The dark side of corrective feedback: Controlled and automatic influences of retrieval practice

Abstract

Corrective feedback is often touted as a critical benefit to learning, boosting testing effects when retrieval is poor and reducing negative testing effects. Here, we explore the dark side of corrective feedback. In 3 experiments, we found that corrective feedback on multiple-choice practice questions is later endorsed as the answer to related second-test questions, even though it is no longer correct. We describe this effect as an automatic influence of memory for feedback which participants fail to control. We explored how this influence is affected by the depth of retrieval during practice by successively increasing the retrieval demands of the multiple-choice practice test across the 3 experiments: Experiment 1 used a standard (select a single favorite option) format; Experiment 2 used ranking (rank order the options); and Experiment 3 used elimination testing (provide reasons for rejecting unchosen options). Increasing retrieval depth enhanced controlled influences on a cued-recall second test, evidenced by better accuracy on related versus new questions. However, it did not reduce the automatic influence on accuracy when the second test was multiple choice, partly because repeating the options between practice and test likely led to false recognition of related questions. Together, the results suggest that multiple-choice practice tests produce both automatic and controlled memory influences on related second-test questions, with retrieval depth at practice being an important determinant of the controlled influence. However, whether that controlled influence will override the automatic influence of memory for the corrective feedback also depends on the second test format.

More information

Identifiers

ORCID for Philip Higham: orcid.org/0000-0001-6087-7224

Catalogue record

Export record

Altmetrics