Abstract
The current study examined how different features of corrective feedback influenced children's performance and motivational outcomes on a mathematics task. Elementary school-aged children from the United States (N = 130; M(age) = 7.61 years; 35% female; 60% White) participated in a Zoom session with a trained researcher. During the learning activity, children solved a series of mathematical equivalence problems and were assigned to different feedback conditions that varied in feedback content (correct answer alone vs. correct answer with verification) and feedback source (computer alone vs. computer with person). In terms of content, feedback with verification cues led to decreased persistence, decreased strategy variability, and higher reliance on entrenched strategies relative to feedback that contained the correct answer alone. In terms of source, feedback from the computer alone enhanced children's accuracy; however, the most resilient children received feedback from the computer and a person. Findings are discussed in light of existing feedback theories.