Citation

McRae M, Patterson JT, Hansen S. J. Mot. Behav. 2015; 47(6): 527-534.

Affiliation

a Department of Kinesiology, Brock University , St Catharines , Ontario , Canada.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/00222895.2015.1020357

PMID

25893852

Abstract

In many practical situations, learners are provided with feedback in the form of knowledge of results (KR) by a peer. However, when peers provide KR is currently unknown. When given the opportunity to request KR in a self-controlled manner, some participants have reported a preference for requesting KR after good performances. Alternatively, peers may provide KR in a different fashion. Subsequently, a discrepancy between the learner's desire to receive KR and when a peer provides KR may arise. In our study, peer- and self-controlled KR schedules were compared. Participants were peers who controlled KR (PC; 8), learners with peers (P-L; 8), or learners with self-control (SC; 8). Participants in the two learning groups (P-L and SC groups) completed a serial-timing task with a goal time of 2500 ms. Absolute error data on KR and no-KR trials along with self-reports indicate that participants with self-control preferred KR after good trials and peers preferred to provide KR after both good and bad trials equally.

RESULTS from the delayed retention test indicated that peer-controlled learners were more consistent (i.e., in terms of variable error) than the self-control group.

Language: en