The Effect םf Feedback םn Computerized Puzzle Completion Task Training

Despite the diversity of commercial and academic computerized mental training systems, many core issues on how to best design and use these systems in order to promote learning and learning transfer are unresolved. One of these open questions is whether having feedback during training is beneficial to trainees. Two studies were performed in order to address the effect of feedback in a computerized system for the training of puzzle completion on learning and transfer of learning. Puzzle completion tasks requires both visual perception and executive functions skills.

In the first study, the task chosen was a simple puzzle completion task composed of geometric shapes. Trainees were invited to two consecutive training sessions, in each of them they were asked to complete 4 four-pieces puzzles and 11 nine-pieces puzzles. However, their task was to perform it with the smallest number of rotations and moves; hence, their focus was on improving their executive functions skills. The variables of available system’s feedback during the task on their actions (“Feedback”) and specific strategies given to trainees at the beginning of their second training session based on their performance in the first session (“Strategies”) were manipulated in a 2X2 design. Eighty-eight ORT Braude undergraduate students were randomly assigned to the four training groups. Results demonstrated that while no significant effect was recorded for Strategies, having the option of getting the system’s feedback improve performance, especially for the weaker performers, even when participants did not take advantage of this option at all. Our explanation is that the availability of feedback increased motivation and reduces anxiety.

In the second study, the task was a completion of 50-piece puzzles composed of various pictures. As in the previous study, trainees were invited to two consecutive training sessions, in each of them they were asked to complete three puzzles, this time as quickly as possible. Eighty-eight ORT Braude undergraduate students were randomly assigned to the four training groups: Feedback group, who received auditory feedback during the task when a piece was put correctly; Strategies group, who received specific strategies at the beginning of its second training session based on each participant’s performance in the first session; ADD group, of participants with ADD; and a Control group.  Results demonstrated that the auditory feedback impeded the performance of the weaker performers while improving the stronger performers’ performance. The ADD grouped performed the task faster but without reducing the number of mouse clicks and moves.