Self–regulatory learning theory as a lens on how undergraduate and postgraduate learners respond to feedback: A BEME scoping review: BEME Guide No. 66

References

• Ashford SJ, Cummings LL. 1983. Feedback as an individual resource: personal strategies of creating information. Org Behav Human Perf. 32(3):370–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangert-Drowns RL, Kulik C-LC, Kulik JA, Morgan M. 1991. The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Rev Educ Res. 61(2):213–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates J, Konkin J, Suddards C, Dobson S, Pratt D. 2013. Student perceptions of assessment and feedback in longitudinal integrated clerkships. Med Educ. 47(4):362–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard AW, Ceccolini G, Feinn R, Rockfeld J, Rosenberg I, Thomas L, Cassese T. 2017. Medical students review of formative OSCE scores, checklists, and videos improves with student-faculty debriefing meetings. Med Educ Online. 22(1):1324718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bing-You RG, Paterson J, Levine MA. 1997. Feedback falling on deaf ears: residents' receptivity to feedback tempered by sender credibility. Med Teach. 19(1):40–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingham C, Sidorkin AM. 2004. The pedagogy of relation: an introduction. Counterpoints. 259:1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Black P, William D. 1998. Assessment and classroom learning. Assess Educ. 5(1):7–74.
   Google Scholar
• Boud D. 1985. Promoting reflection in learning: a model. In: Boud RK, Walker D, editors. Reflection: turning experience into learning. London (UK): Kogan Page Kap.
   Google Scholar
• Boud D, Molloy E. 2013. Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assess Eval High Educ. 38(6):698–712.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brett JF, Atwater LE. 2001. 360° feedback: accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. J Appl Psychol. 86(5):930–942.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brezis M, Cohen R. 2004. Interactive learning in medicine: Socrates in electronic clothes. QJM. 97(1):47–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown P, Levinson S. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess A, Mellis C. 2015. Receiving feedback from peers: medical students’ perceptions. Clin Teach. 12(3):203–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler DL, Winne PH. 1995. Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev Educ Res. 65(3):245–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter R, Halcomb E, Ramjan LM, Wilson NJ, Glew P, Salamonson Y. 2019. Does the use of annotated exemplars by nursing students predict academic performance? A cohort study. Nurse Educ Today. 80:34–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carver CS, Scheier MF. 1982. Control theory: a useful conceptual framework for personality–social, clinical, and health psychology. Psychol Bull. 92(1):111–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chanock K. 2000. Comments on essays: do students understand what tutors write? Teach Higher Educ. 5(1):95–105.
   Google Scholar
• Chiu YT, Lee KL, Ho MJ. 2014. Effects of feedback from near‐peers and non‐medical professionals on portfolio use. Med Educ. 5(48):539–540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleary TJ, Dong T, Artino AR. 2015. Examining shifts in medical students' microanalytic motivation beliefs and regulatory processes during a diagnostic reasoning task. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 20(3):611–626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen S, Farrant P, Taibjee S. 2009. Assessing the assessments: U.K. dermatology trainees' views of the workplace assessment tools. Br J Dermatol. 161(1):34–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman LM, Jussim L, Abraham J. 1987. Students’ reactions to teachers’ evaluations: the unique impact of negative feedback 1. J Appl Social Pyschol. 17(12):1051–1070.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crossman J. 2007. The role of relationships and emotions in student perceptions of learning and assessment. Higher Educ Res Dev. 26(3):313–327.
   Google Scholar
• Dannefer EF, Prayson RA. 2013. Supporting students in self-regulation: use of formative feedback and portfolios in a problem-based learning setting. Med Teach. 35(8):655–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawdy K, McGuffin M, Peacock M, Moline K, Di Prospero L. 2014. Incorporating peer assessments within a clinical practicum course: insights from a clinical faculty initiative. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci. 45(3):244–252.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Kleijn RA, Bouwmeester RA, Ritzen MM, Ramaekers SP, Van Rijen HV. 2013. Students’ motives for using online formative assessments when preparing for summative assessments. Med Teach. 35(12):e1644–e1650.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deci EL, Cascio WF. 1972. Changes in intrinsic motivation as a function of negative feedback and threats. Paper presented at the Eastern Psychological Association Meeting; April 19; Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Deci EL, Ryan RM. 1985. Motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York (NY): Plenum Publishing Co.
