Feedback types in programmed instruction: A systematic review

Psychological Record

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 219-232

  Jaehnig, Wendy ^a,c   Miller, Matthew L ^b  

^a BT Learning

^b Pfizer Global R and D

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247493390     PISSN: 00332933     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03395573     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. ALBERTSON, L. M. (1986). Personalized feedback and cognitive achievement in computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 13(2), 55-57.
2. ANDERSON, R. C., & FAUST, G. W. (1967). The effects of strong formal prompts in programmed instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 4, 345-352.
3. ANDERSON, R. C., KULHAVY, R. W., & ANDRE, T. (1971). Feedback procedures in programmed instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 62(2), 148-156.
4. ANDERSON, R. C., KULHAVY, R. W., & ANDRE, T. (1972). Conditions under which feedback facilitates learning from programmed lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(3), 186-188.
5. BHUSHAN, A., & SHARMA, R. D. (1975). Effect of three instructional strategies on the performance of B.Ed, student-teachers of different intelligence levels. Indian Educational Review, 10(2), 24-29.
6. CHATTERJEE, S., & BASU, M. K. (1987). Effectiveness of a paradigm of programmed instruction. Indian Psychology Review, 32(3), 10-14.
7. CLARIANA, R. B. (1990). A comparison of answer until correct feedback and knowledge of correct response feedback under two conditions of contextualization. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17(4), 125-129.
8. CLARIANA, R. B., ROSS, S. M., & MORRISON, G. R. (1991). The effects of different feedback strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 39(2), 5-17.
9. COLLINS, M., CARNINE, D., & GERSTEN, R. (1987). Elaborated corrective feedback and the acquisition of reasoning skills: A study of computer-assisted instruction. Exceptional Children, 54(3), 254-262.
10. CROSBIE, J., & KELLY, G. (1994). Effects of imposed postfeedback delays in programmed instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(3), 483-491.
11. DANIEL, W. J., & MURDOCH, P. (1968). Effectiveness of learning from a programmed text covering the same material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59(6), 425-431.
12. DEMPSEY, J. V., LITCHFIELD, B. C., & DRISCOLL, M. R (1993). Feedback, retention, discrimination error, and feedback study time. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3), 303-326.
13. DICK, W., & LATTA, R. (1970). Comparative effects of ability and presentation mode in computer-assisted instruction and programmed instruction. Audio-Visual Communication Review, 18(3), 34-45.
14. FELDHUSEN, J. F., & BIRT, A. (1962). A study of nine methods of presentation of programmed learning material. Journal of Educational Research, 55, 461-466.
15. FERNALD, R. S., & JORDAN, E. A. (1991). Programmed instruction versus standard text in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 18(4), 205-211.
16. GAYNOR, P. (1981). Effects of feedback delay on retention of computer-based instructional material. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 8(2), 28-34.
17. GILMAN, D. A. (1969). Comparison of several feedback methods for correcting errors by computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(6), 503-508.
18. GRANT, L., MCAVOY, R., & KEENAN, J. B. (1982). Prompting and feedback variables in concept programming. Teaching of Psychology, 9(3), 173-177.
19. HARTLEY, S. S. (1978). Meta-analysis of the effects of individually-paced instruction in mathematics. Dissertations Abstracts International, 38, 4003.
20. HOLLAND, J. G. (1960). Teaching machines: An application of principles from the laboratory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 3, 275-287.
21. KELLY, G., & CROSBIE, J. (1997). Immediate and delayed effects of imposed postfeedback delays in computerized programmed instruction. The Psychological Record, 47, 687-698.
22. KIM, J. L., & PHILLIPS, T. L. (1991). The effectiveness of two forms of corrective feedback in diabetes education. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18(1), 14-18.
23. KULHAVY, R. W. (1977). Feedback in written instruction. Review of Educational Research, 47(2), 211-232.
24. KULHAVY, R. W., YEKOVICH, F. R., & DYER, J. W. (1976). Feedback and response confidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(5), 522-528.
25. KULHAVY, R. W., YEKOVICH, F. R., & DYER, J. W. (1979). Feedback and content review in programmed instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 4, 91-98.
