Feedback Strategies for Interactive Learning Tasks

Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, Third Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 125-143

  Narciss, Susanne ^a  

^a DRESDEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cybernetics: System theory concerned with the issues of regulation, order, and stability confronting us in the treatment of complex systems and processes.; Feedback: Output of a system that is fed back to the controller of the system as an input signal to regulate the system with regard to a reference value (cybernetic definition); post response information that is provided to learners to inform them of their actual state of learning or performance (instructional context).; Informative tutoring feedback: Multiple try feedback strategies providing elaborated feedback components that guide the learner toward successful task completion without offering immediately the correct response.; Interactive learning task: Tasks providing multiple response steps or tries and instructional components such as feedback, guiding questions, prompts, simulation facilities, and so on.

Indexed keywords

EID: 85144978063     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203880869-13     Document Type: Chapter

References (126)

1. Albacete, P. and VanLehn, K. (2000). Evaluating the effectiveness of a cognitive tutor for fundamental physics concepts. In Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, August 13-15, Philadelphia, PA.
2. Albert, D. and Lukas, J. (1999). Knowledge Spaces: Theories, Empirical Research, and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., and Wallace, R. (2003). Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Rev. Educ. Psychol., 62, 148-156.*
4. Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., Roll, I., and Koedinger, K. R. (2006). Toward computer-based tutoring: a model of helpseeking with a cognitive tutor. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ., 16, 101-130.
5. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., and Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: lessons learned. J. Learn. Sci., 4, 167-207.*
6. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., and Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.
7. Anderson, R. C., Kulhavy, R. W., and Andre, T. (1971). Feedback procedures in programmed instruction. J. Educ. Psychol., 62, 148-156.*
8. Andre, T. (1997). Selected microinstructional methods to facilitate knowledge construction: implications for instructional design. In Instructional Design: International Perspectives. Vol. 1. Theory, Research, and Models, edited by R. D. Tennyson and F. Schott, pp. 243-267. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Annett, J. (1969). Feedback and Human Behavior. Oxford: Penguin Books.*
10. Azevedo, R. and Bernard, R. M. (1995). A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback in computer-based instruction. J. Educ. Comput. Res., 13, 111-127.
11. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Holt.
12. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., and Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in testlike events. Rev. Educ. Res., 61, 213-238.*
13. Bilodeau, E. A. (1969). Principles of Skill Acquisition. New York: Academic Press.*
14. Birenbaum, M. and Tatsuoka, K. (1987). Effects of ‘on-line’ test feedback on the seriousness of subsequent errors. J. Educ. Meas., 24, 145-155.
15. Bloom, B. (1976). Human Characteristics and School Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
16. Boekaerts, M. (1996). Self-regulated learning at the junction of cognition and motivation. Eur. Psychol., 1, 100-112.
17. Brackbill, Y., Blobitt, W. E., Davlin, D., and Wagner, J. E. (1963). Amplitude of response and the delay-retention effect. J. Exp. Psychol., 66, 57-64.
18. Brown, F. J. (1932). Knowledge of results as an incentive in school room practice. J. Educ. Psychol., 23, 532-552.
19. Butler, D. L. and Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev. Educ. Res., 65, 245-281.*
20. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723-733.
21. Chandler, P. and Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. Br. J. Educ. Psychol., 62, 233-246.
22. Chi, M., Siler, S. A., and Joeng, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students’ understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22, 363-387.
23. Chinn, C. A. and Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: a theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Rev. Educ. Res., 63, 1-49.
24. Clariana, R. B. (1993). A review multiple-try feedback in traditional and computer-based instruction. J. Comput. Based Instruct., 20, 67-74.
25. Clariana, R. B. (1999). CBT design: a feedback achievement treatment interaction. 21st Annu. Proc. Assoc. Educ. Commun. Technol., 22, 87-92.
26. Clariana, R. B. and Koul, R. (2004). Multiple-try feedback and higher-order learning outcomes. Int. J. Instruct. Media, 32, 239-245.
