|Key Dimensions of Performance Feedback: From Literature to the Lab|
|Saturday, May 23, 2020|
|12:00 PM–12:50 PM |
|Marriott Marquis, Level M4, Capitol/Congress|
|Area: OBM; Domain: Translational|
|Chair: Andressa Sleiman (Univeristy of Florida )|
|CE Instructor: Andressa Sleiman, M.A.|
Performance feedback is one of the most common strategies employed in interventions within the field of organizational behavior management (OBM) and has been demonstrated to improve performance across a variety of settings and behaviors when used effectively. Despite its accumulation of empirical support overall, the key variables influencing feedback efficacy, maintenance, and treatment implementation require further evaluation. The presentations in this symposium seeks to further this evaluation by 1) providing an updated review on the existing evidence regarding the use of feedback in 75 articles published in the Journal of Organization Behavior Management from 1998 to 2018, 2) assess performer preference for feedback timing relative to task completion (e.g., after step, after trial, and after session), 3) and evaluate the effects of performer reactions to feedback on subsequent feedback delivery and observation accuracy. Each presentation will highlight the importance of identifying various feedback components as they relate to treatment efficacy and implementation. Implications for future research and the utilization of performance feedback in applied settings will be discussed.
|Instruction Level: Basic|
|Keyword(s): OBM, Performance Feedback|
|Target Audience: |
Open to all audiences.
|Learning Objectives: After attending this symposium, attendees should be able accomplish the following: 1) outline the essential characteristics influencing feedback effectiveness identified in previous research 2) describe the relation between task completion and performer preference for feedback timing 3) explain the effects of performer reactions to feedback on observation and feedback accuracy.|
An Objective Review of the Effectiveness and Essential Characteristics of Performance Feedback in Organizational Settings (1998-2018): An Update and Extension
|ANDRESSA SLEIMAN (Univeristy of Florida ), Sigridur Soffia Sigurjonsdottir (Oslo Metropolitan University), Aud Kielland Elnes (Oslo Metropolitan University), Nicole Gravina (University of Florida)|
In organizational behavior management (OBM), feedback can effectively increase and maintain performance across settings and target behaviors. Feedback has been extensively studied, being one of the most studied independent variables in the Journal of Organizational Behavior Management (JOBM). Alvero, Bucklin, and Austin (2001) conducted an objective review of the effectiveness and essential characteristics of performance feedback in organizational settings between 1985-1998. This talk will present an update and extension of the Alvero et al. (2001) review by summarizing the effective characteristics of feedback based on 75 articles that implemented feedback as an intervention in an applied setting that were published in JOBM, and in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (JABA) between 1998 and 2018. Feedback effectiveness will be presented for the following characteristics: feedback source, feedback medium, feedback privacy, feedback participants, feedback frequency, the immediacy of feedback, feedback combinations (e.g., feedback + goal setting or feedback + incentives), and feedback nature (increase or decrease behavior).
|Identifying the Relation Between Feedback Preferences and Performance|
|JANELLE KIRSTIE BACOTTI (University of Florida), Emma Grauerholz-Fisher (University of Florida), Samuel L. Morris (University of Florida), Timothy R. Vollmer (University of Florida)|
|Abstract: Performance feedback is a commonly used organizational behavior management (OBM) intervention (Gravina et al., 2018) that typically yields consistent effects (Alvero et al., 2001). Although feedback applications have varied, a noteworthy characteristic that might affect feedback effectiveness is timing (Lechermeier & Fassnacht, 2018). Prior research has used verbal report as an indicator of preference across immediate and delayed feedback (Reid & Parsons, 1996). Given the frequent use and practical utility of feedback, we assessed feedback preference across three feedback timing options: after step, after trial, and after session. We used a direct-selection paradigm to assess feedback timing preferences with undergraduate students completing two multistep computerized tasks. The data obtained suggest that most subjects shifted their preference from relatively proximal (e.g., after step) to distal feedback (e.g., after session) as they acquired the tasks. A few subjects’ preferences seemed unrelated to increases in performance. We discuss implications based on the current findings and future directions for research.|
You Talking to Me?Effects of Performer Reactions on Observation and Feedback Accuracy
|JESSICA A. NASTASI (University of Florida), Nicholas Matey (University of Florida), Andressa Sleiman (University of Florida ), Nicole Gravina (University of Florida)|
Performance feedback can be a valuable tool for behavior change when used effectively. Despite its utility, delivering feedback may be aversive to the observer, affecting the accuracy of subsequent observations and feedback. A study conducted by Matey et al. (2019) evaluated the effects of required feedback delivery on observer accuracy and found that accuracy was lower when performance feedback was required compared to observation-alone, suggesting the performer’s reaction to feedback may be one variable influencing subsequent accuracy. The current study sought to evaluate the effects of feedback reaction-type on observer accuracy and feedback delivery. First, undergraduate students were randomly assigned to either positive, neutral, or negative reaction groups. Then, in phase one, participants were trained to score a confederate’s posture as either “safe” or “at-risk”. During phase two, participants were instructed to deliver feedback to the confederate after each session. The confederate reacted to this feedback differently depending on group assignment (i.e., positive, negative, or neutral). Preliminary results indicate observation accuracy in the negative-reaction group may be lower after feedback delivery compared to accuracy in the neutral-reaction and positive-reaction groups. Implications for these findings and suggestions for future research will be discussed.