Responding to Feedback after Multiple-choice Answers: The Influence of Response Confidence

Abstract

A model is proposed that describes how people choose multiple-choice answers and deal with subsequent feedback. Central to the model is the construct of likelihood, a signal that: (1) indexes the match between task demands and what is known, (2) gives a basis for decisions, and (3) is estimated by response confidence ratings. In two experiments, subjects answered an item, rated confidence, and studied feedback (for 100 items), and then answered the items again. All predictions of the model were confirmed. Specifically, for right/wrong feedback messages, feedback study intervals were longer after correct than incorrect choices (for correct choices, these intervals decreased as confidence increased). Also, there was no relation between the probability of correcting errors and level of confidence. For feedback messages that consisted of an item with correct alternative marked, there was a positive relation between probability of correcting errors and level of confidence.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

J. R.

(1983). The architecture of cognition Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Anderson

J. R.

(1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications. (3rd ed.) New York: W.H. Freeman.

College Entrance Examination Board (1986). The College Board Achievement Tests: 14 tests in 13 subjects New York: Author.

Gigerenzer

Hoffrage

Kleinbolting

(1991). Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review 98, 506–528.

Glucksburg

McClosky

(1981). Decisions about ignorance: Knowing that you don't know. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 7, 311–325.

Hancock

T. E.

Stock

W. A.

Kulhavy

R. W.

(1992). Predicting feedback effects from response certitude estimates. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 30, 173–176.

Hoch

S. J.

(1987). Perceived consensus and predictive accuracy: The pros and cons of projection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53, 221–234.

Johnson-Laird

P. N.

(1983). Mental models Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Johnson-Laird

P. N.

(1988). The computer and the mind: An introduction to cognitive science Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10.

Koriat

Lichtenstein

Fischhoff

(1980). Reasons for confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 6, 107–118.

11.

Kulhavy

R. W.

Stock

W. A.

(1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review 1, 279–308.

12.

Kulhavy

R. W.

Stock

W. A.

Hancock

T. E.

Swindell

L. K.

Hammrich

P. L.

(1990). Written feedback: Response certitude and durability. Contemporary Educational Psychology 15, 319–332.

13.

Kulhavy

R. W.

Stock

W. A.

Thornton

N. E.

Winston

K. S.

Behrens

J. T.

(1990). Response feedback, certitude, and learning from text. British Journal of Educational Psychology 60, 161–170.

14.

Lichtenstein

Fischhoff

(1980). Training for calibration. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 26, 149–171.

15.

Nelson

T. O.

(1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin 95, 109–133.

16.

Nelson

T. O.

Dunlosky

(1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science 2, 267–270.

17.

Nelson

T. O.

Leonesio

R. J.

(1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “labor-in-vain effect”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 14, 676–686.