Social-comparative Feedback Research Articles

Short-Term Effect of Attributional Versus Non-Attributional Negative Normative Feedback on Motor Tasks: A Double-Blind Study

Augmented feedback can alter motor performance. We examined if presenting attributional versus non-attributional negative normative feedback differently impacted short-term motor performance. With a double-blind experimental design, 49 students (36.7% female, Mage = 17.14 and SD = ±0.35) were assigned to the following two groups: G1: Attributional Negative Normative Feedback group (n = 24) and G2: Non-Attributional Negative Normative Feedback group (n = 25), with the dependent variable being the score obtained on a dart-throwing test. The results showed that those participants who received negative social comparative feedback presented in an attributional way (internal, controllable, and unstable) obtained higher scores in the dart throwing task than those who received negative social comparative feedback presented in a non-attributional way. Furthermore, these differences were maintained in the retention and transfer tests conducted 24 h after the practice phase. These findings have practical implications in motor behavior learning and performance.

Effect of positive social comparative feedback on the resting state connectivity of dopaminergic neural pathways: A preliminary investigation

Positive social comparative feedback is hypothesized to generate a dopamine response in the brain, similar to reward, by enhancing expectancies to support motor skill learning. However, no studies have utilized neuroimaging to examine this hypothesized dopaminergic mechanism. Therefore, the aim of this preliminary study was to investigate the effect of positive social comparative feedback on dopaminergic neural pathways measured by resting state connectivity. Thirty individuals practiced an implicit, motor sequence learning task and were assigned to groups that differed in feedback type. One group received feedback about their actual response time to complete the task (RT ONLY), while the other group received feedback about their response time with positive social comparison (RT + POS). Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired at the beginning and end of repetitive motor practice with feedback to measure practice-dependent changes in resting state brain connectivity. While both groups showed improvements in task performance and increases in performance expectancies, ventral tegmental area and the left nucleus accumbens (mesolimbic dopamine pathway) resting state connectivity increased in the RT + POS group but not in the RT ONLY group. Instead, the RT ONLY group showed increased connectivity between ventral tegmental area and primary motor cortex. Positive social comparative feedback during practice of a motor sequence task may induce a dopaminergic response in the brain along the mesolimbic pathway. However, given that absence of effects on expectancies and motor learning, more robust and individualized approaches may be needed to provide beneficial psychological and behavioral effects.

Dimensional and social comparisons in a health fitness context.

Whereas prior research has found that people are influenced by both internal (e.g., dimensional) and external (e.g., social) comparative information in academic contexts, we experimentally examined the influence of such comparisons in a health fitness context. Participants engaged in "physical and mental fitness" tasks (e.g., performing sit-ups, memorizing words) and were randomly assigned to receive (1) social comparative feedback indicating their physical or mental fitness was better or worse than their peers or (2) dimensional comparative feedback indicating their performance in a target domain (e.g., mental fitness) was better or worse than a referent domain (e.g., physical fitness). Results showed that participants who made upward comparisons had lower fitness self-evaluations and more negative (less positive) emotional reactions to the feedback for the target domain, with the effect being nominally stronger for social than dimensional comparisons and for mental than physical fitness. Findings are discussed in the context of comparison-based models and health behavior theories.

Simulated job applicant test-taker reactions to rejection: comparing absolute and social-comparative feedback

Simulated job applicant test-taker reactions to rejection: comparing absolute and social-comparative feedback

The impact of social comparison processes on self-evaluation of performance, self-concept, and task interest

Development of self-concept and task interest has been shown to be affected by social comparison processes in a variety of cross-sectional studies. A potential explanation for these effects is an effect of social comparative performance feedback on an individual’s self-evaluation of performance, which in turn influences development of self-concept and task interest. There are, however, only few studies addressing this topic with experimental designs. This study was aimed at closing this research gap by experimentally manipulating social comparative performance. Feedback given was based on 2 × 2 experimental conditions: social position (high vs. low) and average performance of the reference group (high vs. low). Results show a strong effect of social position on self-evaluation of performance and smaller effects on self-concept and task interest.

Effects of positive social comparative feedback on motor sequence learning and performance expectancies.