26. KULIK, J. A., COHEN, R. A., & EBELING, B. J. (1980). Effectiveness of programmed instruction in higher education: A meta-analysis of findings. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2, 51-64.
27. KULIK, C. C., SCHWALB, B. J., & KULIK, J. A. (1982). Programmed instruction in secondary education: A meta-analysis of findings. Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 133-138.
28. LALLEY, J. P. (1998). Comparison of text and video as forms of feedback during computer assisted learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 18(4), 323-338.
29. LUBLIN, S. C. (1965). Reinforcement schedules, scholastic aptitude, autonomy need and achievement in a programmed instruction course. Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 295-512.
30. MARKLE, S. M. (1990). Designs for instructional designers. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing Co.
31. MCDONALD, J. K., YANCHAR, S. C., & OSGUTHORPE, R. T. (2005). Learning from programmed instruction: Examining implications for modern instruction technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 84-98.
32. MCKENDREE, J. (1990). Effective feedback content for tutoring complex skills. Human-Computer Interaction, 5, 381-413.
33. MERRILL, J. (1987). Levels of questioning and forms of feedback: Instructional factors in courseware design. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14(1), 18-22.
34. MOORE, J. W., & SMITH, W. I. (1961). Knowledge of results in self-teaching spelling. Psychological Reports, 9, 717-726.
35. MOORE, J. W., & SMITH, W. I. (1964). Role of knowledge of results in programmed instruction. Psychological Reports, 14, 407-423.
36. MORRISON, G. R., ROSS, S. M., GOPALAKRISHNAN, M., & CASEY, J. (1995). The effects of feedback and incentives on achievement in computer-based instruction. Comtemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 32-50.
37. MUNSON, K. J., & CROSBIE, J. (1998). Effects of response cost in computerized programmed instruction. The Psychological Record, 48, 233-250.
38. NAGATA, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77(3), 330-339.
39. PRIDEMORE, D. R., & KLEIN, J. D. (1991). Control of feedback in computer-assisted instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development 39(4), 27-32.
40. PRIDEMORE, D. R., & KLEIN, J. D. (1995). Control of practice and level of feedback in computer-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 444-450.
41. PYSH, F., BLANK, S. S., & LAMBERT, R. A. (1969). The effects of step size, response mode and knowledge of results upon achievement in programmed instruction. The Canadian Psychologist, 10(1), 49-64.
42. RANKIN, R. J., & TREPPER, T. (1978). Retention and delay of feedback in a computer-assisted instructional task. Journal of Experimental Education, 46(4), 67-70.
43. ROBERTS, F. C., & PARK, O. (1984). Feedback strategies and cognitive style in computer-based instruction. Journal of Instructional Technology, 11(2), 63-74.
44. ROPER, W. J. (1977). Feedback in computer assisted instruction. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 14(1), 43-49.
45. ROSA, E. M., & LEOW, R. R. (2004). Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feedback, and Spanish L2 development. The Modern Language Journal, 88(2), 192-216.
46. ROSENSTOCK, E. H., MOORE, W. J, & SMITH, W. I. (1965). Effects of several schedules of knowledge on results on mathematics achievement. Psychological Reports, 17, 535-541.
47. SALAS, S. B., & DICKINSON, D. J. (1990). The effect of feedback and three different types of corrections on student learning. Journal of Human Behavior and Learning, 7(2), 13-19.
48. SKINNER, B. F. (1968). The technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
49. SULLIVAN, H. J., SCHUTZ, R. E., & BAKER, R. L. (1971). Effects of systematic variations in reinforcement contingencies on learner performance. American Educational Research Journal, 8, 135-142.
50. TERRELL, D. J. (1990). A comparison of two procedures for remediating errors during computer-based instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17(3), 91-96.
51. THORKILDSON, R. J., & REID, R. (1989). An investigation of the reinforcing effects of feedback on computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 9(3), 125-135.
52. WALDROP, P. B., JUSTEN, J. E., III, & ADAMS, T. M., II. (1986). A comparison of three types of feedback. Educational Technology, 26, 43-45.
53. WENTLING, T. L. (1973). Mastery versus nonmastery instruction with varying test item feedback treatments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 50-58.