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)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Negative performance feedback prompted higher expectations of future mental effort than positive or no feedback, with effects explained by self-efficacy and feelings of threat. → de Bruin 2025 q3 i? Feedback valence indirectly affected perceived task effort and willingness to invest effort via feelings of challenge and threat. → de Bruin 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

de Bruin 2025¶

de Bruin, A. B. H., Janssen, E. M., Waldeyer, J., & Stebner, F. (2025). Cognitive Load and Challenges in Self-regulation: An Introduction and Reflection on the Topical Collection. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10042-2

q3 · i? · review · r2

Four experiments by van Gog et al. (2024) manipulating motivational state through performance feedback, testing the biopsychological model of challenge and threat. The editorial reports that "negative perfor - mance feedback prompted higher expectations of future mental effort compared to positive or no feedback," with no printed effect size.

"Results revealed that negative perfor - mance feedback prompted higher expectations of future mental effort compared to positive or no feedback. This effect was explained by participants’ levels of self-effi - cacy and feelings of threat."

de Bruin 2025 (2)¶

de Bruin, A. B. H., Janssen, E. M., Waldeyer, J., & Stebner, F. (2025). Cognitive Load and Challenges in Self-regulation: An Introduction and Reflection on the Topical Collection. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10042-2

q3 · i? · causal · r?

Same four-experiment study by van Gog et al. (2024), reporting the indirect pathway from feedback valence through challenge and threat feelings to perceived task effort and willingness to invest effort. No effect size is printed in the editorial.

"Furthermore, feedback valence also indirectly affected participants’ perceived task effort and their willingness to invest effort via feelings of challenge and threat."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• 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
• 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
• 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 — 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
• Predominantly negative feedback leads students to expect a next round of problems will require more effort than predominantly positive feedback (Experiments 1 and 2) — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The effect of feedback valence on expected effort required is fully mediated by self-efficacy (Experiments 1 and 2) and threat (Experiment 1) — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Negative feedback lowered math self-concept indirectly via enjoyment and hope; positive feedback raised it via hope — related