Positive social comparative feedback indicates to the learner that they are performing better than others. While this type feedback supports motor skill learning in some tasks, the effect of social comparative feedback on implicit motor sequence learning remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of positive social comparative feedback on the learning of and expectancies for a motor sequence task. Forty-eight individuals practiced a joystick-based sequence task and were divided into three feedback groups: CONTROL (no performance feedback), RT ONLY (response time only feedback), and RT+POS (response time plus positive social comparison). Participants attended sessions on two consecutive days: Day 1 for repetitive motor practice/skill acquisition and Day 2 for retention testing. Performance related expectancies, like perceived competence, were measured before and after motor practice on Day 1 and at retention on Day 2. While all groups improved with practice, the CONTROL group showed better overall performance/learning (faster response times) compared with the RT ONLY group. Despite similar response times, the RT+POS showed higher peak velocities than the RT ONLY group. Overall, the RT+POS and CONTROL demonstrated increases in perceived competence while the RT ONLY group did not. The results of this study suggest that feedback content is an important consideration during motor practice sessions since feedback without context (RT ONLY) may be detrimental to motor sequence learning. The results also suggest that, if providing performance related feedback during practice of a skill that relies on implicit sequence learning processes, comparative context may be necessary for enhancing expectancies and supporting.

Effect of social-comparative feedback and the focus of attention on the performance of targeting skills in children with ADHD

Introduction: Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder is a neurodevelopmental disorder that affects 3-7% of children. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the effect of deductive-social feedback and attention instructions on the performance of targeting skills in children with attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. Method: This research is a semi-experimental type. Its statistical population was formed by male students suffering from attention/ hyperactivity disorder in Isfahan city with an age range of 7-10 years in 2020. 48 right-handed students were randomly selected as a statistical sample based on the results of the Connors children's behavior rating scale and randomly divided into four groups of 12 people. In order to collect data Personal Information Questionnaire, Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, Ulrich's Gross Motor Development Test, Anderson's Over Shoulder Throw Scale (1999) and Luciana et al. (2012) Over Shoulder Throw Targeting Task were used. Data were analysis with using one-way ANOVA test and Bonferroni's post-hoc test using SPSS-18 software. Results: The results showed that the studied groups had significant differences in the qualitative and quantitative development of hand targeting skills (P<0.05). The results of Bonferroni post hoc test showed that the positive analogical-social feedback group had better and significant external attention than the other groups (P<0.05), the other groups did not differ significantly in the retention stage (P>0.05). Conclusion: The results showed that the comparative-social positive-external attention group performed better, so it is suggested to use this method in teaching and learning goal-setting skills.

The Effect of Positive Social-Comparative Feedback on Learning a Throwing Skill in Adolescents with ADHD.

The Effect of Positive Social-Comparative Feedback on Learning a Throwing Skill in Adolescents with ADHD.

Effects of Enhanced Expectancies and Autonomy Support on Learning Medical Motor Skills

Background: The optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning (OPTIMAL) theory proposes that enhancing expectancies for future performance and supporting learners’ autonomy facilitate motor performance and learning. However, the effects of these factors on the performance of medical motor skills such as suturing have not been understood. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effects of enhanced expectancies and autonomy support (AU) on motor performance, learning, and self-efficacy of a medical motor skill. Methods: Participants were 63 right-handed medical students in the pre-clinical stage of their studies (years 1 and 2 of medical education). They were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (a) social-comparative feedback (SCF), (b) AU, and (c) control (CO) groups. A vertical mattress suture was chosen as a motor task. Following the pretest with 2 trials, all participants were exposed to a 5-day practice phase. The retention test was performed 1 week after the practice phase. During the practice phase, the SCF group received positive feedback at the end of the day. The AU group was given the option of choosing the color of silk sutures. The participants in the CO group practiced without any feedback or choosing the color of silk sutures. Suturing quality and self-efficacy were measured as dependent variables. Results: Positive SCF led to a better suturing performance on the retention test; however, AU did not enhance motor learning of a suturing motor task. Moreover, positive SCF increased self-efficacy during the acquisition phase and on the retention test, while AU had no positive effects on self-efficacy. Conclusions: The present findings support the OPTIMAL theory by demonstrating that enhanced expectancies in the form of positive SCF can facilitate learning medical motor skills (i.e., vertical mattress suturing).

