psychology.iresearchnet.com

iResearchNet

Psychology » Psychology Articles » I-O Psychology Articles » The Role of Feedback in Employee Training Program Design

The Role of Feedback in Employee Training Program Design

Feedback serves as a fundamental component of effective employee training program design, facilitating learning acquisition, performance improvement, and skill transfer through systematic information provision about learner progress and performance quality. This article examines the theoretical foundations, practical applications, and design considerations that inform effective feedback implementation in workplace training contexts, encompassing timing, specificity, source credibility, and delivery mechanisms that optimize learning outcomes. The analysis explores various feedback types including immediate versus delayed, formative versus summative, and intrinsic versus extrinsic feedback, investigating their differential impacts on motivation, retention, and behavioral change in organizational learning environments. Contemporary employee training program design increasingly recognizes feedback as a critical design element that requires systematic planning, implementation, and evaluation to achieve maximum learning effectiveness and performance improvement. The strategic integration of evidence-based feedback principles enables organizations to create training programs that accelerate skill development, enhance learner engagement, and promote sustainable performance improvement through continuous information provision and guidance. Understanding the multifaceted role of feedback in training design is essential for developing programs that maximize learning efficiency while supporting individual development and organizational performance objectives in complex workplace environments.

Introduction

Feedback represents one of the most powerful and well-researched factors influencing learning effectiveness in educational and training contexts, with extensive empirical evidence demonstrating its critical role in skill acquisition, performance improvement, and knowledge retention. The systematic provision of information about performance quality, accuracy, and improvement opportunities enables learners to adjust their efforts, correct errors, and develop expertise more rapidly than would be possible through practice alone (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). In employee training program design contexts, feedback serves multiple functions including motivation enhancement, error correction, skill refinement, and performance monitoring that collectively support comprehensive learning and development objectives.

The complexity of workplace learning environments requires sophisticated approaches to feedback design that address diverse learner characteristics, performance contexts, and organizational objectives while maintaining practical feasibility and cost-effectiveness. Traditional approaches to feedback in training programs often rely on instructor-delivered, post-training evaluation that may be too delayed or generic to optimize learning effectiveness, requiring contemporary training designers to integrate multiple feedback mechanisms throughout training experiences (Shute, 2008). The challenge lies in designing feedback systems that provide timely, relevant, and actionable information while supporting both immediate learning objectives and long-term performance improvement goals.

Contemporary employee training program design must address the evolving nature of work, technology-enhanced learning environments, and diverse workforce characteristics that create new opportunities and challenges for effective feedback implementation. Digital learning platforms, simulation technologies, and performance monitoring systems enable sophisticated feedback delivery mechanisms that were previously impractical or impossible, while global workforces and diverse learning preferences require adaptive feedback approaches that accommodate individual differences and cultural variations (Narciss, 2013). This comprehensive examination explores how systematic feedback integration can enhance training program effectiveness while supporting both individual learning objectives and organizational performance requirements.

Theoretical Foundations of Feedback in Learning

Cognitive Load Theory and Feedback Processing

Cognitive load theory provides essential insights into how feedback design affects learning by influencing the allocation of cognitive resources between processing feedback information and developing new knowledge and skills. Intrinsic cognitive load associated with task complexity, extraneous load created by poor instructional design, and germane load supporting schema construction must all be considered when designing feedback systems that enhance rather than impede learning (Sweller et al., 2011). Effective feedback design minimizes extraneous cognitive load while optimizing germane processing that supports skill development and knowledge integration in employee training program design contexts.

The timing and complexity of feedback significantly influence cognitive processing requirements, with immediate, simple feedback often producing superior learning outcomes compared to delayed or overly complex information that may overwhelm cognitive capacity. However, the optimal feedback complexity depends on learner expertise levels, task difficulty, and learning objectives, requiring sophisticated design decisions that balance information richness with processing capacity limitations (Paas & Sweller, 2014). Employee training program design must consider cognitive load implications when determining feedback timing, content, and presentation format to ensure that feedback supports rather than hinders learning effectiveness.

