Poor peer work does not boost student confidence

Datos Bibliográficos

ID12166148
AutoresHeather Barry Kappes (0000-0002-6335-3888, Department of Management London School of Economics and Political Science London UK, autor de correspondencia), Barbara Fasolo (0000-0002-4643-5689, Department of Management London School of Economics and Political Science London UK), Wenjie Han (0000-0003-2950-1178, Department of Management London School of Economics and Political Science London UK), J Barnes (0000-0001-6586-422X, Behavioural Insights Team London UK), Janna Ter Meer (Behavioural Insights Team London UK)
Año2019
Volumen33
Número2
Páginas139-150
Fecha de publicación2019-08-06
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Behavioral Decision Making (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0894-3257 • E-ISSN: 1099-0771
EditorialWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/bdm.2148
OpenAlexW2963293967
IdiomaNL
Referencias citadas24

Students' low confidence, particularly in numerical topics, is thought to be a barrier to keeping them engaged with education. We studied the effects on confidence of exposure to a peer's work of varying quality (very good or bad) and neatness (messy or neat). Previous research underpinned our hypothesis that a peer's bad‐quality work—which students rarely see—might boost student confidence more than very good work. We also predicted that a peer's very good work—which students are often shown—might be less discouraging if it were messy, suggesting it required effort and struggle. However, in experiments with university students and low‐educated adults, these hypotheses were not supported, and all participants decreased in confidence after seeing any peer work. The failure to find support for these hypotheses can inform future research into social comparison effects on self‐confidence in numerical topics. These results also have practical implications for teachers and managers who are expected to provide examples of peer work

Epistemology · Low Confidence · Mathematics education · Peer effects · Quality (philosophy · Self-confidence · Work (physics · Education, Achievement, and Giftedness · Engineering · Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation · Online and Blended Learning · Psychology · Social Psychology