Investigating feedback-associated stress and mindfulness in undergraduate physiology students and other higher education programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study objective: Students who engage with and learn from academic feedback have developed what is known as feedback literacy skills. Being able to learn from feedback is an exceptionally powerful way of growing as a student; however, the process of receiving feedback can be stressful. This can lead to behaviours such as avoidance, denial or diminishing the importance of feedback, which can impact learning. Providing students with the skills needed to learn from feedback and to manage feedback associated stress is therefore increasingly relevant to student success and wellbeing. Feedback literacy skills include managing affect (emotions), focus, and self-advocacy, which are skills that are supported by mindfulness. Mindfulness is being present, on purpose, and without judgement, and is a proven practice that helps to reduce and manage stress. This study is of post-secondary students’ perceptions concerning feedback literacy, mindfulness, and stress, and their thoughts on digital mindfulness tools intended to support students who experience feedback-associated stress. Hypothesis: Students with higher mindfulness skills will also have higher feedback literacy skills and will also have lower stress. Methodology: Students were recruited from across several disciplines (+1000 students), including Physiology and Pharmacology, Dentistry, Occupational Therapy, Information and Media Studies, and Law, along with students supported by the Learning Development and Success Centre at Western University. The study included an online survey ( n=237) and focus groups ( n=6). Gender and program were both included in the survey; however, due to limited sample size, no additional analysis of these factors was conducted. Coding and thematic analysis was conducted by three faculty and two graduate research assistants. Summary of results: The survey data demonstrates that students with greater mindfulness have significantly greater feedback literacy, as well as lower stress. Thematic analysis of focus group data shows a broad range of affective and behavioural responses were shaped by how students perceive their own abilities, circumstances, and feedback itself. Thematic analysis also suggests there is a developmental trajectory for both mindfulness and feedback literacy as graduate students discussed more mindfulness and feedback literacy skills. Discipline-specific views on mindfulness and stress were also apparent. Conclusion: Survey results indicate that students who are more mindful have higher feedback literacy skills; however, when mindfulness and feedback literacy were discussed in focus groups, data suggests that few students considered explicitly linking mindfulness to academic feedback. Students across the various programs expressed vastly different familiarity with mindfulness and feedback literacy. All students expressed interest regarding the development of digital mindfulness tools to alleviate feedback-associated stress and offered recommendations for their implementation. These recommendations were discipline-specific and included the development of program competencies with respect to feedback literacy and wellness. Internal grants from the University of Western Ontario and the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry. This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2024 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".