psychology assistant
asdfghjklzxcvbnm
EffectsofFeedbackonWorkingMemory2.docxRunning Head: EFFECTS OF FEEDBACK ON WORKING MEMORY
IMPROVING WORKING MEMORY 2
Effects of Feedback on Working Memory: Implications of Student Learning
Feedback is an essential part of effective learning. Research has shown substantial effects of positive feedback on learning (e.g., Bulter 1998; Dweck 2000; Xu 2017). In the learning context, feedback gives students clear guidance on how to improve their learning and helps them understand the subject being studied. In the classroom, feedback is the information given by teachers and students’ pupils. Through feedback, students can reflect on themselves and each other and teachers can modify the teaching and learning activities they are engaged in. In general, the effects of feedback are powerful and positive, leading many researchers to support providing feedback (e.g., Bulter 1998; Dweck 2000). Indeed, Hattie and Timperley (2007) identify feedback as one of the ‘‘highest influences on achievement’’ in the classroom (p. 83). Furthermore，according to Xu（2017）’s study: as learners listen, digest, implement and give feedback about what they should have done, it forces the brain to engage in a heavy mental uplifting, thus fostering comprehension and retention. Doing this helps expand the warehouse and remember what a learner has learned more easily since this involves a lot of information processing. The process that happens during feedback processing heavily relies on core cognitive functions.
Working memory is one of the brain's core cognitive functions. It is a cognitive process that enables the brain to hold and process information, which is crucial for learning (Stevenson, 2017). However, this fundamental brain function is not consistently high in individuals. Working memory failures are widespread. In fact, research has shown that approximately ten percent of people have weak working memory (Kim, & Christianson, 2017). Poor working memory is one of the most significant contributors to learning difficulties (Namaziandost et al., 2018). On the contrary, having excellent working memory helps learners to be able to hold the information taught long enough to use it. In other words, working memory capacity supports learners’ ability to actively select, regulate, and process task-relevant information such as feedback (Alloway 2006).
Performance feedback may be vital in helping improve working memory performance (Agarwal et al., 2017). Research has shown that the practice of receiving feedback can help improve working memory performance compared to when there is a no-feedback group for a particular session (Goo, 2012). For instance, performance feedback helps improve the working memory because the subjects are not aware of the period of inattentiveness but bringing learners' attention state into attentiveness helps them to be able to re-arrange the information (Li & Roshan, 2019). The feedback also helps learners alert them that their current attention state is insufficient to perform well (Finn, Thomas, & Rawson, 2018). And it helps learners learn about the failures and thus ensures that they address these failures. It also helps in increasing the intrinsic motivation of learners. Unmotivated learners may perform below their capability, and thus, giving feedback helps in increasing task engagement and the general level of performance (Bouchacourt, & Buschman, 2019). Furthermore, behavioral feedback can lead to an overall improvement in working memory performance (Adam & Vogel,2016).
Gaps in literature
Research has shown that there is a significant impact in the effects of positive feedback on working memory. However, it is not shown how learners are affected differently by different types of feedback. Do all feedback lead to a similar improvement level? While the researchers believe that positive feedback helps improve working memory, different types of feedback may not lead to improvement and may even lead to decreased performance. Therefore, it is essential to look at how different types of feedback affects learners’ working memory.
Current study
The study examines how the effect of positive and negative feedback interacts with learners’ working memory performance. Data were collected from 197 college students from both the U.S and Chinese Universities. The study seeks to address the following questions:
1. What is the relationship between positive and negative feedback effects on learners' differences in working memory?
2. Is there a difference in impact between the two feedback groups?
Method
Participants
Ninety-Seven Chinese college students from Zhejiang University and Ninety-Six U.S. college students from the University of California, Irvine participated in this study. Sixty-nine percent of them were women, and thirty-one percent of them were men.
Procedure
In this study, participants all have four rounds of n-back tasks on their performance before receiving any feedback, which serves as the baseline performance measure. Then they took ten rounds of n-back tasks on their performance after receiving negative or positive feedbacks, which serves as the post-performance measure.
Results
We are interested in the relationship between the effectiveness of positive and negative feedback on learners' differences in working memory and thus conducted a T-test to examine their baseline performance and post-performance by positive and negative conditions, respectively.
The participants were assigned to two conditions: positive feedback(n = 98) and negative feedback ( n = 95). We find our results as shown in Figure 1:
FIGURE 1
The effects of positive and negative feedback on working memory performance.
