This research investigates the usefulness of two major types of interactional feedback (elicitation and reformulation) in dyadic interaction. The focus is on the different ways in which each feedback type is provided and their relationship with learner repair. The participants were 42 adult intermediate English as a second language learners and two native English teachers performing dyadic task-based interactions. Six different reformulation subtypes and five different elicitation subtypes were identified, differing from one another in feedback salience, and the degree to which they pushed the learner to respond to feedback. Analysis of data on output accuracy following feedback showed that both reformulation and elicitation resulted in higher rates of accurate repair when they were combined with explicit intonational or verbal prompts compared with less explicit prompts or no prompts. These findings confirm the role of salience and opportunities for pushed output as important characteristics of effective feedback.