» Articles » PMID: 16795283

Instructions and Group Versus Individual Reinforcement in Modifying Disruptive Group Behavior

Overview
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 1971 Jul 1
PMID 16795283
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Head Start children were matched into two groups on the basis of rates of disruptive behavior during rest periods. Attempts were made to modify their behavior using either individual or group token reinforcement procedures. While the reinforcement procedures reduced inappropriate behavior somewhat, the addition of instructions to the reinforcement reduced the inappropriate behavior to near zero for both groups. Instructions alone, however, were ineffective in controlling behavior. Type of reinforcement (group or individual) did not produce differential effects. While experimental control over the target behavior was demonstrated, there was little carryover from the experimental room to the regular classroom. Even when treatment was introduced into the regular class, follow-up results showed that with time the target behavior approximated pretreatment levels. The results suggest that (a) the combination of instructions and reinforcement is much more effective than either one of these alone, (b) behavior change is specific to the environmental contingencies, and (c) the group reinforcement technique, which is much more easily implemented, was at least as effective as individual reinforcement in the present study.

Citing Articles

Effect of Group Contingency Type on Walking: Comparisons of Effectiveness and Cost Efficiency.

Kim H, Lee C, Lee S, Chung K Front Psychol. 2021; 12:655663.

PMID: 34122239 PMC: 8195251. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655663.


A Descriptive Analysis of Applied Behavior Analysis Research With Economically Disadvantaged Children.

Fontenot B, Uwayo M, Avendano S, Ross D Behav Anal Pract. 2020; 12(4):782-794.

PMID: 31976290 PMC: 6834796. DOI: 10.1007/s40617-019-00389-8.


Using taped-problems and rewards to increase addition-fact fluency in a first grade general education classroom.

Aspiranti K, Skinner C, McCleary D, Cihak D Behav Anal Pract. 2012; 4(2):25-33.

PMID: 22649576 PMC: 3357097. DOI: 10.1007/BF03391781.


Internet-based group contingency management to promote abstinence from cigarette smoking: a feasibility study.

Meredith S, Grabinski M, Dallery J Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011; 118(1):23-30.

PMID: 21414733 PMC: 3144260. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.02.012.


Modification of perseverative responding that increased earnings but impeded skill acquisition in a job-skills training program.

DeFulio A, Iati C, Needham M, Silverman K J Appl Behav Anal. 2010; 42(3):627-40.

PMID: 20190923 PMC: 2741061. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2009.42-627.


References
1.
Baron A, Kaufman A, Stauber K . Effects of instructions and reinforcement-feedback on human operant behavior maintained by fixed-interval reinforcement. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969; 12(5):701-12. PMC: 1338672. DOI: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-701. View

2.
Barrish H, Saunders M, Wolf M . Good behavior game: effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. J Appl Behav Anal. 1969; 2(2):119-24. PMC: 1311049. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1969.2-119. View

3.
Agras S, Leitenberg H, Barlow D . Social reinforcement in the modification of agoraphobia. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1968; 19(4):423-7. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1968.01740100039006. View

4.
OLIVEAU D, Agras W, Leitenberg H, Moore R, Wright D . Systematic desensitization, therapeutically oriented instructions and selective positive reinforcement. Behav Res Ther. 1969; 7(1):27-33. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(69)90045-x. View

5.
Evans G, Oswalt G . Acceleration of academic progress through the manipulation of peer influence. Behav Res Ther. 1968; 6(2):189-95. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(68)90006-5. View