Working memory limitations affect learners’ ability to process feedback information simultaneously with skill practice and knowledge acquisition, requiring feedback design approaches that distribute cognitive load across time and modalities. Multi-modal feedback presentation, chunking complex feedback into manageable segments, and providing replay or review capabilities enable learners to process feedback effectively without overwhelming cognitive capacity (Mayer & Moreno, 2003). These cognitive load considerations inform feedback design decisions that optimize learning efficiency while accommodating individual differences in processing capacity and learning preferences.

Social Learning Theory and Feedback Sources

Social learning theory emphasizes the importance of modeling, observation, and social feedback in skill acquisition and behavioral change, highlighting the role of credible feedback sources in promoting learning effectiveness and motivation. Feedback from respected supervisors, experienced peers, and subject matter experts carries greater influence than feedback from less credible sources, requiring careful consideration of feedback source selection and development in employee training program design (Bandura, 1997). The credibility and expertise of feedback providers significantly influence learner acceptance, motivation, and behavioral change likelihood.

Vicarious learning through observation of feedback provided to others enables learners to benefit from feedback experiences without direct personal involvement, extending feedback impact beyond individual recipients to encompass group learning and development. Peer observation of feedback sessions, group debriefing discussions, and shared performance review activities create opportunities for collective learning while reducing the resource requirements for individual feedback provision (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007). Employee training program design can leverage vicarious learning principles to maximize feedback impact while optimizing resource utilization and creating collaborative learning environments.

Self-efficacy development through feedback experiences influences learners’ confidence in their ability to perform tasks successfully and persist through challenges and setbacks. Constructive feedback that acknowledges progress while providing specific guidance for improvement enhances self-efficacy, while harsh criticism or vague feedback may undermine confidence and motivation (Zimmerman, 2000). Training program designers must consider self-efficacy implications when designing feedback systems that build learner confidence while promoting accurate self-assessment and continuous improvement behaviors.

Control Theory and Feedback Loops

Control theory provides frameworks for understanding how feedback systems regulate learning and performance through goal-setting, progress monitoring, and corrective action implementation. The feedback loop process involving goal establishment, performance monitoring, comparison with standards, and corrective action enables systematic performance improvement and skill development (Carver & Scheier, 1998). Employee training program design can utilize control theory principles to create systematic feedback systems that promote self-regulated learning and continuous performance improvement.

Negative feedback loops identify discrepancies between current performance and desired standards, triggering corrective actions that reduce performance gaps and promote skill development. These error-detection and correction processes are essential for skill refinement and performance optimization, requiring feedback systems that accurately identify performance deficiencies while providing specific guidance for improvement (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). Effective negative feedback design focuses attention on specific behaviors or outcomes while maintaining learner motivation and engagement throughout the improvement process.

Positive feedback loops reinforce successful performance patterns while promoting continued skill development and motivation enhancement. Recognition of progress, achievement acknowledgment, and success celebration create positive feedback loops that encourage persistence and effort investment in learning activities (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Employee training program design should incorporate both negative and positive feedback mechanisms that address performance deficiencies while recognizing achievements and building momentum for continued learning and development.

Feedback Types and Characteristics

Immediate versus Delayed Feedback

Immediate feedback provides information about performance quality or accuracy directly following task completion or during task performance, enabling rapid error correction and skill adjustment that optimizes learning efficiency. Research consistently demonstrates advantages of immediate feedback for skill acquisition, particularly for procedural tasks and motor skill development where rapid error correction prevents practice of incorrect techniques (Schmidt & Lee, 2019). Employee training program design can leverage immediate feedback through digital platforms, simulation systems, and real-time performance monitoring that provide instant information about performance quality and improvement opportunities.

Delayed feedback involves providing performance information after a time interval following task completion, which may promote deeper processing and retention in certain learning contexts while allowing independent problem-solving attempts. The optimal delay interval depends on task complexity, learner characteristics, and learning objectives, with some research suggesting that brief delays may enhance retention and transfer by promoting more effortful processing of performance information (Butler et al., 2013). Training designers must balance the benefits of immediate error correction with potential advantages of delayed feedback for promoting reflection and independent problem-solving capabilities.

