Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

HFES 2008 Proceedings Presentation


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

HFES 2008 Proceedings Presentation

  1. 1. How Individual Differences and Task Load May Affect Feedback Use When Learning a New Task<br />Christopher M. Kelley & Anne Collins McLaughlin<br />North Carolina State University<br />September 26, 2008<br />
  2. 2. Some Definitions<br />Feedback - Information from an external source about performance meant to guide learning<br />(Kluger & DeNsi, 1996). <br />Performance vs. Learning measures<br />(Brosvic, Dihoff, Epstein, & Cook, 2006; McLaughlin, 2007; Salmoni, Schmidt, & Walter, 1984; Schmidt & Bjork, 1992) <br />Feedback support<br />(McLaughlin, 2007)<br />
  3. 3. Conceptual Directive<br />Rare Every Trial<br />Lengthy Delay Immediate<br />SUPPORT<br /> Low High<br />Introduction to Feedback Parameters<br />Content<br /> information contained in feedback (FB)<br />Frequency<br /> absolute or relative; generally # of trials receiving FB<br />Timing<br />amount of delay between precipitating action and FB<br />
  4. 4. Conflicting Models<br />Effects of Feedback Support<br />Less Feedback Support<br />More Feedback Support<br /><ul><li>Increases attention & motivation
  5. 5. Feedback support becomes a crutch
  6. 6. Increases exploration
  7. 7. Feedback used to free up cognitive resources</li></li></ul><li>Research Results<br />Feedback Present<br />No Feedback<br />Acquisition<br />Retention<br />Feedback/Support<br />Condition<br />Results<br />Results<br />Mixed<br />Increased performance<br />High<br />Mixed<br />Decreased performance<br />Low<br />Cog. Resources<br />Task Demand<br />
  8. 8. The Role of Cognitive Resources<br />
  9. 9. A Measure of Cognitive Resources<br />Working memory capacity is the amount of attentional processes available to an individual as well as the ability to focus and allocate these processes <br />((Engle, Kane & Tuholski, 1999 ).<br />
  10. 10. Present Study<br />Control for cognitive resources<br />Control for task demand<br />
  11. 11. Method<br />Purpose: To investigate the relationship between cognitive resources, task demand and the feedback required to learn a cognitive task<br />Participants<br />Younger Adults <br />Task<br />Simple & complex version<br />Feedback<br />Summary<br />High<br />Design<br />Between Participants<br />Independent Variables<br />Feedback Support<br />Task Demand<br />Age (quasi)<br />Dependent variables<br />Performance in<br />Acquisition<br />Retention<br />
  12. 12. Procedure<br />3 days<br />Complete ability tests<br />Acquisition<br />(18 trials)<br />Retention<br />(12 trials)<br />Feedback<br />No Feedback<br />Retention Test<br />More<br />Less<br />
  13. 13. The Task: Furniture Factory<br />Decisions<br />Results<br />Employee 1<br />Job<br />Goal<br />Performance<br />Feedback<br />Reward<br />Was it fair?<br />Employee 2<br />Job<br />Goal<br />Performance<br />Feedback<br />Reward<br />
  14. 14. Pilot Study<br />Participants<br />8 low WMC and 12 high WMC<br />2 (Feedback specificity: low, high) × 2 (WMC: low, high)× 3 (Exploration strategy: systematic, unsystematic) factorial <br />
  15. 15. Acquisition Results <br />Main effect of FB<br />
  16. 16. Retention Results<br />Participants in high FB specificity demonstrated more learning, although results did not reach significance<br />
  17. 17. Retention Results Con’t<br />High FB, High WMC > Low FB, High WMC<br />
  18. 18. Retention Results Con’t<br />Regression analysis indicates WMC, exploration strategy and acquisition performance significantly predict retention test performance<br />
  19. 19. Application<br />Results of full study used to develop guidelines for individual training<br />Develop more effective feedback prescriptions<br />Creating a better match between individual characters and requirements for learning a new cognitive task<br />
  20. 20. Acknowledgements<br />The Learning, Aging, and Cognitive Ergonomics Lab at NC State University<br />