Home · Sources · FB-011

Effects of Differential Feedback on Students' Examination Performance

Authors: Lipnevich, A. A.; Smith, J. K. · Year: 2009 · Tier: RCT · DOI/URL: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017841

Links to claims

Claim	Basis
C4	University students revising an exam essay a week later with feedback in hand: detailed comments raised the revised score strongly (η² = .24); instructor comments alone 83.85 vs grade alone 75.11 vs praise alone 74.38. Same-task revision, no later task, so outside C4's "later task or test" scope; not a kill test. Full text read.

Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.

Källa: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017841 (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 15(4), 319–333)

[full text] 464 first-year psychology students at two US universities wrote a 500-word course-exam essay; one week later they saw feedback and revised the same essay in the same sitting (pp. 322–325).
[full text] 3 × 2 × 2 design: detailed comments (none, framed as from the instructor, framed as from a computer; same content) × draft grade shown or not × praise statement or not.
[full text] Detailed comments raised the revised score strongly: F(2, 450) = 69.23, p < .001, η² = .24 (p. 326). Raw cell means (Table 4, p. 327): instructor comments alone 83.85 (n = 39), grade alone 75.11 (n = 38), praise alone 74.38 (n = 40), nothing 73.80 (n = 40).
[full text] Praise had no main effect on scores and went with lower self-reported motivation; a shown grade went with lower self-efficacy and more negative affect (pp. 328–329).
[full text] Authors' limit (p. 331): "The students were not assessed later, and they were not given a similar task at a later time."

[full text] One revision of the same essay with the feedback in hand; university students; one course.
[assessment] The grade effects are small: the overall grade effect, F(1, 450) = 4.07, does not pass the authors' own corrected level of .0083 (study mining 2026-11-09 recomputed p ≈ .044 from the printed F and df), so only the detailed-comments result is used as evidence.

[assessment] Supports C4's direction (comments over a grade or praise alone) outside its "later task or test" scope; not a kill-condition test. Grade-alongside-comments results are held in open question 24.

Added 2026-11-09 by the project (nightly attack run). [full text] = read in the full text; [assessment] = the project's own assessment.

ID: FB-011
Tier: RCT (individually randomised, 3 × 2 × 2)
Titel: Effects of Differential Feedback on Students' Examination Performance
Författare: Lipnevich, A. A.; Smith, J. K.
År: 2009
Källa/DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017841
Tidskrift: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 15(4), 319–333
Status: in the library since 2026-11-09 (FB-011; nightly attacks, C4 Bounds correction); full text stored 2026-10-17 (private); mined 2026-11-09
Åldersgrupp: vuxen-livslangt
Teman: feedback-bedomning
Verifierad: Crossref metadata (title, authors Lipnevich/Smith, J Exp Psychol Appl 15(4) 319–333, 2009-12) checked 2026-11-09
Hämtad: 2026-10-17
Not: C4 lead (blocked attack, week run 2026-10-16; the report there cited DOI 10.1037/a0017807 in some notes — correct DOI is 10.1037/a0017841). EARLIER VERSION also saved: ETS Research Report RR-08-30 (2008), "Response to Assessment Feedback: The Effects of Grades, Praise, and Source of Information", doi 10.1002/j.2333-8504.2008.tb02116.x, from the first author's homepage https://www.anastasiyalipnevich.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Lipnevich_EECE_2008_ETS-Feedback.pdf — files / ets-rr-08-30-earlier-version.pdf. Not yet read for a verdict.

The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.