Adaptive feedback timing systems adjust feedback delivery based on learner performance, task difficulty, and individual characteristics to optimize learning effectiveness through personalized feedback schedules. These systems may provide immediate feedback for complex or unfamiliar tasks while introducing delays for simpler tasks or more experienced learners to promote independent performance and skill transfer (Narciss, 2008). Employee training program design utilizing adaptive feedback timing demonstrates superior learning outcomes compared to fixed feedback schedules that fail to accommodate individual differences and task characteristics.

Knowledge of Results versus Knowledge of Performance

Knowledge of results (KR) feedback provides information about task outcomes or goal achievement without specific details about performance execution or improvement strategies. KR feedback answers whether performance was successful or unsuccessful while leaving learners to determine how to improve performance quality or consistency (Schmidt & Lee, 2019). This outcome-focused feedback approach may be sufficient for simple tasks or experienced learners while providing inadequate guidance for complex skill development or novice learners requiring detailed performance information.

Knowledge of performance (KP) feedback provides specific information about movement execution, technique quality, or process characteristics that influence task outcomes and skill development. KP feedback addresses how performance was executed rather than simply whether it was successful, providing actionable information that enables targeted skill improvement and technique refinement (Magill & Anderson, 2017). Employee training program design for complex skills typically requires comprehensive KP feedback that addresses multiple performance dimensions while providing specific guidance for skill enhancement and error correction.

Combined KR and KP feedback systems provide both outcome information and process details that enable learners to understand relationships between performance execution and results while receiving comprehensive guidance for improvement. These integrated feedback approaches acknowledge that learners need both outcome awareness and process understanding to develop expertise and maintain motivation throughout skill development (Salmoni et al., 1984). Training program design utilizing combined feedback approaches demonstrates superior learning outcomes compared to single feedback type implementations that address only limited aspects of performance and improvement requirements.

Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Feedback

Intrinsic feedback emerges naturally from task performance through sensory information, environmental consequences, and inherent task characteristics that provide automatic information about performance quality and outcomes. This self-generated feedback enables learners to develop independent performance monitoring capabilities while reducing dependence on external feedback sources (Adams, 1987). Employee training program design should consider how task structure and environmental design can enhance intrinsic feedback availability while promoting self-regulated learning and independent performance capabilities.

Extrinsic feedback is provided by external sources including instructors, technology systems, peers, or supervisors who observe performance and provide information not available through intrinsic feedback channels. Extrinsic feedback can supplement limited intrinsic feedback while providing expert perspectives and objective evaluation that may not be accessible through self-monitoring alone (Bilodeau & Bilodeau, 1958). The effectiveness of extrinsic feedback depends on source credibility, timing appropriateness, and alignment with learner needs and task characteristics.

Feedback dependency concerns arise when learners become reliant on extrinsic feedback at the expense of developing intrinsic feedback sensitivity and self-monitoring capabilities essential for independent performance. Systematic withdrawal of extrinsic feedback, emphasis on intrinsic feedback development, and promotion of self-assessment capabilities help prevent dependency while maintaining learning support throughout skill development (Winstein & Schmidt, 1990). Employee training program design must balance extrinsic feedback provision with intrinsic feedback development to promote both immediate learning effectiveness and long-term performance independence.

Feedback Design Principles and Implementation

Specificity and Actionability

Specific feedback provides detailed, concrete information about particular aspects of performance rather than general evaluative comments that may lack actionable guidance for improvement. Research demonstrates that specific feedback addressing particular behaviors, techniques, or outcomes produces superior learning and performance improvement compared to vague or general feedback that fails to provide clear improvement direction (Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Employee training program design must prioritize feedback specificity while ensuring that detailed information remains manageable and actionable for learners with varying experience levels and cognitive capabilities.

Actionable feedback includes specific recommendations, improvement strategies, or corrective actions that learners can implement immediately to enhance performance quality and skill development. Effective actionable feedback moves beyond problem identification to provide concrete solutions and improvement approaches that address identified deficiencies (Shute, 2008). Training programs should incorporate feedback design processes that ensure all performance information includes specific, implementable recommendations that support immediate improvement efforts and continued skill development activities.