   Google Scholar
• Delva D, Sargeant J, Miller S, Holland J, Alexiadis Brown P, Leblanc C, Lightfoot K, Mann K. 2013. Encouraging residents to seek feedback. Med Teach. 35(12):e1625–e1631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doloriert C, Sambrook S, Stewart J. 2012. Power and emotion in doctoral supervision: implications for HRD. Euro J Training Dev. 36(7):732–750.
   Google Scholar
• Drew S. 2001. Perceptions of what helps learn and develop in education. Teach Higher Educ. 6(3):309–331.
   Google Scholar
• Duers LE, Brown N. 2009. An exploration of student nurses' experiences of formative assessment. Nurse Educ Today. 29(6):654–659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dweck C. 2013. Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York (NY): Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Dweck CS, Leggett EL. 1988. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychol Rev. 95(2):256–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eide T, Dulmen SV, Eide H. 2016. Educating for ethical leadership through web-based coaching: a feasibility study. Nurs Ethics. 23(8):851–865.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embo MP, Driessen EW, Valcke M, Van der Vleuten CP. 2010. Assessment and feedback to facilitate self-directed learning in clinical practice of midwifery students. Med Teach. 32(7):e263–e269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eva KW, Armson H, Holmboe E, Lockyer J, Loney E, Mann K, Sargeant J. 2012. Factors influencing responsiveness to feedback: on the interplay between fear, confidence, and reasoning processes. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 17(1):15–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough N. 1995. Critical discourse analysis. London (UK): Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Fredrickson BL. 2001. The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Am Psychol. 56(3):218–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaunt A, Patel A, Fallis S, Rusius V, Mylvaganam S, Royle TJ, Almond M, Markham DH, Pawlikowska TRB. 2017. Surgical trainee feedback-seeking behavior in the context of workplace-based assessment in clinical settings. Acad Med. 92(6):827–834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaunt A, Patel A, Rusius V, Royle TJ, Markham DH, Pawlikowska T. 2017. ‘Playing the game’: how do surgical trainees seek feedback using workplace-based assessment? Med Educ. 51(9):953–962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geddes D, Linnehan F. 1996. Exploring the dimensionality of positive and negative performance feedback. Commun Quart. 44(3):326–344.
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg S, Regehr G, Lingard L, Eva KW. 2015. Reading between the lines: faculty interpretations of narrative evaluation comments. Med Educ. 49(3):296–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleaves A, Walker C, Grey J. 2008. Using digital and paper diaries for assessment and learning purposes in higher education: a case of critical reflection or constrained compliance? Assess Eval Higher Educ. 33(3):219–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CJ, Könings KD, Dannefer EF, Schuwirth LW, Wass V, van der Vleuten CP. 2016. Factors influencing students’ receptivity to formative feedback emerging from different assessment cultures. Perspect Med Educ. 5(5):276–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CJ, Könings KD, Molyneux A, Schuwirth LW, Wass V, van der Vleuten CP. 2013. Web-based feedback after summative assessment: how do students engage? Med Educ. 47(7):734–744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie J. 2008. Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hattie J, Timperley H. 2007. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res. 77(1):81–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins ET, Silberman I. 1998. Development of regulatory focus: promotion and prevention as ways of living. In Dweck JHCS, editor. Motivation and self-regulation across the life span. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; p. 78–113.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins R, Hartley P, Skelton A. 2001. Getting the message across: the problem of communicating assessment feedback. Teach Higher Educ. 6(2):269–274.
   Google Scholar
• Hounsell D. 1987. Essay writing and the quality of feedback. In Richardson JTE, editor. Student learning: research in education and cognitive psychology. Milton Keynes (UK): SRHE and Open University Press; p. 109–119.
   Google Scholar
• Hyatt DF. 2005. ‘Yes, a very good point!’: a critical genre analysis of a corpus of feedback commentaries on master of education assignments. Teach Higher Educ. 10(3):339–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland F, Hyland K. 2001. Sugaring the pill: praise and criticism in written feedback. J Second Lang Writing. 10(3):185–212.
   Google Scholar
• Innovation VH. n.d. Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne (Australia): Veritas Health Innovation. www.covidence.org.
