Interactions between instructional contents and feedback frequency on human performance

Resumen

Background: Some authors suggest that rules and instructions are different because of their function. In this sense, it is suggested that a function of an instruction is to restrict the individual’s range of responses in order to prevent the participants from making mistakes. The acquisition of this function is related to variables such as the type of the instructions, the feedback frequency received and the correspondence between descriptions and contingencies. In the present study we assessed one variable that has not been systematically explored, the description’s contents (i.e. instantial and dimensional). Methods: Sixteen experimentally naïve undergraduate students participated in the study. A first-order matching-to-sample task was carried out. In Experiment 1, 8 students were assigned to groups that received an instruction qualified as Generic differing in the contents of the description; the feedback received was continuous. The Experiment 2 followed the previous logic, differing only in the frequency of feedback that was intermittent (each third response). Findings: Experiment 1 results showed high percentage of correct responses in training sessions since the beginning of this phase for all the groups, regardless the contents of the description. In Experiment 2, only the group with dimensional description content showed high percentage of correct responses in training session. Discussion: The findings of Experiment 1 supports the data obtained in different studies in the area about the effects of type of descriptions and frequency feedback. Nevertheless, the data obtained in Experiment 2 differ from the data in the area; this could suggest that the variable content of description has a differential effect on the participant perform, when interact with some values of other variables, such as feedback. Results are discussed in terms of the quantity of information about properties of the contingency which is required in order to acquire the matching criteria. In this sense, results suggest that the content of the description is more relevant when interacts with feedback that give less quantity of information about the performances of the participant (i.e. intermittent feedback).