Association between the Effects of Positive Social-Comparative Feedback and Learners’ Competitiveness

This study examined the effects of positive social-comparative feedback on learners’ intrinsic motivation on a motor learning task, as well as its association with learners’ competitiveness. The participants, who performed a balance task in a positive social-comparative feedback and a control group, were assessed for performance outcome, perceived competence, and competitiveness. The positive social-comparative feedback group demonstrated more effective balance performance than the control group on the retention test. In addition, the participants in the positive social-comparative feedback group reported significantly higher perceived competence than the participants in the control group after practice. Further, a subscale of learners’ competitiveness—instrumental competitiveness—predicted the performance on a retention test in the positive social-comparative feedback group, but not in the control group. Our results suggest that positive social-comparative feedback is not beneficial to all learners, and may even be less effective for learners with lower competitiveness.

Contrast and Assimilation Effects on Self-Evaluation of Performance and Task Interest in a Sample of Elementary School Children

Social comparison processes and the social position within a school class already play a major role in performance evaluation as early as in elementary school. The influence of contrast and assimilation effects on self-evaluation of performance as well as task interest has been widely researched in observational studies under the labels big-fish-little-pond and basking-in-reflected-glory effect. This study examined the influence of similar contrast and assimilation effects in an experimental paradigm. Fifth and sixth grade students (n = 230) completed a computer-based learning task during which they received social comparative feedback based on 2x2 experimentally manipulated feedback conditions: social position (high vs. low) and peer performance (high vs. low). Results show a more positive development of task interest and self-evaluation of performance in both the high social position and the high peer performance condition. When transferred to the school setting, results of this study suggest that students who already perform well in comparison to their peer group are also the ones profiting most from social comparative feedback, given that they are the ones who usually receive the corresponding positive performance feedback.

The Impact of Self-controlled Attention and Social-comparative Feedback on the Learning of Sandbag Throwing in Adolescents

Background: Recent studies have demonstrated that autonomy support, social-comparative feedback, and attentional factors contribute to performance and motor learning skills. The present study investigated the influence of self-controlled attention and social-comparative feedback on the performance and learning of a throwing task. Methods: 80 healthy students of Shahid Khalaj Azad junior high school from Takestan (mean age=14.12 ±0.752 SD) in 2017 academic year, placed in five groups: internal-experimenter-controlled, external-experimenter-controlled, internal-self-controlled, external-self-controlled, and control. Internal groups practiced based on an internal focus of attention, an external group practiced based on an external focus of attention. Experimenter-controlled groups received only veridical feedback, self-controlled groups in addition to the veridical feedback received social-comparative feedback. We used a four (pre-test; acquisition; retention; transfer) × five (groups) repeated measure analyses of variance (ANOVA) in SPSS software version 25 to analyze data. Results: The results indicated that throwing tasks differed significantly between phases. The retention phase score was higher than the other phases (83.14±0.72, P<0.001). Test of between-subjects effects determined that groups significantly differed from each other. The Internal-self-controlled group score was higher in other groups (81.15±6.15, P=0.041). Conclusions: These findings demonstrated that the self-controlled focus of attention in companion with social-comparative feedback enhances motor learning in the first stage of the learning.

Examining changes in corticospinal excitability and balance performance in response to social-comparative feedback