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson A. 2013. Facilitating productive use of feedback in higher education. Active Learning Higher Educ. 14(1):63–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khowaja AA, Gul RB, Lakhani A, Rizvi NF, Saleem F. 2014. Practice of written feedback in nursing degree programmes in Karachi: the students’ perspective. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 24(4):241–244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kluger AN, DeNisi A. 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol Bull. 119(2):254–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulhavy RW. 1977. Feedback in written instruction. Rev Educ Res. 47(2):211–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulhavy RW, Stock WA. 1989. Feedback in written instruction: the place of response certitude. Educ Psychol Rev. 1(4):279–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lave J, Wenger E. 1991. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee I, Mak P, Burns A. 2015. Bringing innovation to conventional feedback approaches in EFL secondary writing classrooms: a Hong Kong case study. English Teach: Pract Crit. 14(2):140–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefroy J, Hawarden A, Gay SP, McKinley RK, Cleland J. 2015. Grades in formative workplace-based assessment: a study of what works for whom and why. Med Educ. 49(3):307–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefroy J, Roberts N, Molyneux A, Bartlett M, Gay S, McKinley R. 2017. Utility of an app-based system to improve feedback following workplace-based assessment. Int J Med Educ. 8:207–216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu C, Lim R, Taylor S, Calvo RA. 2019. Students’ behavioural engagement in reviewing their tele-consultation feedback within an online clinical communication skills platform. Comp Human Behav. 94:35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lizzio A, Wilson K. 2008. Feedback on assessment: students’ perceptions of quality and effectiveness. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 33(3):263–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockyer J, Violato C, Fidler H. 2003. Likelihood of change: a study assessing surgeon use of multisource feedback data. Teach Learn Med. 15(3):168–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macafee D, Macafee M, Brewerton P. 2012. Strengthening your surgical hand: strengths-based profiling and coaching of surgical Trainees. Health Serv Insights. 5(31):S10408.
   Google Scholar
• Mains TE, Cofrancesco J, Milner SM, Shah NG, Goldberg H. 2015. Do questions help? The impact of audience response systems on medical student learning: a randomised controlled trial. Postgrad Med J. 91(1077):361–367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann K, van der Vleuten C, Eva K, Armson H, Chesluk B, Dornan T, Holmboe E, Lockyer J, Loney E, Sargeant J. 2011. Tensions in informed self-assessment: how the desire for feedback and reticence to collect and use it can conflict. Acad Med. 86(9):1120–1127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHugh ML. 2012. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med. 22(3):276–282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHugh ML. 2013. Lessons in biostatistics the Chi-square test of independence. Biochem Med. 23(2):143–149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McSwiggan LC, Campbell M. 2017. Can podcasts for assessment guidance and feedback promote self-efficacy among undergraduate nursing students? A qualitative study. Nurse Educ Today. 49:115–121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulder RH. 2013. Exploring feedback incidents, their characteristics and the informal learning activities that emanate from them. Euro J Training Dev. 37(1):49–71.
   Google Scholar
• Munro W, Hollingworth L. 2014. Audio feedback to physiotherapy students for viva voce: how effective is ‘the living voice’? Assess Eval Higher Educ. 39(7):865–878.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicol DJ, Macfarlane‐Dick D. 2006. Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Stud Higher Educ. 31(2):199–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nofziger AC, Naumburg EH, Davis BJ, Mooney CJ, Epstein RM. 2010. Impact of peer assessment on the professional development of medical students: a qualitative study. Acad Med. 85(1):140–147.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noordman J, Van der Weijden T, Van Dulmen S. 2014. Effects of video-feedback on the communication, clinical competence and motivational interviewing skills of practice nurses: a pre-test posttest control group study. J Adv Nurs. 70(10):2272–2283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordenbo SE. 2002. Bildung and the thinking of Bildung. J Philos Educat. 36(3):341–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton LS, Norton J. 2001. Essay feedback: how can it help students improve their academic writing? Paper presented at the International Conference of the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing across Europe; Jun 18–20; Groningen.
   Google Scholar
• Orsmond P, Merry S. 2013. The importance of self-assessment in students’ use of tutors’ feedback: a qualitative study of high and non-high achieving biology undergraduates. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 38(6):737–753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orsmond P, Merry S, Reiling K. 2000. The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 25(1):23–38.