Performance dimension prioritization helps learners focus improvement efforts on the most critical aspects of skill development while avoiding cognitive overload from excessive feedback information. Effective feedback design identifies key performance elements that have greatest impact on overall skill quality while providing systematic progression through multiple performance dimensions as learner competence develops (Goodman et al., 2004). This prioritization approach ensures that feedback supports systematic skill development while maintaining learner motivation and engagement throughout complex learning processes.

Timing and Frequency Considerations

Optimal feedback timing balances immediate error correction benefits with reflection and independent problem-solving opportunities that promote deeper learning and retention. Task complexity, learner experience, and learning objectives influence optimal timing decisions, with immediate feedback often benefiting procedural skill development while delayed feedback may enhance conceptual understanding and transfer capabilities (Butler et al., 2013). Employee training program design requires systematic analysis of timing trade-offs while considering individual learner characteristics and task-specific requirements that influence feedback effectiveness.

Feedback frequency decisions address how often performance information should be provided to optimize learning without creating dependency or overwhelming cognitive capacity. High-frequency feedback may accelerate initial learning while potentially hindering development of independent performance monitoring capabilities, while low-frequency feedback may promote self-reliance at the expense of rapid error correction (Winstein & Schmidt, 1990). Training designers must determine appropriate feedback frequency schedules that balance learning acceleration with independence development throughout skill acquisition processes.

Faded feedback approaches systematically reduce feedback frequency as learner competence develops, promoting transition from external feedback dependence to independent performance monitoring and self-assessment capabilities. These approaches begin with high-frequency feedback during initial learning phases while gradually reducing external feedback provision as learners develop internal performance standards and self-monitoring skills (Schmidt & Lee, 2019). Employee training program design utilizing faded feedback demonstrates superior transfer and retention outcomes compared to constant feedback approaches that may impede independence development.

Multi-Modal Feedback Delivery

Visual feedback utilizes graphs, charts, video replay, and other visual representations to provide performance information that may be difficult to convey through verbal or written descriptions alone. Visual feedback can illustrate performance trends, technique comparisons, and improvement patterns while accommodating learners who process visual information more effectively than auditory or textual information (Sigrist et al., 2013). Employee training program design can leverage visual feedback through digital platforms, video analysis systems, and graphical performance displays that enhance information comprehension and retention.

Auditory feedback provides real-time or post-performance information through verbal instruction, audio cues, or sound-based performance indicators that enable immediate response without visual attention requirements. Auditory feedback is particularly valuable for tasks requiring visual attention or in environments where visual feedback may not be practical or safe (Roosink & Zijdewind, 2010). Training programs should consider auditory feedback integration for tasks requiring hands-free operation or continuous visual attention while ensuring that audio information complements rather than competes with other feedback modalities.

Haptic feedback delivers performance information through touch, vibration, or force feedback that provides immediate sensory information about movement quality, timing, or accuracy. This tactile feedback modality can enhance learning for motor skills while providing performance information that may not be available through visual or auditory channels alone (Sigrist et al., 2013). Employee training program design for technical skills, equipment operation, or physical performance can benefit from haptic feedback integration that enhances sensory awareness while supporting skill development and performance optimization.

Technology-Enhanced Feedback Systems

Digital Platforms and Analytics

Learning management systems and digital training platforms enable comprehensive feedback delivery through automated assessment, performance tracking, and personalized information provision that scales across large numbers of learners while maintaining consistency and quality. These platforms can provide immediate feedback on knowledge assessments, track progress through learning modules, and deliver customized recommendations based on individual performance patterns (Clark & Mayer, 2016). Employee training program design utilizing digital feedback systems demonstrates improved efficiency and effectiveness compared to manual feedback approaches that may be inconsistent or resource-intensive.

