Is perceiving another’s error detrimental to learning from corrective feedback?

Figures & data

Figure 1. Trial flow for each condition and the experimental setup (bottom diagram) for Experiment 1. Ps: participants

Table 1. Mean proportions of correct responses for each condition in the final test for Experiments 1 and 2. Standard errors are in parentheses

	Read-only	Fill in the blank	Tester/CA	Tester/WA
Experiment 1	0.33 (0.04)	0.48 (0.05)	0.30 (0.03)	0.32 (0.05)
Experiment 2	0.44 (0.05)	0.58 (0.04)	0.45 (0.05)	0.46 (0.05)

CA: correct answer, WA: wrong answer

Figure 2. Trial flow for each condition and the experimental setup (the bottom diagram) for Experiment 2. Ps: participants, R: respondent, T: tester

Target words and examples of false information in Experiments 1 and 2

Target	Example of false information	Exp.	Target	Example of false information	Exp.
Brain lateralization	Asymmetrical ability	E1, E2	Vicarious retribution	Proxy war	E1, E2
Cocktail party effect	Attention effect	E1, E2	Biofeedback	Bio-monitoring	E1, E2
Myelin sheath	Synapse	E1, E2	Transductive reasoning	Transfer of reasoning	E1, E2
Johari window	Implicit theory of personality	E1, E2	Sleeper effect	Time lag effect	E1, E2
Zone of proximal development	Stage of co-operation	E1, E2	Positive illusions	Positive thinking	E1, E2
Naive theory	Preconceived idea	E1, E2	Preferential looking method	Eye tracking	E1, E2
Halo effect	Justification effect	E1, E2	Bottom-up processing	Ascending processing	E1, E2
Self-handicapping	Self-defense	E1, E2	Prospective memory	Future memory	E1, E2
Boomerang effect	Reactance effect	E1, E2	Spiral of silence	Public pressure	E1, E2
Expertise	Learning acceleration	E1, E2	Prospect theory	Game theory	E1, E2
Door-in-the-face technique	Persuasive request technique	E1, E2	Face inversion effect	Face up-and-down effect	E1, E2
Conforming behavior	Passive behavior	E1, E2	Personal space	Private space	E1, E2
Pygmalion effect	Adjustment effect	E1, E2	Self-efficacy	Self-esteem	E1, E2
Safety base	Affectionate base	E1, E2	Cell assembly	Cell unit	E1
Learning readiness	Maturation	E1, E2	Hippocampus	Frontal lobe	E1, E2
Critical period	Manifestation period	E1, E2	Circadian rhythm	Solar rhythm	E1, E2
Domain specificity	Fixability	E1, E2	Misattribution	Misreasoning	E1, E2
Aptitude-treatment interaction	Aptitude effect	E1, E2	Mood-congruency effect	Mood cognition effect	E1, E2
Meaningful reception learning	Meaningful learning	E1, E2	Self-presentation	Vanity gratification	E1, E2
Mirror neuron	Mimicry cell	E1, E2	Developmental acceleration	Precocity	E1, E2
Homeostasis	Physiological stabilization	E1, E2	Placebo effect	Mind and body effect	E1, E2
Fading	Reduction	E1, E2	Narrative therapy	Reconstruction therapy	E1
Meta-reasoning	Recursive reasoning	E1, E2	Masking	Shielding	E2
Counterbalancing	Matching	E1, E2	Binocular stereopsis	Stereo vision	E2
Salamanca Statement	Inclusion Statement	E1	Sound image	Stereophonic sound	E2
Motion parallax	Binocular parallax	E1, E2

Examples of statements (number of Japanese characters is in parentheses)

1. People can recognize specific contents in the noisy situation where many persons are talking. This is called the [cocktail party] effect of attention. (68)

2. There is rarely an educational method that has the same level of effect across learners. When educational treatments have different effects depending on the characteristics of learners, it is called [aptitude-treatment interaction]. (77)

3. Learners acquire knowledge and skills progressively through long-term repeated experience in a region and then show excellent performance in the region. This is called [expertise]. (70)