Logo ICM 2012

Final Conference Agenda

Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or room to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).

 
Session Overview
Session
PAP-12: Feedback
Time: Wednesday, 29/Aug/2012: 3:30pm - 5:00pm
Session Chair: Birgit Harks, German Institue for International Educational Research
Location: 254
n=60

Presentations

Effects of a reattribution training on learning in young children - combining educational and neuroscientific research

Barbara Moschner, Andrea Anschuetz, Jale Oezyurt, Christiane M. Thiel

Universität Oldenburg, Germany

Feedback is a major topic in educational, cognitive and neuroscientific research and is of high relevance for every day educational practice. Focusing feedback processes, a pre-post treatment-control group design is implemented in our study to analyse the effects of a reattribution training in 10 to 13 year old children. The aim of our study is to investigate effects of feedback given by trained teachers on learning outcomes in comparison to the feedback given by untrained teachers. For this reason we tested 418 children between the ages of 10 to 13 years in their natural school setting with an experimental learning task with different kinds of feedback (affective and corrective) before and after the training. 30 of these children were tested with fMRI.

First analyses of our data show that training effects were obvious in the behavioural and the neural data. Behavioral results show that only highly affective feedback impacts performance in the following trials. We show compelling evidence that a reattribution training improves performance in highly affective conditions which are associated with signal changes in brain areas involved in the processing of affective and self-relevant information, respectively. To our knowledge, this is the first fMRI study demonstrating that emotional motivational training has a significant influence on negative feedback processing in children.


The effects of trained 2x2 achievement goals on task continuation after goal achievement feedback

Gera Noordzij1, Edwin A.J. Van Hooft2, Heleen Van Mierlo1, Marise Ph. Born1

1Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands, The; 2University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Given the importance of goal achievement in work, school, and other related settings, training achievement goals and investigating the effects on task continuation can give better insight in the processes by which successful task performance and goal achievement can be increased. Based on the achievement goal framework (Elliot & McGregor, 2001) we developed four different training courses distinctive in climate and goal setting. After training, participants performed a computer task and received feedback on their goal achievement (success or failure). We hypothesized that mastery-approach, mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance achievement goal training and the nature of feedback have distinct implications for subsequent task continuation. Using a 2x2x2 experimental design with 161 students from a large University in the Netherlands, we found partly support for these predictions.

Participants who were trained to set mastery approach or avoidance achievement goals showed significantly longer task continuation after feedback compared to participants who were trained to set performance achievement goals. Participants who received negative feedback showed significantly longer task continuation compared to participants who received positive feedback. However, there was no significant interaction effect between achievement goal training and feedback, although the results were in the expected direction showing that mastery-approach achievement goal training results in the longest task continuation after negative feedback. We discuss the implications for work and school settings.


Indirect and moderated effects of feedback on motivation and achievement

Birgit Harks1, Katrin Rakoczy1, John Allan Hattie2, Eckhard Klieme1

1German Institute for International Educational Research, Germany; 2The University of Melbourne, Australia

The powerful impact of feedback on learning has been demonstrated in many studies. However, relatively little is known about whether and how innovative feedback methods – like criterial feedback (localizing student’s performance in a competence model) and process-oriented feedback (providing information on individual strengths, weaknesses and strategies) – positively affect motivation and achievement compared to feedback usually given in instruction (social-comparative feedback, providing grades). The moderation of such feedback effects by motivational variables and their mediation via processing components as perception of feedback’s usefulness have been seldom studied.

The present study investigates whether (1) criterial/process-oriented feedback is perceived as more useful than social-comparative feedback, (2) there are indirect effects from criterial versus social-comparative feedback/process-oriented versus social-comparative feedback on achievement development and motivation via perceived usefulness, (3) indirect effects of criterial versus social-comparative feedback differ from indirect effects of process-oriented versus social-comparative feedback, (4) indirect feedback effects are moderated by interest and self-efficacy.

216 ninth graders were assigned to a process-oriented, criterial or social-comparative feedback condition. Achievement was assessed by tests, mediating and moderating variables were measured by questionnaires.

Results of path analysis show that (1) criterial and process-oriented feedback are perceived as more useful than social-comparative feedback. (2) There are indirect effects of criterial versus social-comparative feedback/process-oriented versus social-comparative feedback on achievement development and motivation via perceived usefulness. (3) Indirect effects of criterial versus social-comparative feedback do not differ from indirect effects of process-oriented versus social-comparative feedback. (4) Indirect effects are influenced by student’s interest and self-efficacy.

Rewards are not always bad for fun: Challenging the undermining effect using task-congruent rewards

Susanne M. Steiner, Friederike X. R. Gerstenberg, Hugo M. Kehr

Technische Universität München, Germany

If people are rewarded for tasks they enjoy, they may enjoy those tasks less: Extrinsic rewards have the potential to undermine one' s intrinsic motivation. Multiple studies have verified evidence for this undermining effect. In particular, the negative effect of tangible rewards on intrinsic motivation appears to be incontrovertible. However, thus far, the harmful effects of different tangible rewards have not been compared. The purpose of the present research was to close this research gap, and to find out whether there are classes of tangible rewards that do not harm intrinsic motivation.

Our basic assumption was that rewards only undermine intrinsic motivation as much as they are thematically unrelated to the task. These assumptions are based on attribution theory and the compensatory model of motivation and volition. We hypothesized that only task-incongruent tangible rewards that are not related to the task would undermine intrinsic motivation. By contrast, task-congruent tangible rewards should not undermine intrinsic motivation.

We conducted three studies to verify these assumptions: Whereas Studies 1 and 2 were conducted in a laboratory setting; Study 3 was conducted in an educational setting. The findings provided a high degree of support for our assumptions. Studies 1 to 3 revealed that task-congruent rewards do not undermine intrinsic motivation, whereas task-incongruent rewards do. Furthermore, Study 2 revealed that task-incongruent rewards tend to undermine intrinsic motivation regardless of whether they are monetary or nonmonetary. Beyond the positive effect of task-congruent rewards on intrinsic motivation, Study 3 also revealed a positive effect on performance.


 
Contact and Legal Notice · Contact Address:
Conference: ICM 2012
Conference Software - ConfTool Pro 2.6.51
© 2001 - 2012 by H. Weinreich, Hamburg, Germany