27. Clariana, R. B. and Koul, R. (2005). The effects of different forms of feedback on fuzzy and verbatim memory of science principles. Br. J. Educ. Psychol., 75, 1-13.
28. Clariana, R. B. and Lee, D. (2001). The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 49, 23-36.
29. Clariana, R. B., Wagner, D., and Rohrer-Murphy, L. C. (2000). A connectionist description of feedback timing. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 48, 5-21.
30. Collies, B., DeBoer, W., and Slotman, K. (2001). Feedback for Web-based assignments. J. Comput. Assist. Learn., 17, 306-313.
31. Corbett, A. T. and Anderson, J. R. (1990). The effect of feedback control on learning to program with the Lisp Tutor. In Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, July 25-28, Cambridge, MA (http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/165/FeedbackControl_CorJRA.pdf).
32. Crippen, K. J. and Brooks, D. W. (2005). The AP descriptive chemistry question: student errors. J. Comput. Math. Sci. Teach., 24, 357-366.
33. Cusella, L. P. (1987). Feedback, motivation and performance. In Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, and L. W. Pooter, pp. 624-678. Newsbury Park, CA: SAGE.
34. Dempsey, J. V. and Sales, G. C., Eds. (1993). Interactive Instruction and Feedback. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.*
35. Dempsey, J. V., Driscoll, M. P., and Swindell, L. K. (1993). Textbased feedback. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, edited by J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 21-54. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
36. Dempsey, J. V. and Wager, S. U. (1988). A taxonomy for the timing of feedback in computer-based instruction. Educ. Psychol., 28(10), 20-25.
37. Dick, W., Carey, L., and Carey, J. O. (2001). The Systematic Design of Instruction. New York: Addison, Wesley, Longman.
38. Dresel, M. and Ziegler, A. (2006). Langfristige Förderung von Fähigkeitsselbstkonzept und impliziter Fähigkeitstheorie durch computerbasiertes attributionales Feedback (Longterm enhancement of academic self-concept and implicit ability theory through computer-based attributional feedback). Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 20, 49-64.
39. Fitts, P. M. (1962). Factors in complex skill training. In Training Research and Education, edited by R. Glaser, pp. 177-197. Oxford, England: University of Pittsburgh Press.
40. Gouli, E., Gogoulou, A., Papanikolaou, K., and Grigoriadou, M. (2005). An adaptive feedback framework to support reflection, tutoring and guiding in assessment. In Advances in Web-Based Education: Personalized Learning Environments, edited by G. Magoulas and S. Chen, pp. 178-202. New York: Idea Group Publishing.
41. Hancock, T. E., Stock, W. A., and Kulhavy, R. W. (1992). Predicting feedback effects from response-certitude estimates. Bull. Psychonom. Soc., 30, 173-176.
42. Hancock, T. E., Thurman, R. A., and Hubbard, D. C. (1995a). An expanded control model for the use of instructional feedback. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 20, 410-425.
43. Hancock, T. E., Thurman, R. A., and Hubbard, D. C. (1995b). Using multiple indicators of cognitive state in logistic models that predict individual performance in machine-mediated learning environments. Machine-Mediated Learn., 5(3), 237-253.
44. Hannafin, M. J., Hannafin, K. D., and Dalton, D. W. (1993). Feedback and emerging instructional technologies. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, edited by J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 263-286. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
45. Heffernan, N. T. (2001). Intelligent Tutoring Systems Have Forgotten the Tutor: Adding a Cognitive Model of Human Tutors, Ph.D. dissertation, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University (http://www.algebratutor.org).
