It is widely accepted that feedback is critical to guide the learning process and to make effective decisions. However, ideal feedback is relatively rare in our daily environments. Two multiple-cue judgment experiments examined whether biased and incomplete feedback leads to less accurate learning than comprehensive feedback. Experiment 1 found that participants given selective feedback produce equivalently accurate predictions, learned equally rapidly, and exhibited equivalent task structure knowledge to those given full feedback. Experiment 2 showed that selective feedback led to more accurate outcome predictions and task structure knowledge in a dynamic task environment. These results are problematic for error-based models of learning.