PDFE #12 "Feedback"

There are two different types of feedback: knowledge of results (KR) and knowledge of performance (KP). KR allows the participant to get feedback on how close they were at reaching their goal after each attempt of the trial phase. Although this feedback can be helpful in adjusting the participant's performance, the participant usually becomes dependent on the feedback for learning. KP allows the participant to rate the quality of their performance.

For the lab on feedback, we split up into pairs with one partner being the "100% KR" and the other partner being the "Requested KR." Each person took turns aiming their pen at a targeted line while blindfolded. Each person performed 3 sets of 10 trials with a minute break in between each set. Then, after 30 trails, the participant took a five-minute break and then performed a retention test of 5 trails with no KR. Jenny was my partner and was in the "100% KR group" where she was told her results after each trail. I was in the "Requested KR" group, which allowed me to get feedback only when I asked for it. During my 30 trials, I requested feedback 13 times.

Providing KR only when requested worked much better, especially when considering the average scores. The requested feedback average scores were all under 7mm while the 100% KR was all between 7 to 20. The results did match the chapter reading, which stated that the requested KR category would respond better to inquired feedback. Are results were clearly consistent with these findings.

Several factors could have influenced the results. First, if Jenny did not do as well on one trial, I had to tell her. Often, if she did not do well on one, the next couple would be bad as well. However, if she did well on one, her next one would be good. When I was the participant, I could tell if I had done well because Jenny would be really fast in telling me to start the next trial. Often times, I would find myself asking for feedback even though I know I had done well. This acted as a positive reinforcement that helped me want to do better. Also, technique played a role in performance. Jenny had only one hand on the paper, would lift up her entire hand, and place the pen down where she thought the line might be. This technique made her randomly guess. On the other hand, I placed one hand on the end line and dragged my writing hand across the paper. This way I was able to gauge how far I was from the end line. I think this made my performance more accurate. Frequency of KR and technique both influenced our results.