Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39905105›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

The unskilled-and-unaware problem and performance feedback in monotonous, easily accustomed, and repetitive work.

Yasuhiro Nakamoto, Tomoharu Mori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yasuhiro NakamotoFaculty of Informatics, Kansai University, Takatsuki, Japan. nakamoto@kansai-u.ac.jp.
Tomoharu MoriCollege of Comprehensive Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Ibaraki, Japan.

Funding

Kansai Daigaku Kansai University Fund for Supporting Young scholars, 2018Ritsumeikan University Individual Research Allowance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current research examined whether people predict their performance on monotonous, easily accustomed, and repetitive (MEAR) tasks accurately and confirm the effects of performance feedback on their MEAR work predictions. Considering typing on the keyboard as an MEAR task in modern society, 128 university students were asked to type a 12-digit number displayed on each monitor within 5 minutes, explaining that there would be 75 typing problems and participants would receive 20 yen per correct answer. Additionally, participants were informed that they could earn money by reaching a self-determined performance target, with the condition that if they did not reach their self-set goal, they would not receive any earnings. The main findings were as follows: Regardless of the performance levels of typing on keyboards, only 23% of the participants reached the goal, indicating that the absence of performance feedback led to individuals' overestimation of performance. In contrast, providing feedback significantly improved performance predictions: 76% of the participants reached the goal with feedback on their own performance, 70% with feedback on others' performance, and 88% with feedback on both their own and others' performance information. Specifically, the effects between one's own and others' performance feedback did not vary at statistically significant levels.

Indexed as

Monotonous, easily accustomed, repetitive workPerformance feedbackUnskilled-and-unaware problem

Identifiers

PMID39905105
PMCPMC11794710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.