• Medical education · Apr 2014

    Randomized Controlled Trial

    Task- versus ego-oriented feedback delivered as numbers or comments during intubation training.

    • Julian Manzone, Luc Tremblay, Kong E You-Ten, Devdatta Desai, and Ryan Brydges.
    • Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
    • Med Educ. 2014 Apr 1; 48 (4): 430-40.

    ContextLearners can focus on mastery (i.e. task orientation) or on learning relative to others (i.e. ego orientation). Previous research suggests task orientations are optimal for learning, a benefit usually linked to the suggestion that qualitative comments are better for learning than quantitative comparisons (i.e. grades). Yet, it is not clear if the observed effects are attributable to the feedback orientation (i.e. task versus ego), feedback format (i.e. comments versus numerical scores), or an interaction between the two. Here, we aimed to clarify the effects of feedback orientation and feedback format during simulation-based training in endotracheal intubation.MethodsForty-one medical students were randomly assigned to four feedback conditions: Task-oriented Numerical; Ego-oriented Numerical; Task-oriented Comment, and Ego-oriented Comment. Participants performed a total of 20 trials of endotracheal intubation. Pre-test, post-test and retention test assessments included the use of hand motion analysis and a global rating scale (GRS). Participants rated feedback credibility, self-assessment and self-confidence using Likert-type scales. Analyses of variance were used to examine group differences.ResultsParticipants' performance did not differ significantly on the easiest (p > 0.2) or two complex variations of intubation (p > 0.3). For the moderately difficult variation, analyses of hand motion and GRS data revealed significant group differences at post-test (p < 0.05), but no differences on the retention test. Analysis of participants' perceptions showed significant interactions whereby the Ego-oriented Numerical group rated feedback credibility (p < 0.01) higher than the Task-oriented Numerical group; the two Comment groups did not differ. Some participants recounted negative experiences with the feedback they received.ConclusionsMedical students responded to feedback in ways that challenge previous education research. Specifically, students preferred and improved more in the short term (but not at retention) when receiving Ego-oriented feedback in Numerical form. Although learning retention did not differ significantly across feedback conditions, students' perceptions of themselves and of the teacher and training environment did differ and the implications for trainees' future learning must be considered.© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.