This study compared social interaction behavior between nondisabled and disabled students, as a function of the way tasks were structured during a peer integration program. Of the eight pairs of students, four pairs were assigned to an individualistic goal-structured condition; the other four pairs, to a cooperative condition. For nondisabled students, the cooperative condition was associated with more social interaction during activity and free play sessions. For disabled students, the cooperative condition was associated with more social interaction during activity sessions, but not during free play sessions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrinkerR. (1985). Interactions between severely mentally retarded students and other students in integrated and segregated public school settings. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89, 587–594.
2.
ColeD. A. (1986). Facilitating play in children's peer relationships: Are we having fun yet?American Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 201–215.
3.
ColeD. A.MeyerL. H.VandercookT., & McQuarterR. (1986). Interactions between peers with and without severe handicaps: The dynamics of teacher intervention. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 91(2), 160–169.
4.
CoonM. E.VogelsbergT., & WilliamsW. (1981). Effects of classroom public transportation instruction on generalization to the natural environment. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 6(2). 46–53.
5.
DeutchM. (1949). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group process. Human Relations, 2, 199–232.
6.
EichingerJ. (1988). The effects of cooperative versus individualistic goal structured activities upon social interaction behavior between nondisabled students and students with severe disabilities. Dissertation Abstracts International, (University Microfilms No. 89–01, 829).
7.
GrossmanH., (Ed.) (1983). Classification in mental retardation. Washington, DC: The American Association on Mental Deficiency.
8.
GuralnickM. (1980). Social interaction among preschool children. Exceptional Children, 46(4), 248–253.
9.
HornerR. H.BellamyG. T., & ColvinG. T. (1984). Responding in the presence of nontrained stimuli: Implications of generalization error patterns. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 9, 287–295.
10.
JohnsonD., & JohnsonR. (1980). Integrating handicapped students into the mainstream. Exceptional Children, 47(2), 90–98.
11.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR., & MaruyamaG. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous and homogeneous individuals: A theoretical formulation of a meta-analysis of the research. Review of Educational Research, 53(1), 5–54.
12.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR.WarringD., & MaruyamaG. (1986). Different cooperative learning procedures and cross-handicap relationships. Exceptional Children, 53(3), 247–252.
13.
JohnsonD. W., & JohnsonR. T. (1987). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14.
JohnsonR.RyndersJ.JohnsonD. W.SchmidtB., & HaiderS. (1979). Producing positive interactions between handicapped and nonhandicapped teenagers through cooperative goal structuring: Implications for mainstreaming. American Educational Research Journal, 16, 161–167.
15.
JohnsonR. T., & JohnsonD. W. (1981). Building friendships between handicapped and nonhandicapped students: Effects of cooperative vs. individualistic instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 415–423.
16.
JohnsonR. T., & JohnsonD. W. (1982). Effects of cooperative and competitive learning experiences on interpersonal attraction between handicapped and nonhandicapped students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 116, 211–219.
17.
JohnsonR. T., & JohnsonD. W. (1983). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning experiences on social development. Exceptional Children, 49(4), 323–329.
18.
MartinoL., & JohnsonD. W. (1979). Cooperative and individualistic experiences among disabled and normal children. The Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 177–183.
19.
MeyerL.FoxA.SchernerA.KettlesonD.MontanN.MaleyK., & ColeD. (1986). The effects of teacher intrusions on social play interactions between children with autism and their nonhandicapped peers. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 17(3), 315–332.
20.
MeyerL. M., & KishiG. S. (1985). School integration strategies. In LakinC. & BruininksR. (Eds.), Strategies for achieving community integration of developmentally disabled citizens (pp. 231–252). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
21.
NoonanM. J.HemphillN. J., & LevyG. (1983). Social skills curricular strategies for students with severe disabilities. Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Department of Special Education, Hawaii Integration Project.
22.
PutnamJ. W.RyndersJ. E.JohnsonR. T., & JohnsonD. W. (1989). Collaborative skill instruction for promoting positive interactions between mentally handicapped and nonhandicapped children. Exceptional Children, 55, 550–557.
23.
RyndersJ. E.JohnsonR.JohnsonD. W., & SchmidtB. (1980). Producing positive interaction among Down Sydrome and nonhandicapped teenagers through cooperative goal structuring. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85, 268–283.
24.
StainbackS., & StainbackW. (1985). Assessing opportunities for interaction. In StainbackS. & StainbackW. (Eds.), Integration of students with severe handicaps into regular schools (pp. 29–33). Reston, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children.
25.
StokesT. F., & BaerD. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 349–367.
26.
VoeltzL. M., & BrennanJ. (1984). Analysis of interactions between non-handicapped and severely handicapped peers using multiple measures. In BergJ. M. (Ed.), Perspectives and progress in mental retardation, Volume I: Social, psychological and educational aspects (pp. 61–72). Baltimore: University Park Press.
27.
VoeltzL.KishiG., & BrennanJ. (1981). SIOS: Social Interaction Observation System. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
