Feedback Loops in Communication Explained

What has been corrected on this page?

Every accepted correction to this page is recorded with the exact change, so readers can see how the page improved over time.

1. 28 July 2026 · corrected by Emir Baycan

   Corrected seven attribution and overstatement issues: scoped the WHO surgical-checklist 36%/47% figures to Haynes et al. (2009) as before-and-after associations from a multi-component program with an acknowledged unclear mechanism; nuanced the Cybersyn claim (it ended with the 1973 coup but also faced real technical and bandwidth limits);

   corrected Bandura's self-efficacy to its four sources (mastery experiences most influential, plus vicarious experience, social persuasion, and physiological states) rather than 'primarily performance feedback'; qualified Liker's one-to-two-minute-stop and order-of-magnitude figures;

   reframed Hattie's Visible Learning (2009) as a broad synthesis whose effect-size rankings have been methodologically criticized, not a single fixed hierarchy of feedback types; corrected the hotel-towel study attribution to Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius (2008) and removed the incorrect Steve Martin same-room framing;

   and corrected the misnamed 'Principle of Indifference' attributed to Weinberg.

   What the page claimed

   The article said the WHO checklist proves communication feedback pathways reduce death, that Cybersyn failed for political rather than technical reasons, that Bandura found self-efficacy is primarily from performance feedback, that Liker documented one-to-two-minute stops with an order-of-magnitude advantage, that Hattie's 250-million-student synthesis established one fixed feedback hierarchy, that Cialdini and Steve Martin ran the same-room towel study, and that Weinberg named a Principle of Indifference.

   What was corrected

   Scoped the checklist and Cybersyn claims, corrected the Bandura self-efficacy sources, qualified the Liker and Hattie figures, fixed the towel-study attribution, and corrected the Weinberg concept name.

   Why: The sources are genuine but were mis-attributed or overstated. Corrections fix attributions and scope the claims to what the studies support rather than adding new sources.

   View the full record →

Who checked this page?

1 contributor has checked "Feedback Loops in Communication Explained" on When Notes Fly. Each name below links to that person's public CitePep profile, where every contribution they have made is listed with the exact change they proposed.