FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2114783384> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2114783384 endingPage "603" @default.
• W2114783384 startingPage "593" @default.
• W2114783384 abstract "Medical Education 2012:46:593–603 Objectives Regulatory focus theory posits the existence of two systems of self-regulation underlying human motivation: promotion focus, which is concerned with aspirations and accomplishments, and prevention focus, which is concerned with obligations and responsibilities. It has been proposed that regulatory focus theory may help to explain learners’ variable responses to feedback, predicting that positive feedback is motivating under promotion focus, whereas negative feedback is motivating under prevention focus. We aimed to explore this link between regulatory focus theory and response to feedback using data collected in a naturalistic setting. Methods In a constructivist grounded theory study, we interviewed 22 early-career academic doctors about experiences they perceived as influential in their learning. Although feedback emerged as important, responses to feedback were highly variable. To better understand how feedback becomes (or fails to become) influential, we used the theoretical framework of regulatory focus to re-examine all descriptions of experiences of receiving and responding to feedback. Results Feedback could be influential or non-influential, regardless of its sign (positive or negative). In circumstances in which the individual’s regulatory focus was readily determined, such as in choosing a career (promotion) or preparing for a high-stakes examination (prevention), the apparent influence of feedback was consistent with the prediction of regulatory focus theory. However, we encountered many challenges in applying regulatory focus theory to real feedback scenarios, including the frequent presence of a mixed regulatory focus, the potential for regulatory focus to change over time, and the competing influences of other factors, such as the perceived credibility of the source or content of the feedback. Conclusions Regulatory focus theory offers a useful, if limited, construct for exploring learners’ responses to feedback in the clinical setting. The insights and predictions it offers must be considered in light of the motivational complexity of clinical learning tasks and of other factors influencing the impact of feedback." @default.
• W2114783384 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2114783384 creator A5024304845 @default.
• W2114783384 creator A5057221074 @default.
• W2114783384 creator A5077159626 @default.
• W2114783384 creator A5080296268 @default.
• W2114783384 creator A5091416187 @default.
• W2114783384 date "2012-05-24" @default.
• W2114783384 modified "2023-10-01" @default.
• W2114783384 title "Understanding responses to feedback: the potential and limitations of regulatory focus theory" @default.
• W2114783384 cites W1607610280 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W1944495410 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W1994774607 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2014549726 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2018729084 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2022923524 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2030441548 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2034921045 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2047028789 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2112823838 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2130854479 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2136172537 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2142354435 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2157464421 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W2164770078 @default.
• W2114783384 cites W4234715662 @default.
• W2114783384 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04209.x" @default.
• W2114783384 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22626051" @default.
• W2114783384 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2114783384 type Work @default.
• W2114783384 sameAs 2114783384 @default.
• W2114783384 citedByCount "64" @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842012 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842013 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842014 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842015 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842016 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842017 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842018 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842019 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842020 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842021 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842022 @default.
• W2114783384 countsByYear W21147833842023 @default.
• W2114783384 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2114783384 hasAuthorship W2114783384A5024304845 @default.
• W2114783384 hasAuthorship W2114783384A5057221074 @default.
• W2114783384 hasAuthorship W2114783384A5077159626 @default.
• W2114783384 hasAuthorship W2114783384A5080296268 @default.
• W2114783384 hasAuthorship W2114783384A5091416187 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C11012388 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C156325361 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C165801399 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C190248442 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C191160116 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C192209626 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C93586867 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConcept C98147612 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C11012388 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C120665830 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C121332964 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C144024400 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C156325361 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C15744967 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C165801399 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C17744445 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C190248442 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C191160116 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C192209626 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C199539241 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C36289849 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C62520636 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C77805123 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C93586867 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C94625758 @default.
• W2114783384 hasConceptScore W2114783384C98147612 @default.
• W2114783384 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W2114783384 hasLocation W21147833841 @default.
• W2114783384 hasLocation W21147833842 @default.
• W2114783384 hasOpenAccess W2114783384 @default.
• W2114783384 hasPrimaryLocation W21147833841 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W1522358894 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W1999784549 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W2127000284 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W2315556775 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W2319713762 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W2330981676 @default.
• W2114783384 hasRelatedWork W2384798482 @default.

• next