Skip to main content
Log in

Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique Promotes Learning and Corrects Inaccurate first Responses

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Multiple-choice testing procedures that do not provide corrective feedback facilitate neither learning nor retention. In Studies 1 and 2, the performance of participants evaluated with the Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (IF AT), a testing method providing immediate feedback and enabling participants to answer until correct, was compared to that of participants responding to identical tests with Scantron answer sheets. Performance on initial tests did not differ, but when retested after delays of 1 day or 1 week, participants evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated higher scores and correctly answered more questions that had been initially answered incorrectly than did participants evaluated with Scantron forms. In Study 3, immediate feedback and answering until correct was available to all participants using either the IF AT or a computerized testing system on initial tests, with the final test completed by all participants using Scantron forms. Participants initially evaluated with the IF AT demonstrated increased retention and correctly responded to more items that had initially been answered incorrectly. Active involvement in the assessment process plays a crucial role in the acquisition of information, the incorporation of accurate information into cognitive processing mechanisms, and the retrieval of correct answers during retention tests. Results of Studies 1-3 converge to indicate that the IF AT method actively engages learners in the discovery process and that this engagement promotes retention and the correction of initially inaccurate response strategies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AIKEN, E. G. (1968). Delayed feedback effects on learning and retention of Morse Code symbols. Psychological Reports, 23, 723–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BEESON, R. O. (1973). Immediate knowledge of results and test performance. Journal of Educational Research, 66, 224–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BENJAMIN, L.T., CAVELL, T. A., & SHALLENBERGER, W. R. (1984). Staying with initial answers on objective tests: Is it a myth? Teaching of Psychology, 11, 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BENTON, S. L., GLOVER, J. A., & BRUNING, R. H. (1983). Levels of processing: Effects of numbers of decision on prose recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 382–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BRACKBILL, Y., BRAVOS, A., & STARR, R. H. (1962). Delay-improved retention of a difficult task. Physiological Psychology, 55, 947–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CLARIANA, R. B., ROSS, S. M., & MORRIS, G. R. (1992). The effects of different strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 39,156-169.

  • EPSTEIN, M. L., EPSTEIN, B. B., & BROSVIC, G. M. (2001). Immediate feedback during academic testing. Psychological Reports, 88, 889–894.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • GAYNOR, P. (1981). The effect of feedback delay on retention of computer-based mathematical material. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 8, 28–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • GLOVER, J. A., BRUNING, R. H., & PLAKE, B. S. (1982). Distinctiveness of encoding and recall of text materials. Journal of Educational Psychology, 14, 522–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HETHERINGTON, E. M., & ROSS, L. E. (1967). Discrimination learning by normal and retarded children under delay of reward and interpolated task conditions. Child Development, 38, 639–647.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • KLUGER, A., & DENISI, A. (1998). Feedback interventions: Toward the understanding of a double-edged sword. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 67–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KULHAVY, R. W., & ANDERSON, R. C. (1972). Delay-retention effect with multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 505–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • LHYLE, K. G., & KULHAVY, R. W. (1987). Feedback processing and error correction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 320–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MISLEVY, R. J. (1991). A framework for studying differences between multiple-choice and free-response test items. Cited from R. D. BENNETT & W. C. WARD (1993)? Construction vs. choice in cognitive reassessment. Hillsdale, Nj: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • PEECK, J., Van Den BOSCH, A. B., & Kreupeling, W. J. (1985). Effects of informative feedback in relation to retention of initial responses. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RAMSEY, P. H., RAMSEY, P. P., & BARNES, M. J. (1987). Effects of participant confidence and item difficulty on test score gains due to answer changing. Teaching of Psychology, 14, 206–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RANKIN, R. J., & TEPPER, T. (1978). Retention and delay of feedback in a computer assisted instruction task. Journal of Experimental Education, 46, 67–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SKINNER, N. F. (1983). Switching answers on multiple-choice questions: Shrewdness or shibboleth? Teaching of Psychology, 10, 220–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SURBER, J. R., & ANDERSON, R. C. (1975). Delay-retention effect in natural classroom settings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 7, 170–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WEBB, J. M., STOCK, W. A., & MCCARTHY, M. T. (1994). The effects of feedback timing on learning facts: The role of response confidence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 251–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael L. Epstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Epstein, M.L., Lazarus, A.D., Calvano, T.B. et al. Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique Promotes Learning and Corrects Inaccurate first Responses. Psychol Rec 52, 187–201 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395423

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395423

Navigation