Learning analytics applications analyze learner behavior, performance patterns, and engagement data to provide insights into learning effectiveness and areas requiring additional support or intervention. These analytical capabilities enable proactive feedback provision based on predictive models that identify learners at risk of poor performance or those ready for advanced challenges (Siemens & Long, 2011). Training designers can leverage learning analytics to optimize feedback timing, content, and delivery methods while identifying program improvements and individual support requirements.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications enable sophisticated feedback personalization through analysis of individual learning patterns, performance data, and response characteristics that inform adaptive feedback delivery. AI-powered systems can adjust feedback specificity, timing, and delivery modality based on learner preferences and effectiveness patterns while providing consistent support across diverse learner populations (Roll & Wylie, 2016). Employee training program design incorporating AI-enhanced feedback demonstrates superior personalization and learning outcomes compared to static feedback approaches that fail to adapt to individual learner characteristics.

Virtual Reality and Simulation Feedback

Immersive virtual reality environments enable realistic performance feedback through consequence simulation, environmental response, and authentic task replication that may be impractical or impossible in traditional training settings. VR feedback can demonstrate the results of decisions, provide realistic consequences for actions, and enable repeated practice with varied scenarios while maintaining safety and cost-effectiveness (Jensen & Konradsen, 2018). Employee training program design utilizing VR feedback capabilities can provide comprehensive performance information while enabling safe practice of high-risk procedures and complex decision-making scenarios.

Real-time performance tracking in virtual environments provides immediate feedback about movement accuracy, timing, and efficiency while learners perform simulated tasks and procedures. These systems can monitor multiple performance dimensions simultaneously while providing integrated feedback that addresses technical skills, decision-making quality, and procedure compliance (Merchant et al., 2014). Training programs incorporating real-time VR feedback demonstrate superior skill development and retention compared to traditional training methods that lack immediate performance information and consequence visibility.

Collaborative virtual environments enable peer feedback, team performance evaluation, and social learning opportunities that leverage multiple feedback sources while supporting collaborative skill development. These environments can facilitate group discussions, peer coaching, and collaborative problem-solving while providing structured feedback frameworks that optimize learning and team performance (Dalgarno & Lee, 2010). Employee training program design utilizing collaborative VR environments creates opportunities for comprehensive feedback integration while building teamwork and communication skills essential for workplace effectiveness.

Mobile and Just-in-Time Feedback

Mobile feedback applications provide performance support and just-in-time information delivery that enables continuous learning and skill reinforcement beyond formal training sessions. These applications can deliver context-specific feedback, performance reminders, and skill reinforcement content based on location, time, or user request while supporting sustained learning and performance improvement (Quinn, 2011). Employee training program design incorporating mobile feedback extends learning support into work environments while providing ongoing development opportunities and performance guidance.

Push notification systems enable timely feedback delivery and learning reminders that maintain engagement and skill practice between formal training sessions. These systems can provide scheduled skill practice prompts, performance improvement tips, and learning milestone recognition while maintaining learner motivation and progress momentum (Sharples et al., 2007). Training programs utilizing mobile notification systems demonstrate improved learning retention and skill application compared to programs that lack ongoing feedback and reinforcement mechanisms.

Geolocation and context-aware feedback systems provide environment-specific performance information and guidance that addresses real-world performance contexts and challenges. These systems can deliver location-appropriate safety reminders, procedure guidance, and performance feedback that supports skill transfer and application in actual work environments (Ahn et al., 2019). Employee training program design incorporating context-aware mobile feedback bridges the gap between training and performance while providing ongoing support for skill application and continuous improvement.

Cultural and Individual Considerations

Cross-Cultural Feedback Preferences

Cultural dimensions including power distance, individualism-collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance significantly influence feedback preferences, acceptance, and effectiveness across diverse organizational contexts and learner populations. High power distance cultures may prefer formal, hierarchical feedback delivery while low power distance cultures may favor peer feedback and collaborative evaluation approaches (Hofstede et al., 2010). Employee training program design must consider cultural preferences when designing feedback systems that maintain effectiveness while respecting cultural values and communication preferences.

Direct versus indirect feedback communication styles vary significantly across cultures, with some preferring explicit, straightforward performance information while others favor subtle, contextual feedback that preserves face and maintains harmony. Training programs serving diverse cultural groups must provide flexible feedback approaches that accommodate different communication preferences while maintaining information clarity and actionability (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998). Understanding cultural communication preferences enables feedback design that enhances rather than impedes learning effectiveness across diverse participant populations.

