To explain the inconsistencies reported in research noting different ages of learners, types of materials received, and delays of reinforcement, students in Grades 5, 8, and 11 received immediate and delayed reinforcement using easy and difficult material. Dubois residual gain scores were used to factor out the correlation between pre- and posttest scores. Results of analyses of variance indicate inconsistent findings concerning the effect of reinforcement may not be explained by variation in grade level or differences in the difficulty of material separately.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngellG. W.The effect of giving immediate knowledge of results on final examination scores in freshman chemistry. Journal of Educational Research, 1949, 42, 391–394.
2.
DuboisP. H.The design of correlational studies in training. In GlaserR. (Ed.), Training research and education. New York: Wiley, 1965. Pp. 63–86.
3.
EnglishR. A.KinzerJ. R.The effect of immediate and delayed feedback on retention of subject matter. Psychology in the Schools, 1966, 3, 143–147.
4.
GreenspoonJ.ForemanS.Effect of delay of knowledge of results on learning a motor task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1956, 51, 226–228.
5.
LandsmanH. J.TurkewitzM.Delay of knowledge of results and performance on a cognitive task. Psychological Reports, 1962, 11, 66.
6.
MorganC. L.MorganL. U.Effects of immediate awareness of success and failure upon objective examination scores. Journal of Experimental Education, 1935, 4, 63–66.
7.
RennerK. E.Delay of reinforcement: A historical review. Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 61, 341–361.
