Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes

IF 5.1 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2025-02-23 DOI:10.1111/jcal.13112

Ute Mertens, Marlit A. Lindner

{"title":"Computer-Based Answer-Until-Correct and Elaborated Feedback: Effects on Affective-Motivational and Performance Outcomes","authors":"Ute Mertens, Marlit A. Lindner","doi":"10.1111/jcal.13112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Educational assessments increasingly shift towards computer-based formats. Many studies have explored how different types of automated feedback affect learning. However, few studies have investigated how digital performance feedback affects test takers' ratings of affective-motivational reactions during a testing session.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>In this within-subject experiment, 97 university students completed a multiple-choice treatment test including 36 challenging fact-based science tasks (biology, chemistry, and physics). The test items were presented with different types of computer-based feedback (i.e., <i>elaborated feedback</i> [EF] and multiple-try feedback, i.e., <i>Answer-Until-Correct</i> [AUC]) and compared to a no-feedback control condition. Outcome measures were students' self-reported affective-motivational responses and their performance in the treatment and in a recall posttest.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Feedback positively affected performance. EF enhanced students' recall performance in a posttest more than AUC feedback. Yet, error correction, as measured by the number of corrected responses in the posttest, did not differ between the two feedback conditions. Regarding affective-motivational outcomes, both EF and AUC feedback affected students similarly and were more beneficial than no feedback. This effect was further moderated by the item-level response correctness. Following correct responses, the affective-motivational impact of feedback was substantial and positive. In contrast to earlier findings, automated feedback did not have detrimental affective-motivational effects after incorrect responses. Although the emotional benefit of AUC and EF feedback was reduced after incorrect responses, students' affect remained more positive compared to when they received no feedback.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Feedback effects on emotions and motivation varied by feedback type and the correctness of test-takers' responses.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.13112","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.13112","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Educational assessments increasingly shift towards computer-based formats. Many studies have explored how different types of automated feedback affect learning. However, few studies have investigated how digital performance feedback affects test takers' ratings of affective-motivational reactions during a testing session.

Method

In this within-subject experiment, 97 university students completed a multiple-choice treatment test including 36 challenging fact-based science tasks (biology, chemistry, and physics). The test items were presented with different types of computer-based feedback (i.e., elaborated feedback [EF] and multiple-try feedback, i.e., Answer-Until-Correct [AUC]) and compared to a no-feedback control condition. Outcome measures were students' self-reported affective-motivational responses and their performance in the treatment and in a recall posttest.

Results

Feedback positively affected performance. EF enhanced students' recall performance in a posttest more than AUC feedback. Yet, error correction, as measured by the number of corrected responses in the posttest, did not differ between the two feedback conditions. Regarding affective-motivational outcomes, both EF and AUC feedback affected students similarly and were more beneficial than no feedback. This effect was further moderated by the item-level response correctness. Following correct responses, the affective-motivational impact of feedback was substantial and positive. In contrast to earlier findings, automated feedback did not have detrimental affective-motivational effects after incorrect responses. Although the emotional benefit of AUC and EF feedback was reduced after incorrect responses, students' affect remained more positive compared to when they received no feedback.

Conclusion

Feedback effects on emotions and motivation varied by feedback type and the correctness of test-takers' responses.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

6.00%

发文量

116

期刊介绍： The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope