Providing peer feedback can be more beneficial than receiving it because it is more cognitively engaging¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoreticalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Providing comments to peers is often more beneficial than receiving them, involving higher-order processes such as applying criteria, diagnosing problems and suggesting solutions. → David Carless & David Boud 2018
Evidence¶
David Carless & David Boud 2018¶
David Carless & David Boud. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
q2 · i? · theoretical · r2
Narrative review section on composing and receiving peer feedback, attributing the finding to Nicol, Thomson, and Breslin (2014). The review reports that giving feedback engages "higher-order processes" more than receiving it.
"Providing comments to peers is often more beneficial than receiving them because it is more cognitively-engaging: involving higher-order processes, such as application of criteria, diagnosing problems and suggesting solutions (Nicol, Thomson, and Breslin 2014)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The quality of feedback students give peers predicts gains in their own work, but no recorded study isolates a causal benefit of the assessor role — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
- Coached peer review improves the specificity of reviewer comments and receivers' uptake of feedback — related
- During peer-feedback provision, students deal with errors in one of two patterns: quick discovery (identification simultaneous with decoding, often without evaluation) or elaborate discovery (identification resulting from an interpreting/evaluating phase) — related
- Peer feedback promoted critical reflection, collaboration and engagement, but students doubted its reliability because peers were statistics beginners — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
providing-peer-feedback-more-cognitively-engaging |
title |
Providing peer feedback can be more beneficial than receiving it because it is more cognitively engaging |
description |
Providing peer feedback can be more beneficial than receiving it because it is more cognitively engaging |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — david-carless-david-boud-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.