'It’d be useful, but I wouldn’t use it':barriers to university students’ feedback seeking and recipience

For feedback to be effective, it must be used by the receiver. Prior research has outlined numerous reasons why students’ use of feedback is sometimes limited, but there has been little systematic exploration of these barriers. In 11 activity-oriented focus groups, 31 undergraduate Psychology students discussed how they use assessment feedback. The data revealed many barriers that inhibit use of feedback, ranging from students’ difficulties with decoding terminology, to their unwillingness to expend effort. Thematic analysis identified four underlying psychological processes: awareness, cognisance, agency, and volition. We argue that these processes should be considered when designing interventions to encourage students’ engagement with feedback. Whereas the barriers identified could all in principle be removed, we propose that doing so would typically require – or would at least benefit from – a sharing of responsibility between teacher and student. The data highlight the importance of training students to be proactive receivers of feedback.

The verbal transformation effect:an exploration of the perceptual organization of speech

Six experiments investigated the influence of several grouping cues within the framework of the Verbal Transformation Effect (VTE, Experiments 1 to 4) and Phonemic Transformation Effect (PTE, Experiments 5 and 6), where listening to a repeated word (VTE) or sequence of vowels (PTE) produces verbal transformations (VTs). In Experiment 1, the influence of F0 frequency and lateralization cues (ITDs) was investigated in terms of the pattern of VTs. As the lateralization difference increased between two repeating sequences, the number of forms was significantly reduced with the fewest forms reported in the dichotic condition. Experiment 2 explored whether or not propensity to report more VTs on high pitch was due to the task demands of monitoring two sequences at once. The number of VTs reported was higher when listeners were asked to attend to one sequence only, suggesting smaller attentional constraints on the task requirements. In Experiment 3, consonant-vowel transitions were edited out from two sets of six stimuli words with ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ formant transitions, respectively. Listeners reported more forms in the spliced-out than in the unedited case for the strong-transition words, but not for those with weak transitions. A similar trend was observed for the F0 contour manipulation used in Experiment 4 where listeners reported more VTs and forms for words following a discontinuous F0 contour. In Experiments 5 and 6, the role of F0 frequency and ITD cues was investigated further using a related phenomenon – the PTE. Although these manipulations had relatively little effect on the number of VTs and forms reported, they did influence the particular forms heard. In summary, the current experiments confirmed that it is possible to successfully investigate auditory grouping cues within the VTE framework and that, in agreement with recent studies, the results can be attributed to the perceptual re-grouping of speech sounds.