The Relative Effect Upon Learning of Immediate and Delayed Knowledge of Results

Margaret M Elliott, Fordham University


It would seem that the question or the relative importance for learning or delayed and immediate knowledge of results has been solved with delayed knowledge the superior. However, careful analysis reveals serious defects in the experimental proceedings which would render invalid any conclusions whatever from the experiments concerning the influence of delay. These defects are so serious that mere reanalysis of their data will not permit any valid conclusions as will be shown in Chapter II. There seemed only one way to solve the problem, and that was to conduct a further experiment avoiding the errors involved in the earlier work. The present investigation was undertaken for that purpose, namely; to determine the relative effect upon learning of immediate and delayed knowledge of results. The learning task used by Zaganczyk, line-drawing was chosen. This task has the advantage of being relatively unfamiliar to all subjects. Because of Zaganczyk's interesting finding concerning it, delay occupied by difficult mental multiplication was used. The five day period was selected because that was found by Zaganczyk to be sufficient to test learning. A longer period failed to increase the learning, and observation or results showed that any shorter one would be inadequate.

Subject Area

Educational psychology

Recommended Citation

Elliott, Margaret M, "The Relative Effect Upon Learning of Immediate and Delayed Knowledge of Results" (1937). ETD Collection for Fordham University. AAI29282579.