With reduced construct overlap and a no-feedback control, feedback did not significantly affect challenge (Experiments 3 and 4), and negative feedback raised expected effort required only in Experiment 3¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In the replication experiments with different challenge/threat questionnaires, feedback condition did not significantly affect challenge in either experiment. → Tamara van Gog 2024 q3 i2 Threat differed significantly across conditions in both experiments, and negative feedback raised expected effort required relative to positive and no feedback only in Experiment 3. → Tamara van Gog 2024 (2)

Evidence¶

Tamara van Gog 2024¶

Tamara van Gog, Eva Janssen, Florence Lucas, Maaike Taheij (2024). A Motivational Perspective on (Anticipated) Mental Effort Investment: The Biopsychosocial Model of Challenge and Threat. Educational Psychology Review (2024) 36:54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09861-6

q3 · i? · causal · r2

One-way ANOVAs across three conditions (no, predominantly positive, predominantly negative feedback; N = 167 and N = 211) found no significant effect on challenge. The authors suggest the earlier challenge findings may have resulted from self-efficacy overlap in the challenge scale.

"we did not find a significant effect of feedback condition on challenge, either in Experiment 3, F(2, 164) = 2.41, p = 0.093, or in Experiment 4, F(2, 208) = 1.78, p = 0.172."

Tamara van Gog 2024 (2)¶

Tamara van Gog, Eva Janssen, Florence Lucas, Maaike Taheij (2024). A Motivational Perspective on (Anticipated) Mental Effort Investment: The Biopsychosocial Model of Challenge and Threat. Educational Psychology Review (2024) 36:54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09861-6

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

One-way ANOVAs on expected effort required across the three feedback conditions found a significant effect in Experiment 3 (η²p = 0.06) but not in Experiment 4; post-hoc tests showed the negative feedback condition expected more effort than positive (p = 0.007) and no feedback (p = 0.039) conditions.

"we did find a significant effect of condition in Experiment 3, F(2, 164) = 5.25, p = 0.006, /u1D7022p = 0.06, but not in Experiment 4, F(2, 208) = 0.86, p = 0.425."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Feedback valence affects post-task self-efficacy, challenge, and threat: negative feedback lowers self-efficacy and challenge and raises threat (Experiments 1 and 2) — related
• Feedback valence does not directly affect willingness to invest effort, but has significant indirect effects via challenge and threat pointing in opposite directions (all four experiments) — related
• The effect of feedback valence on expected effort required is fully mediated by self-efficacy (Experiments 1 and 2) and threat (Experiment 1) — related
• Predominantly negative feedback leads students to expect a next round of problems will require more effort than predominantly positive feedback (Experiments 1 and 2) — related
• In the absence of feedback, self-efficacy after problem solving was not associated with invested, expected, or willingness-to-invest effort, and threat was not associated with any effort measure (Experiments 3 and 4) — related
• Negative performance feedback raises expected future mental effort and affects perceived effort and willingness to invest effort via challenge and threat (van Gog et al., 2024) — related