  10 in total
  20 in total

1.  Making related errors facilitates learning, but learners do not know it.

Authors:  Barbie J Huelser; Janet Metcalfe
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-05

2.  The costs and benefits of providing feedback during learning.

Authors:  Matthew Jensen Hays; Nate Kornell; Robert A Bjork
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

3.  Delaying feedback by three seconds benefits retention of face-name pairs: the role of active anticipatory processing.

Authors:  Shana K Carpenter; Edward Vul
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-10

4.  An Analysis of Feedback from a Behavior Analytic Perspective.

Authors:  Kathleen A Mangiapanello; Nancy S Hemmes
Journal:  Behav Anal       Date:  2015-01-14

5.  People's hypercorrection of high-confidence errors: did they know it all along?

Authors:  Janet Metcalfe; Bridgid Finn
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Correcting false memories: Errors must be noticed and replaced.

Authors:  Hillary G Mullet; Elizabeth J Marsh
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-04

7.  Feedback and stimulus-offset timing effects in perceptual category learning.

Authors:  Darrell A Worthy; Arthur B Markman; W Todd Maddox
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 2.310

8.  Encoding Deficits Impede Word Learning and Memory in Adults With Developmental Language Disorders.

Authors:  Karla K McGregor; Katherine Gordon; Nichole Eden; Tim Arbisi-Kelm; Jacob Oleson
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.297

9.  The contributions of entorhinal cortex and hippocampus to error driven learning.

Authors:  Shih-Pi Ku; Eric L Hargreaves; Sylvia Wirth; Wendy A Suzuki
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2021-05-24

10.  The Neural Underpinnings of Processing Newly Taught Semantic Information: The Role of Retrieval Practice.

Authors:  Eileen Haebig; Laurence B Leonard; Patricia Deevy; Jennifer Schumaker; Jeffrey D Karpicke; Christine Weber
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.