BackgroundSocial-comparative feedback informs an individual that their performance was better or worse than the group. Previous studies have found that compared to knowledge of results alone, social-comparative feedback produces a valence response that results in larger improvements in balance performance. However, the neural processes contributing to these motor improvements have not yet been examined. Research questionDoes social-comparative feedback alter corticospinal excitability and consequently, balance performance? MethodsThirty-six healthy young adults stood and maintained their balance on a stabiliometer for eight trials. After three of the trials, the neutral (i.e., only knowledge of results) group received their performance feedback (i.e., time on balance) while the other two groups also received positive (i.e., performed better than the group) or negative (i.e., performed worse than the group) social-comparative feedback. To measure corticospinal excitability, soleus motor-evoked potentials were elicited using transcranial magnetic stimulation at the beginning of the experiment, after the presentation of feedback, and at the end of the experiment. Pre- and post- ratings of confidence, perceived skill, motivation, and anxiety were also collected. ResultsThe negative feedback group reported decreases in perceived skill (43 ± 29%) and balance confidence (26 ± 28%), while the positive group reported a 13 ± 17% increase in perceived skill. Despite these group differences in feedback perception, all three groups improved their balance performance by ≈35% (p < 0.001) by the eighth trial. However, this improvement in balance performance was not matched by any changes in corticospinal excitability over time (19.2 ± 55.9% change; p = 0.340) or between groups (p = 0.734). SignificanceOur findings suggest that social-comparative feedback, as presented in this study, does not affect corticospinal excitability and balance performance differently than knowledge of results (neutral feedback) alone. More arousing and more frequent forms of social-comparative feedback may be necessary for observing larger changes in the functional or neural control of balance.

Dark Side of Incentives: Evidence From a Randomized Control Trial in Uganda

Throughout our lives, we are routinely offered different incentives as a way to motivate us. Many researchers have studied the effects of incentives on people’s performance. There can also be important psychological outcomes in terms of stress and happiness. The current paper contributes to the literature by explicitly accounting for this performance-versus-well-being trade-off introduced by incentives. I implement two types of social comparative feedback regimes, within and across-class group comparisons, and two types of incentive regimes, financial and reputation rewards. The results show that rewards can improve performance up to 0.28 standard deviations, but at a cost of higher stress and lower happiness, whereas comparative feedback alone (without rewards) increases performance only mildly, by 0.09 to 0.13 standard deviations, but without impact on student’s stress and happiness. More stressed students exert less effort, perform worse and are absent by 29 percent more compared to those who are stressed minimally. The results also help to identify gender-specific responses to incentives. While boys strongly react to rewards, girls do so only if they are also provided with feedback. Final contribution comes from a rich dataset of more than 5000 primary and secondary school students in Uganda, who were repeatedly tested and interviewed over one academic year.

Onward and upward: Optimizing motor performance

In the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning (Wulf & Lewthwaite, 2016), three factors are postulated to facilitate motor performance and learning: Enhanced expectancies (EE) for performance, autonomy support (AS), and an external focus (EF) of attention. We examined whether EE, AS, and EF would have immediate performance benefits and whether implementing these factors consecutively would lead to incremental performance increases. Participants were assigned to the optimized or control groups and performed a maximal jump. After the first trial block (baseline), optimized group participants were provided different conditions on each of the following 3 blocks: (a) Positive social-comparative feedback (EE); (b) choice of figure on the ground from which to jump (AS); and (c) instructions to focus on a marker on their waist (EF). The order of conditions was counterbalanced. Control group participants performed all 4 blocks under the same (control) condition. The optimized group outperformed the control group on Blocks 2–4. Moreover, their jump height increased with each addition of another variable, whereas it did not change across blocks in the control group. Thus, EE, AS, and EF had additive or incremental benefits for performance. The findings corroborate the importance of key variables in the OPTIMAL theory for motor performance.

The effects of co-witness discussion on confidence and precision in eyewitness memory reports

ABSTRACTWe examined the influence of co-witness discussion on the metacognitive regulation of memory reports. Participants (N = 92) watched a crime video. Later, a confederate confidently agreed with (gave confirming feedback), disagreed with (gave disconfirming feedback), or gave no feedback (control) regarding participants’ answers to questions about the video. Participants who received disconfirming feedback reported fewer fine-grain details than participants in the confirming and control conditions on a subsequent, individual recall test for a different question set. Unexpectedly, this decrease in fine-grain reporting was not accompanied by a decrease in participants’ confidence in the accuracy of their fine-grain responses. These results indicate that receiving social comparative feedback about one’s memory performance can affect rememberers’ metamemorial control decisions, and potentially decrease the level of detail they volunteer in later memory reports. Further research is needed to assess whether these results replicate under different experimental conditions, and to explore the effects of social influences on metamemory.