Collectivistic versus individualistic feedback orientations influence preferences for group versus individual feedback, public versus private delivery, and competitive versus collaborative evaluation approaches. Collectivistic cultures may prefer group feedback that emphasizes collective improvement while individualistic cultures may favor personal feedback that highlights individual achievement and advancement (Triandis, 2018). Employee training program design should accommodate these cultural preferences through flexible feedback delivery options that maintain effectiveness while respecting cultural values and expectations.

Learning Style and Personality Adaptations

Learning style preferences including visual, auditory, and kinesthetic processing orientations influence optimal feedback delivery modalities and presentation formats that maximize information comprehension and retention. Visual learners may benefit from graphical feedback displays and video demonstrations while auditory learners prefer verbal feedback and discussion-based evaluation approaches (Fleming & Mills, 1992). Training program design should incorporate multiple feedback modalities that accommodate diverse learning preferences while ensuring comprehensive information delivery across all participant populations.

Personality characteristics including extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience influence feedback reception, processing, and utilization patterns that affect learning outcomes and skill development. Extraverted learners may prefer social feedback and group discussion while introverted learners may favor private feedback and individual reflection opportunities (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Understanding personality influences on feedback effectiveness enables training designers to create flexible systems that optimize learning for diverse personality types while maintaining program coherence and quality standards.

Feedback sensitivity and resilience vary significantly among learners, requiring adaptive approaches that provide appropriate challenge and support based on individual emotional responses and coping capabilities. Some learners thrive on detailed corrective feedback while others may become discouraged by extensive criticism or comparison with others (Dweck, 2006). Employee training program design must consider individual differences in feedback sensitivity while creating supportive environments that promote growth and learning for all participants regardless of their feedback preferences and emotional responses.

Motivation and Engagement Factors

Intrinsic motivation enhancement through feedback requires approaches that support autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs rather than simply providing external evaluation and control. Feedback that acknowledges progress, provides choices in improvement approaches, and connects performance to personal goals and values enhances intrinsic motivation while supporting sustained learning engagement (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Training program design should prioritize feedback approaches that build internal motivation while avoiding over-reliance on external rewards and recognition that may undermine long-term learning commitment.

Goal orientation influences how learners interpret and utilize feedback, with performance-oriented individuals focusing on ability demonstration while mastery-oriented individuals emphasize learning and improvement. Feedback design should accommodate both orientations through recognition of achievement and progress while emphasizing learning opportunities and skill development rather than ability comparisons (Dweck, 2006). Employee training programs can enhance motivation by framing feedback in growth-oriented terms that emphasize development potential rather than fixed ability assessments.

Self-efficacy development through feedback experiences influences learners’ confidence in their ability to succeed and persist through challenges and setbacks. Constructive feedback that acknowledges effort and progress while providing specific improvement guidance builds self-efficacy, while harsh criticism or ability-focused feedback may undermine confidence and motivation (Bandura, 1997). Training program feedback systems should explicitly support self-efficacy development through recognition of improvement, emphasis on skill development, and provision of achievable next steps that build confidence and competence simultaneously.

Conclusion

The role of feedback in employee training program design represents a fundamental determinant of learning effectiveness, skill development, and performance improvement that requires systematic planning, implementation, and evaluation to achieve optimal outcomes. This comprehensive examination has demonstrated that effective feedback systems must integrate theoretical understanding of learning processes with practical considerations including timing, specificity, delivery mechanisms, and individual differences that influence feedback reception and utilization. The evolution from simple post-training evaluation to sophisticated, technology-enhanced feedback systems reflects growing recognition of feedback’s critical role in accelerating learning while supporting sustained performance improvement and skill transfer.

The evidence presented throughout this analysis underscores the importance of moving beyond traditional feedback approaches to embrace comprehensive systems that provide multiple feedback types, adapt to individual learner characteristics, and leverage technological capabilities to enhance information delivery and processing. Organizations that systematically integrate evidence-based feedback principles into their training programs demonstrate superior learning outcomes, enhanced learner engagement, and improved return on investment compared to those employing minimal or poorly designed feedback approaches. The key to successful feedback implementation lies in understanding both theoretical foundations and practical constraints while creating systems that optimize learning effectiveness and organizational impact.