46. Heift, T. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in CALL. ReCall: J. Eurocall, 16, 416-431.
47. Holding, D. H. (1965). Principles of Training. Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon Press.
48. Hoska, D. M. (1993). Motivating learners trough CBI feedback: developing a positive learner perspective. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, edited by J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 105-131. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.*
49. Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, Vol. II, edited by C. M. Reigeluth, pp. 215-239. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., and Hannum, W. H. (1999). Classifying knowledge and skills from task analysis. In Task Analysis Methods for Instructional Design, edited by D. H. Jonassen, M. Tessmer, and W. H. Hannum, pp. 25-32. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In Instructional Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status, edited by C. M. Reigeluth, pp. 386-434. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Koedinger, K. R., Aleven, V., Heffernan, N., McLaren, B., and Hockenberry, M. (2004). Opening the door to non-programmers: authoring intelligent tutor behavior by demonstration. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS 2004), pp. 162-174. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
53. Kluger, A. N. and DeNisi, A. (1996). Effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol. Bull., 119, 254-284.*
54. Kulhavy, R. W. and Anderson, R. C. (1972). Learning-criterion error perseveration in text material. J. Educ. Psychol., 63(5), 505-512.
55. Kulhavy, R. W. and Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: the place of response certitude. Educ. Psychol. Rev., 1, 279-308.*
56. Kulhavy, R. W., White, M. T., Topp, B. W., Chan, A. L., and Adams, J. (1985). Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 10, 285-291.
57. Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., Hancock, T. E., Swindell, L. K., and Hammrich, P. L. (1990a). Written feedback: response certitude and durability. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 15, 319-332.
58. Kulhavy, R. W., Stock, W. A., Thornton, N. E., Winston, K. S., and Behrens, J. T. (1990b). Response feedback, certitude and learning from text. Br. J. Educ. Psychol., 60, 161-170.
59. Kulik, J. A. and Kulik, C. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Rev. Educ. Res., 58, 79-97.*
60. Kutay, C. and Ho, P. (2005). Designing agents for feedback using the documents produced in learning. Int. J. E-Learning, http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-4307620/Designing-agents-for-feedback-using.html.
61. Markowotz, N. and Renner, K. E. (1966). Feedback and the delay-retention effect. J. Exp. Psychol., 72(3), 452-455.
62. Mason, J. B. and Bruning, R. (2001). Providing Feedback in Computer-Based Instruction: What the Research Tells Us, http://dwb4.unl.edu/dwb/Research/MB/MasonBruning.html.
63. Mathan, S. A. and Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Fostering the intelligent novice: learning from errors with meta-cognitive tutoring. Educ. Psychol., 40, 257-265.
64. Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
65. McKendree, J. (1990). Effective feedback content for tutoring complex skills. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 5, 381-413.*
66. Melis, E. and Anders, E. (2005). Global feedback in Activmath. J. Comput. Math. Sci. Teach., 24, 197-220.
67. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., and Trafton, J. G. (1992). Effective tutoring techniques: a comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. J. Learn. Sci., 2, 277-305.*
68. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Merrill, S. K., and Landes, S. (1995). Tutoring: guided learning by doing. Cognit. Instruct., 13, 315-372.
69. Merrill, J. (1987). Levels of questioning and forms of feedback: instructional factors in courseware design. J. Comput.-Based Instruct., 14(1), 18-22.
70. Mitrovic, A., Martin, B., and Mayo, M. (2002). Using evaluation to shape ITS design: results and experience with SQL-Tutor, User Model. User-Adapt. Interact., 12(2/3), 243-279.
71. Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instruct. Sci., 32, 99-113.
72. Moreno, R. and Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: the role of student interactivity and feedback. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 53, 35-45.
73. Mory, E. H. (1994). Adaptive feedback in computer-based instruction: effects of response certitude on performance, feedback-study time and efficiency. J. Educ. Comput. Res., 11, 263-290.
74. Mory, E. H. (1996). Feedback research. In Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, edited by D. H. Jonassen, pp. 919-956. New York: Simon and Schuster.*
75. Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 2nd ed., edited by D. H. Jonassen, pp. 745-783. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.*
76. Murray, R. C., VanLehn, K., and Mostow, J. (2004). Looking ahead to select tutorial actions: a decision-theoretic approach. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ., 14, 235-278.
