One purpose of the present study was to examine whether self-confidence or anxiety would be differentially affected by feedback from more accurate rather than less accurate trials. The second purpose was to determine whether arousal variations (activation) would predict performance. On Day 1, participants performed a golf putting task under one of two conditions: one group received feedback on the most accurate trials, whereas another group received feedback on the least accurate trials. On Day 2, participants completed an anxiety questionnaire and performed a retention test. Skin conductance level, as a measure of arousal, was determined. The results indicated that feedback about more accurate trials resulted in more effective learning as well as increased self-confidence. Also, activation was a predictor of performance.
Feedback About More Accurate Versus Less Accurate Trials
Differential Effects on Self-Confidence and Activation
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.