Note. WM=working memory; Pre=baseline performance; Post=post performance; WM performance is measured in percentage correct on the n-back task.
The positive feedback group（N=98）has a significant increase in the post-test after they received positive feedback(M=0.61,SD=0.19)compared to the pre-test before they receive any feedback ( M=0.45,SD=0.20) ,t(97)=1.66,p<.001.
The negative feedback group（N=95）has a significant increase in the post-test after they received negative feedback(M=0.55,SD=0.20)compared to the pre-test before they receive any feedback ( M=0.42,SD=0.22) ,t(94)=1.66,p<.001.
There is no significant difference in the changing scores between the positive group(M=0.16,SD=0.15) and the negative group(M=0.13,SD=0.15 ),t(190)=1.97,p<0.18. However，the changing score in the positive group is greater than it is in the negative group.
Discussion
1.positive feedback improve working memory, which is aligned with our result( list researches in the intro or may be add new ! illustrate with our findings together.
2. research does not talk about negative feed back, we find negative feedback also improve working memory
3.limitations for the study
You may talk about sample size two small 194 and demographic is limited only from the U.S and Zhejiang universities
Research method n back test ‘s limitation or other better psychological test?
/ positive negative feedback may not given enough .it is important to ensure that the feedback used is efficient and delivered as supposed
Another thing you could think off. Add it.
References
Adam, K. C., & Vogel, E. K. (2016). Reducing failures of working memory with performance feedback. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 23(5), 1520-1527.
Agarwal, P. K., Finley, J. R., Rose, N. S., & Roediger III, H. L. (2017). Benefits from retrieval practice are greater for students with lower working memory capacity. Memory, 25(6), 764-771.
Alloway, T. P. (2006). How does working memory work in the classroom? Educational Research and Reviews, 1(4), 134–139.
Bouchacourt, F., & Buschman, T. J. (2019). A flexible model of working memory. Neuron, 103(1), 147-160.
Buchsbaum, B. R., & D'Esposito, M. (2019). A sensorimotor view of verbal working memory. Cortex, 112, 134-148.
Butler, R. （1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation; the effects of task-involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58,1-14.
Collins, A. G., Ciullo, B., Frank, M. J., & Badre, D. (2017). Working memory load strengthens reward prediction errors. Journal of Neuroscience, 37(16), 4332-4342.
Dweck, C.S.（2000), Self-Theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development, London UK: Taylor ＆ Francis
Engle, R. W. (2018). Working memory and executive attention: A revisit. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 190-193.
Esmaeeli, S. (2021). The Effectiveness of Neurofeedback Training on the Working-Memory of People with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Symptoms. European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 8(1), 1795-1803.
Finn, B., Thomas, R., & Rawson, K. A. (2018). Learning more from feedback: Elaborating feedback with examples enhances concept learning. Learning and Instruction, 54, 104-113.
Fyfe, E. R., DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2015). When feedback is cognitively demanding: the importance of working memory capacity. Instructional Science, 43(1), 73-91.
Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in second language acquisition, 34(3), 445-474.
Goo, J. & Rawson, K. A (2015). Feedback and working memory capacity. Studies in second language acquisition, 34(3), 445-474.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487.
Jaemyung, G. (2017). Working Memory and Corrective Feedback in Interaction. 언어연구, 32(4), 595-625.
Kim, J. H., & Christianson, K. (2017). Working memory effects on L1 and L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses by Korean L2 learners of English. Second Language Research, 33(3), 365-388.
Li, S., & Roshan, S. (2019). The associations between working memory and the effects of four different types of written corrective feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 1-15.
Mackey, A., & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62(3), 704-740.
Namaziandost, E., Hafezian, M., & Shafiee, S. (2018). Exploring the association among working memory, anxiety and Iranian EFL learners’ listening comprehension. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 3(1), 1-17.
Sana, F., Yan, V. X., Kim, J. A., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2018). Does working memory capacity moderate the interleaving benefit?. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(3), 361-369.
Stevenson, C. E. (2017). Role of working memory and strategy-use in feedback effects on children’s progression in analogy solving: An explanatory item response theory account. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 27(3), 393-418.
Wardlow, L., & Heyman, G. D. (2016). The roles of feedback and working memory in children’s reference production. Journal of experimental child psychology, 150, 180-193.
Xu, Y. (2017). Reevaluating the sensory account of visual working memory storage. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(10), 794-815