77. Nagata, N. (1993). Intelligent computer feedback for second language instruction. Modern Lang. J., 77, 330-339.
78. Nagata, N. (1997). An experimental comparison of deductive and inductive feedback generated by a simple parser. System, 25, 515-534.
79. Nagata, N. and Swisher, M. V. (1995). A study of consciousnessraising by computer: the effect of metalinguistic feedback on second language learning. Foreign Lang. Ann., 28, 337-347.
80. Narciss, S. (2004). The impact of informative tutoring feedback and self-efficacy on motivation and achievement in concept learning. Experimental Psychology, 51(3), 214-228.
81. Narciss, S. (2006). Informatives tutorielles Feedback. Entwicklungs-und Evaluationsprinzipien auf der Basis instruktionspsychologischer Erkenntnisse (Informative Tutoring Feedback). Münster: Waxmann.
82. Narciss, S. and Huth, K. (2004). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multi-media learning. In Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning, edited by H. M. Niegemann, D. Leutner, and R. Brünken, pp. 181-195. Münster: Waxmann.*
83. Narciss, S. and Huth, K. (2006). Fostering achievement and motivation with bug-related tutoring feedback in a computerbased training for written subtraction. Learn. Instruct. 16, 310-322.
84. Narciss, S., Körndle, H., Reimann, G., and Müller, C. (2004). Feedback-seeking and feedback efficiency in Web-based learning: how do they relate to task and learner characteristics? In Instructional Design for Effective and Enjoyable Computer-Supported Learning: Proceedings of the First Joint Meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers [CD-ROM], edited by P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, and R. Joiner, pp. 377-388. Tübingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.
85. Peek, J. and Tillema, H. H. (1978). Delay of feedback and retention of correct and incorrect responses. J. Exp. Educ., 38, 171-178.
86. Phye, G. D. (1979). The processing of informative feedback about multiple-choice test performance. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 4, 381-394.
87. Phye, G. D. (1991). Advice and feedback during cognitive training: effects at acquisition and delayed transfer. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 16, 87-94.
88. Phye, G. D. (2001). Problem-solving instruction and problemsolving transfer: the correspondence issue. J. Exp. Psychol., 93, 571-578.
89. Phye, G. D. and Bender, T. (1989). Feedback complexity and practice: response pattern analysis in retention and transfer. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 14, 97-110.
90. Phye, G. D. and Sanders, C. E. (1994). Advice and feedback: elements of practice for problem solving. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 19, 286-301.
91. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. In Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 7. Educational Psychology, edited by W. M. Reynolds and G. E. Miller, pp. 103-122. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
92. Pressley, M. (1986). The relevance of the good strategy user model to the teaching of mathematics. Educ. Psychol., 21, 139-161.
93. Rankin, R. J. and Trepper, T. (1978). Retention and delay of feedback in a computer-assisted task. J. Exp. Educ., 64, 67-70.
94. Rittle-Johnson, B. and Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Designing knowledge scaffolds to support mathematical problem solving. Cognit. Instruct., 23, 313-349.*
95. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., Ryu, E., Baker, R., and Koedinger, K. R. (2006). The help-tutor: does metacognitive feedback improve students’ help-seeking actions, skills and learning? In ITS 2006, LNCS 4053, edited by M. Ikeda, K. Ashley, and T.-W. Chan, pp. 360-369. Berlin: Springer.
96. Romero, C., Ventura, S., and DeBra, P. (2005). Knowledge discovery with genetic programming for providing feedback to courseware authors. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact., 14, 425-464.
97. Sales, G. C. (1993). Adapted and adaptive feedback in technology-based instruction. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 159-175. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
98. Sansone, C. (1986). A question of competence: the effects of competence and task feedback on intrinsic interest. J. Person. Soc. Psychol., 51, 918-931.
99. Sansone, C. (1989). Competence feedback, task feedback, and intrinsic interest: an examination of process and context. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 25, 343-361.