Future developments in feedback system design will likely incorporate emerging technologies including artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and predictive analytics that enable unprecedented personalization and responsiveness while maintaining cost-effectiveness and practical feasibility. However, the fundamental principles examined in this article – timing optimization, specificity enhancement, multi-modal delivery, and individual adaptation – will remain central to effective feedback design regardless of technological advances or delivery innovations. The strategic integration of comprehensive feedback systems into employee training program design ensures that organizations can maximize learning efficiency while supporting both individual development and organizational performance objectives in increasingly complex and competitive business environments.

References

  1. Adams, J. A. (1987). Historical review and appraisal of research on the learning, retention, and transfer of human motor skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101(1), 41-74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.41
  2. Ahn, C. R., Lee, S., Sun, C., Jebelli, H., Yang, K., & Choi, B. (2019). Wearable sensing technology applications in construction safety and health. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(11), 03119007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001708
  3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman. https://www.worldcat.org/title/self-efficacy-the-exercise-of-control/oclc/36074515
  4. Bilodeau, E. A., & Bilodeau, I. M. (1958). Variable frequency of knowledge of results and the learning of a simple skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 379-383. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043214
  5. Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2013). Correcting a metacognitive error: Feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 918-928. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029793
  6. Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174794
  7. Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. Wiley. https://www.worldcat.org/title/e-learning-and-the-science-of-instruction-proven-guidelines-for-consumers-and-designers-of-multimedia-learning/oclc/945436806
  8. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI): Professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources. https://www.worldcat.org/title/revised-neo-personality-inventory-neo-pi-r-and-neo-five-factor-inventory-neo-ffi-professional-manual/oclc/25589695
  9. Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01038.x
  10. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
  11. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House. https://www.worldcat.org/title/mindset-the-new-psychology-of-success/oclc/62894835
  12. Fleming, N. D., & Mills, C. (1992). Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11(1), 137-155. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.1992.tb00213.x
  13. Goodman, J. S., Wood, R. E., & Hendrickx, M. (2004). Feedback specificity, exploration, and learning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 248-262. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.248
  14. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
  15. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. https://www.worldcat.org/title/cultures-and-organizations-software-of-the-mind/oclc/429803435
  16. Jensen, L., & Konradsen, F. (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1515-1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9676-0
  17. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254
  18. Magill, R. A., & Anderson, D. I. (2017). Motor learning and control: Concepts and applications. McGraw-Hill Education. https://www.worldcat.org/title/motor-learning-and-control-concepts-and-applications/oclc/951747343
  19. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
  20. Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033
  21. Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 125-143). Erlbaum. https://www.worldcat.org/title/handbook-of-research-on-educational-communications-and-technology/oclc/144520600
  22. Narciss, S. (2013). Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning environments on the basis of the Interactive Tutoring Feedback Model. Digital Education Review, 23, 25-37. https://revistes.ub.edu/index.php/der/article/view/11281
  23. Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 27-42). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.004
  24. Quinn, C. (2011). Designing mLearning: Tapping into the mobile revolution for organizational performance. Pfeiffer. https://www.worldcat.org/title/designing-mlearning-tapping-into-the-mobile-revolution-for-organizational-performance/oclc/694394442
  25. Roosink, M., & Zijdewind, I. (2010). Corticospinal excitability during observation and imagery of simple and complex hand tasks: Implications for motor rehabilitation. Behavioural Brain Research, 213(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2010.04.027
  26. Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 582-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3
  27. Salmoni, A. W., Schmidt, R. A., & Walter, C. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 355-386. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.355
  28. Schmidt, R. A., & Lee, T. D. (2019). Motor learning and performance: From principles to application. Human Kinetics. https://www.worldcat.org/title/motor-learning-and-performance-from-principles-to-application/oclc/1082991969
  29. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2007). Influencing children’s self-efficacy and self-regulation of reading and writing through modeling. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(1), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560600837578
  30. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age