Generalized effects of praise and reproof.

Anderson, Harry E.; White, William F.; Wash, James A.

doi:10.1037/h0023404

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The majority of these studies has found negative stimuli to be more powerful (7,9,10,14,15,21,22,24,26,30). Other literature has suggested positive incentives and/or reinforcement to be more effective (1,2,12,24). A third group of authors has argued that the relative power of the two forces is contingent on personality variables ( 1 3, 18,20,28).…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

The Effects of the Use of Grades as an Incentive

Cullen

Hayhow

et al. 1975

The Journal of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 94%

The Effects of the Use of Grades as an Incentive

Cullen

Hayhow

et al. 1975

The Journal of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Goldberg, 1965), or feedback methods (e.g. Anderson et al, 1966;Sassenrath and Garverick, 1965). Examples of research on the effects of different student outputs include such comparisons as those between quiz and essay examinations (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, quite a number of published studies-not to mention the hidden mass of unpublished ones-sought, but did not find, any significant trait-by-method interactions at all (e.g. Anderson et al, 1966;Goldberg, 1964Goldberg, , 1965Goldberg et al, 1964;Guetzkow et al, 1954;Lublin, 1965;Ripple et al, 1969;Sassenrath and Garverick, 1965;Tallmadge, 1968).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Student personality characteristics and optimal college learning conditions: An extensive search for trait-by-treatment interaction effects

Goldberg

1972

Instr Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this research project was to discover those personality characteristics of college students which predispose them towards learning more effectively from one, rather than some other, particular instructional format. Over 800 students in each of two college courses were taught by one of four different methods, and three broad classes of criterion information were assessed: (a) knowledge of course content, (b) amount of extra-curricular reading, and (c) degree of student satisfaction. Each student completed an extensive battery of personality measures, which yielded over 350 test scores. The ratio of significant interaction effects to the number expected by chance was only 4 to 3. Consequently, new interaction scales were developed empirically in each course, and these were then cross-validated in the other course. In general, these new scales did not produce statistically significant interaction effects upon cross-validation, and scales constructed from items which produced significant interactions in both courses showed low internal consistency and low convergent validity. Factors which could have attenuated the strength of trait-by-treatment interaction effects are discussed.Over the years, in a continued effort to improve the practice of higher education, a number of investigators have attempted to assess the differential effects of various teaching procedures upon student achievement in college courses. The instructional methods which have been compared in studies of this gort can be divided into at least two major types: (a) variations in * The report is a summary of the findings presented in Goldberg (1969), a monograph which is available to readers wishing additional details of the investigation. Help with the design and implementation of the project was generously provided by William A. Bricker, Leslie A. Davison, and Vello Sermat. The author also wishes to acknowledge, with great thanks, the research contributions of

show abstract

“…Teacher approval and disapproval have a considerable effect on students' motivation. Early studies (e.g., Anderson, White and Wash, 1966;Eswara, 1972;Rest, Neirenberg and Weiner, 1973), found that praise was more effective for achievement than criticism. This view is supported by later research such as Salzberg and Salzberg (1981), Radocy (1982), and Bartholomew (1993).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploratory study of approvals and disapprovals in Australian instrumental music teaching

Zhukov¹

2008

International Journal of Music Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the use of approvals/ disapprovals in classroom teaching has highlighted praise as more effective than criticism, specific evaluation more valuable than general, and gender differences. This study investigated instrumental music lessons in higher education to ascertain the use of positive/ negative and specific/ general evaluation and gender effects on these. The participants were 12 teachers and 24 students from five Australian tertiary institutions. Greater use of approvals than disapprovals was found in most lessons. The teachers were more specific when criticising their students, but not when praising them. The female teachers were slightly more positive than the male teachers, but the male teachers were more specific in their appraisals of student playing. The female students received more teacher praise than the male students. Results support previous research and provide new evidence into the use of approvals and disapprovals in instrumental music lessons in higher education. The implications for teaching practice include greater use of specific praise and sensitivity to gender biases.

show abstract

Generalized effects of praise and reproof.

Cited by 14 publications

References 11 publications

The Effects of the Use of Grades as an Incentive

The Effects of the Use of Grades as an Incentive

Student personality characteristics and optimal college learning conditions: An extensive search for trait-by-treatment interaction effects

Exploratory study of approvals and disapprovals in Australian instrumental music teaching

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About