100. Sanz, C. (2004). Computer delivered implicit versus explicit feedback in processing instruction. In Processing Instruction: Theory, Research and Commentary, edited by B. Van-Patten, pp. 241-255. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
101. Schimmel, B. J. (1988). Providing meaningful feedback in courseware. In Instructional Designs for Microcomputer Courseware, edited by D. H. Jonassen, pp. 183-195. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
102. Schroth, M. L. and Lund, E. (1993). Role of delay of feedback on subsequent pattern recognition transfer tasks. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 18, 15-22.
103. Schunk, D. H. (1983). Ability versus effort attributional feedback: differential effects on self-efficacy and achievement. J. Educ. Psychol., 75, 848-856.
104. Schunk, D. H. and Rice, J. M. (1993). Strategy fading and progress feedback: effects on self-efficacy and comprehension among students receiving remedial reading services. J. Spec. Educ., 27, 257-276.
105. Senko, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2005). Regulation of achievement goals: the role of competence feedback. J. Educ. Psychol., 97, 320-336.
106. Smith, P. L. and Ragan, T. J. (1993). Designing instructional feedback for different learning outcomes. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, edited by J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 75-103. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.*
107. Steinberg, E. R. (1977). Review of student control in computerassisted instruction. J. Comput.-Based Instruct., 3, 84-90.
108. Steinberg, E. R. (1989). Cognition and learner control: a literature review, 1977-1988. J. Comput.-Based Instruct., 16, 117-121.
109. Stock, W. A., Kulhavy, R. W., Pridemore, D. R., and Krug, D. (1992). Responding to feedback after multiple-choice answers: the influence of response confidence. Q. J. Exp. Psychol., 45A, 649-667.
110. Sturges, P. T. (1969). Verbal retention as a function of the informativeness and delay of information feedback. J. Educ. Psychol., 60, 11-14.
111. Sturges; P. T. (1972). Information delay and retention: effect of information in feedback and tests. J. Educ. Psychol., 63, 32-43.
112. Sturges, P. T. (1978). Delay of informative feedback in computer-assisted testing. J. Educ. Psychol., 70(3), 357-358.
113. Surber, J. R. and Anderson, R. C. (1975). Delay-retention effect in natural classroom settings. J. Educ. Psychol., 67(2), 170-173.
114. Swindell, L. K. and Walls, W. F. (1993). Response confidence and the delay retention effect. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 18, 363-375.
115. Symonds, P. M. and Chase, D. H. (1929). Practice vs. motivation. J. Educ. Psychol., 20, 19-35.
116. Taylor, R. (1987). Selecting effective courseware: three fundamental instructional factors. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 12, 231-243.
117. Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Educational Psychology: The Psychology of Learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
118. Ulicsak, M. H. (2004) ‘How did it know we weren’t talking?': an investigation into the impact of self-assessments and feedback in a group activity. J. Comput. Assist. Learn., 20, 205-211.
119. Usher, E. L. and Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middle school students. Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 31, 125-141.
120. van den Boom, G., Paas, F., van Mërrienboer, J. J. G., and van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts and tutor feedback in a Web-based learning environment: effects on students’ selfregulated learning competence. Comput. Hum. Behav., 20, 551-567.
121. VanLehn, K. (1990). Mind Bugs: The Origins of Procedural Misconceptions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
122. VanLehn, K., Lynch, C., Schulze, K., Shapiro, J. A., Shelby, R., Taylor, L., Treacy, D., Weinstein, A., and Wintersgill, M. (2005). The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ., 15 147-204.*
123. Vollmeyer, R. and Rheinberg, F. (2005). A surprising effect of feedback on learning. Learn. Instruct., 15, 589-602.
124. Wager, W. and Mory, E. H. (1993). The role of questions in learning. In Interactive Instruction and Feedback, edited by J. V. Dempsey and G. C. Sales, pp. 55-73. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
125. Wager, W. and Wager, S. U. (1985). Presenting questions, processing responses, and providing feedback in CAI. J. Instruct. Dev., 8(4), 2-8.
126. Wiener, N. (1954). The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society. Oxford, England: Houghton Mifflin.