   Google Scholar
• Overeem K, Wollersheim H, Driessen E, Lombarts K, Van De Ven G, Grol R, Arah O. 2009. Doctors' perceptions of why 360-degree feedback does (not) work: a qualitative study. Med Educ. 43(9):874–882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. 2015. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation. 13(3):141–146.
   Google Scholar
• Pintrich PR. 2000. The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In Boekaerts M, Pintrich P, Zeidner M, editors. Handbook of self-regulation. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press; p. 451–502.
   Google Scholar
• Porter L, Lawler E, Hackman J. 1974. Behavior in organizations. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Price M, Handley K, Millar J. 2011. Feedback: focusing attention on engagement. Stud Higher Educ. 36(8):879–896.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price M, Handley K, Millar J, O’donovan B. 2010. Feedback: all that effort, but what is the effect? Assess Eval Higher Educ. 35(3):277–289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinton S, Smallbone T. 2010. Feeding forward: using feedback to promote student reflection and learning–a teaching model. Innov Educ Teach Int. 47(1):125–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramani S, Könings KD, Ginsburg S, van der Vleuten CP. 2019. Feedback redefined: principles and practice. J Gen Intern Med. 34(5):744–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramani S, Könings KD, Mann KV, Pisarski EE, van der Vleuten CP. 2018. About politeness, face, and feedback: exploring resident and faculty perceptions of how institutional feedback culture influences feedback practices. Acad Med. 93(9):1348–1358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramaprasad A. 1983. On the definition of feedback. Syst Res. 28(1):4–13.
   Google Scholar
• Rana NP, Dwivedi YK. 2017. Can clicking promote learning? Measuring student learning performance using clickers in the undergraduate information systems class. JIEB. 10(2):201–215.
   Google Scholar
• Rizan C, Elsey C, Lemon T, Grant A, Monrouxe LV. 2014. Feedback in action within bedside teaching encounters: a video ethnographic study. Med Educ. 48(9):902–920.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts T-A, Nolen-Hoeksema S. 1989. Sex differences in reactions to evaluative feedback. Sex Roles. 21(11–12):725–747.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe A. 2011. The personal dimension in teaching: why students value feedback. Int J Educ Manage. 25(4):343–360.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan AM, Brutus S, Greguras GJ, Hakel MD. 2000. Receptivity to assessment‐based feedback for management development. J Manage Dev. 19(4):252–276.
   Google Scholar
• Sadler DR. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instr Sci. 18(2):119–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant J, Lockyer JM, Mann K, Armson H, Warren A, Zetkulic M, Soklaridis S, Könings KD, Ross K, Silver I, et al. 2018. The R2C2 model in residency education: how does it foster coaching and promote feedback use? Acad Med. 93(7):1055–1063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant J, Lockyer J, Mann K, Holmboe E, Silver I, Armson H, Driessen E, MacLeod T, Yen W, Ross K, et al. 2015. Facilitated reflective performance feedback: developing an evidence- and theory-based model that builds relationship, explores reactions and content, and coaches for performance change (R2C2). Acad Med. 90(12):1698–1706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant J, Mann K, Manos S, Epstein I, Warren A, Shearer C, Boudreau M. 2017. R2C2 in action: testing an evidence-based model to facilitate feedback and coaching in residency. J Grad Med Educ. 9(2):165–170.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, Van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. 2007. Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes. Med Educ. 41(6):583–591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, Van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. 2008. Understanding the influence of emotions and reflection upon multi-source feedback acceptance and use. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 13(3):275–288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant J, Mann K, van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. 2008. “Directed” self‐assessment: practice and feedback within a social context. J Cont Educ Health Prof. 28(1):47–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant JM, Mann KV, Ferrier SN, Langille DB, Muirhead PD, Hayes VM, Sinclair DE. 2003. Responses of rural family physicians and their colleague and coworker raters to a multi-source feedback process: a pilot study. Acad Med. 78(10):S42–S44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sargeant JM, Mann KV, Van der Vleuten CP, Metsemakers JF. 2009. Reflection: a link between receiving and using assessment feedback. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 14(3):399–410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schürmann E, Beausaert S. 2016. What are drivers for informal learning? Euro J Train Dev. 40(3):130–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair HK, Cleland JA. 2007. Undergraduate medical students: who seeks formative feedback? Med Educ. 41(6):580–582.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smither JW, London M, Richmond KR. 2005. The relationship between leaders’ personality and their reactions to and use of multisource feedback: a longitudinal study. Group Org Manage. 30(2):181–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sudarso S, Rahayu GR, Suhoyo Y. 2016. How does feedback in mini-CEX affect students’ learning response? Int J Med Educ. 7:407–413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor P, Mather G, Rowe A. 2011. The personal dimension in teaching: why students value feedback. Int J Educ Manage. 25(4):343–360.
