Final recall does not differ reliably between participant-controlled and computer-controlled feedback skipping¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2010 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Recall was slightly greater when participants controlled skipping (M = .74) than when the computer did (M = .71), a difference that was not reliable. → Matthew Jensen Hays 2010

Evidence¶

Matthew Jensen Hays 2010¶

Matthew Jensen Hays, Nate Kornell, and Robert A. Bjork. (2010). The costs and benefits of providing feedback during learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.6.797

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Controller comparison within the skipping-permitted condition of the fixed-time experiment; equivalence was not tested, only a non-significant t test is reported.

"recall on the final test was slightly greater when skipping was controlled by the participants (M 5 .74, SD 5 .25) than when it was controlled by the computer (M 5 .71, SD 5 .26). This difference was not reliable [t(66) , 1, p 5 .695]."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• When total learning time is fixed, permitting learners to skip feedback after retrieval improves delayed final recall compared with mandatory feedback — related
• Participants' feedback-skipping decisions diverge from the optimal computer algorithm: they skip after some incorrect responses and fail to skip after many correct responses — related
• Permitting feedback skipping increases the number of retrieval attempts completed within a fixed learning time — related
• Participants' willingness to skip feedback after correct responses increases substantially across retrieval-practice cycles — related
• Learners' self-assessments of response correctness are imperfect, with asymmetric error rates for incorrect and correct responses — related