Enhancing performance expectancies through positive comparative feedback facilitates the learning of basketball free throw in children

The present study examined the influence of enhancing performance expectancies through comparative feedback on the learning of a sport motor skill, the basketball free throw, in children. Two groups of participants, a positive comparative feedback group (PF) and a control group, practiced 40 basketball free throws. All children received feedback regarding their punctuation scores after each block of practice. Participants in the PF group also received positive social-comparative feedback suggesting that their own punctuation score was better than that of a peer group's on the block. Learning effects were observed through a transfer test performed one day after practice. Participants in the PF group demonstrated higher learning of the task, showing greater punctuation scores on the transfer test than participants in the control group. Questionnaire results also showed higher levels of perceived competence, importance of doing well, and persistence related to the task among the PF group relative to the control participants. These findings provide the first evidence that enhancing performance expectancies through positive comparative feedback enhances the learning of sport motor skills in children. They also demonstrate the important motivational role of feedback on children's learning of motor skills.

Triple play: Additive contributions of enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and external attentional focus to motor learning.

In the OPTIMAL theory of motor learning [Wulf, G., & Lewthwaite, R. (2016). Optimizing performance through intrinsic motivation and attention for learning: The OPTIMAL theory of motor learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1382-1414], 3 factors are postulated to facilitate learning: enhanced expectancies (EE) for performance, autonomy support (AS), and an external focus (EF) of attention. In 3 recent studies, combinations of 2 of these variables resulted in superior learning relative to the presence of only 1 variable, or none. We examined whether the combination of all 3 factors would enhance learning relative to combinations of 2 factors. Our design included EE-AS, EE-EF, AS-EF, and AS-EE-EF groups. Participants threw balls at a target with their non-dominant arm. In the EE conditions, they received positive social-comparative feedback. In the AS conditions, they were allowed to throw with their dominant arm on trial blocks chosen by them. In the EF conditions, participants were asked to focus on the target. On a delayed retention test, the AS-EE-EF group outperformed all other groups. The findings provide evidence that enhanced expectancies, autonomy support, and an external focus can contribute in an additive fashion to optimize motor learning.

Contrast and Assimilation Effects on Task Interest in an Academic Learning Task

Information on social comparison is one of the major factors used to evaluate academic achievement. The presence of Big-Fish-Little-Pond (BFLP) and Basking-In-Reflected-Glory (BIRG) effects of academic achievement on the self-concept have been extensively researched in various observational studies. Recent research suggests that these effects can also be transferred to motivational variables such as task interest. This paper uses an experimental paradigm to take a closer look at the mechanisms expected to be behind BFLP and BIRG effects: contrast and assimilation effects of task performance. The analyses are based on N = 129 primary education students who completed a computer-based learning task. During this task, participants received social comparative feedback that was experimentally manipulated based on 2x2 conditions: social position (high vs. low) and peer performance (high vs. low). Task interest was measured both before the start of the learning task and after it was finished. Results indicate a positive influence of high social position and high peer performance on the development of task interest from pre- to post-test compared to the low social position and peer performance conditions. Further, the hypothesized positive association between self-concept, task interest and performance in the academic learning task could also be shown.

Computer Mediated Social Comparative Feedback Does Not Affect Metacognitive Regulation of Memory Reports.

In two experiments, we investigated how social comparative feedback affects the metacognitive regulation of eyewitness memory reports. In Experiment 1, 87 participants received negative, positive, or no feedback about a co-witness’s performance on a task querying recall of a crime video. Participants then completed the task individually. There were no significant differences between negative and positive feedback groups on any measure. However, participants in both of these conditions volunteered more fine-grain details than participants in the control condition. In Experiment 2, 90 participants answered questions about a crime video. Participants in the experimental groups received either positive or negative feedback, which compared their performance to that of others. Participants then completed a subsequent recall task, for which they were told their performance would not be scored. Feedback did not significantly affect participants’ confidence, accuracy, or the level of detail they reported in comparison to a no feedback control group. These findings advance our understanding of the boundary conditions for social feedback effects on meta-memory.