   Google Scholar
• Telio S, Ajjawi R, Regehr G. 2015. The “educational alliance” as a framework for reconceptualizing feedback in medical education. Acad Med. 90(5):609–614.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teunissen P, Scheele F, Scherpbier A, Van Der Vleuten C, Boor K, Van Luijk S, Van Diemen‐Steenvoorde J. 2007. How residents learn: qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities. Med Educ. 41(8):763–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teven JJ, Gorham J. 1998. A qualitative analysis of low‐inference student perceptions of teacher caring and non‐caring behaviors within the college classroom. Commun Res Rep. 15(3):288–298.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike EL. 1927. The law of effect. Am J Psychol. 39(1–4):212–222.
   Google Scholar
• Treglia MO. 2008. Feedback on feedback: exploring student responses to teachers’ written commentary. J Basic Writing. 27:105–137.
   Google Scholar
• Trope Y, Neter E. 1994. Reconciling competing motives in self-evaluation: the role of self-control in feedback seeking. J Pers Soc Psychol. 66(4):646–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van-Dijk D, Kluger AN. 2011. Task type as a moderator of positive/negative feedback effects on motivation and performance: a regulatory focus perspective. J Organiz Behav. 32(8):1084–1105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van‐Dijk D, Kluger AN. 2004. Feedback sign effect on motivation: is it moderated by regulatory focus? Appl Psychol. 53(1):113–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Ridder JM, McGaghie WC, Stokking KM, ten Cate OT. 2015. Variables that affect the process and outcome of feedback, relevant for medical training: a meta-review. Med Educ. 49(7):658–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veloski J, Boex JR, Grasberger MJ, Evans A, Wolfson DB. 2006. Systematic review of the literature on assessment, feedback and physicians' clinical performance: BEME Guide No. 7. Med Teach. 28(2):117–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky L. 1978. Interaction between learning and development. In Cole M, John-Steiner V, Scribner S, Souberman E, editors. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; p. 79–91.
   Google Scholar
• Wardman M, Yorke V, Hallam J. 2018. Evaluation of a multi-methods approach to the collection and dissemination of feedback on OSCE performance in dental education. Eur J Dent Educ. 22(2):e203–e211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watling C, Driessen E, van der Vleuten CP, Lingard L. 2012. Learning from clinical work: the roles of learning cues and credibility judgements. Med Educ. 46(2):192–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watling C, Driessen E, van der Vleuten CP, Lingard L. 2014. Learning culture and feedback: an international study of medical athletes and musicians. Med Educ. 48(7):713–723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watling C, Driessen E, van der Vleuten CP, Vanstone M, Lingard L. 2013. Beyond individualism: professional culture and its influence on feedback. Med Educ. 47(6):585–594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winne PH, Butler DL. 1994. Student cognition in learning from teaching. Int Encyclopedia Educ. 2:5738–5775.
   Google Scholar
• Winstone NE, Nash RA, Rowntree J, Parker M. 2017a. It'd be useful, but I wouldn't use it’: barriers to university students’ feedback seeking//recipience. Stud Higher Educ. 42(11):2026–2041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winstone NE, Nash RA, Rowntree J, Parker M. 2017b. Supporting learners' agentic engagement with feedback: a systematic review and a taxonomy of recipience processes. Educ Psychol. 52(1):17–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winter C, Dye VL. 2004. An investigation into the reasons why students do not collect marked assignments and the accompanying feedback. Wolverhampton (UK): University of Wolverhampton.
   Google Scholar
• Yorke M. 2003. Formative assessment in higher education: moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher Educ. 45(4):477–501.
   Google Scholar
• Young P. 2000. ‘I might as well give up’: self-esteem and mature students’ feelings about feedback on assignments. J Further Higher Educ. 24(3):409–418.
   Google Scholar