Relevance of student motivation for providing high-quality peer-feedback: Results of two field studies

The prevailing interest in peer-feedback practices in higher education is grounded in their potential to foster students' learning, understanding, and performance while reducing instructor workload. This potential depends on students' motivation to provide high-quality peer-feedback. Within this, students’ expectancies for and the value they place on peer-feedback provision as well as their achievement goals seem to be particularly impactful. However, barely any research has investigated these relations. We aim to explain differences in peer-feedback quality based on feedback providers’ motivation in terms of mastery goals (task and learning goals), work avoidance goals, expectancies for success, task value, and cost. To answer these questions, we conducted two field studies in higher education courses in which 254 and 173 students provided peer-feedback on written assignments. Students reported their mastery goals, work avoidance goals, expectancies for success, task value, and cost regarding the task right before providing feedback. This feedback was assessed in terms of its quality along three aspects: criteria-based rating by trained raters, receiver-perceived quality, and feedback length. Consistently across both studies, path models showed that particularly task goals and utility value mattered for high-quality peer-feedback. Expectancies for success and cost were partly positively associated with feedback-quality. The motivation of students providing peer-feedback seems to be relevant for the quality of the peer-feedback they provide and is thus a crucial factor to consider in instructional settings implementing peer-feedback. Within this, particularly the effects of cost warrant further investigation. • Students' goals, expectancies and values matter for peer-feedback quality. • Students' task goals for providing feedback relate to peer-feedback quality. • Students' utility value for providing feedback relates to peer-feedback quality. • Cost of providing feedback seems to positively relate to peer-feedback quality. • Students and instructors' views on peer-feedback quality seem to differ.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Learning and Instruction
Published
2025-06-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2025.102152
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Student Assessment and Feedback
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
17.85
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Relevance of student motivation for providing high-quality peer-feedback: Results of two field studies

Melanie V. Keller, Martin Daumiller, Markus Dresel
2 citations
Learning and Instruction
Student Assessment and Feedback
17.85
article

Relevance of student motivation for providing high-quality peer-feedback: Results of two field studies

Melanie V. Keller, Martin Daumiller, Markus Dresel
article en
2 citations

Abstract

The prevailing interest in peer-feedback practices in higher education is grounded in their potential to foster students' learning, understanding, and performance while reducing instructor workload. This potential depends on students' motivation to provide high-quality peer-feedback. Within this, students’ expectancies for and the value they place on peer-feedback provision as well as their achievement goals seem to be particularly impactful. However, barely any research has investigated these relations. We aim to explain differences in peer-feedback quality based on feedback providers’ motivation in terms of mastery goals (task and learning goals), work avoidance goals, expectancies for success, task value, and cost. To answer these questions, we conducted two field studies in higher education courses in which 254 and 173 students provided peer-feedback on written assignments. Students reported their mastery goals, work avoidance goals, expectancies for success, task value, and cost regarding the task right before providing feedback. This feedback was assessed in terms of its quality along three aspects: criteria-based rating by trained raters, receiver-perceived quality, and feedback length. Consistently across both studies, path models showed that particularly task goals and utility value mattered for high-quality peer-feedback. Expectancies for success and cost were partly positively associated with feedback-quality. The motivation of students providing peer-feedback seems to be relevant for the quality of the peer-feedback they provide and is thus a crucial factor to consider in instructional settings implementing peer-feedback. Within this, particularly the effects of cost warrant further investigation. • Students' goals, expectancies and values matter for peer-feedback quality. • Students' task goals for providing feedback relate to peer-feedback quality. • Students' utility value for providing feedback relates to peer-feedback quality. • Cost of providing feedback seems to positively relate to peer-feedback quality. • Students and instructors' views on peer-feedback quality seem to differ.

Learning and InstructionVol. 99
University of Augsburg (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Student Assessment and Feedback
17.85
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.