The current study examined elementary school teachers’ acceptability of a positive behavioral intervention based on the use of jargon and non jargon language during behavioral consultation. One-hundred and one kindergarten through grade six teachers responded to the Usage Rating Profile-Intervention Revised (URP-IR) after reviewing a vignette describing a positive behavioral intervention utilizing jargon or non-jargon language. No statistically significant difference existed between acceptability and usage of a positive behavioral intervention when described in either jargon or non-jargon terms.
Boone Von BrockM.ElliottS. N. (1987) Influence of treatment effectiveness information on the acceptability of classroom interventions. Journal of School Psychology25: 131–144. doi: 10.1016/0022-4405(87)90022-7
2.
BrieschA. M.ChafouleasS. M.Rak NeugebauerS.Riley-TillmanT. C. (2013) Assessing influences on intervention implementation: Revision of the Usage Rating Profile-Intervention. Journal of School Psychology51: 81–96. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2012.08.006
3.
ChafouleasS. M.BrieschA. M.Riley-TillmanT. C.McCoachD. B. (2009) Moving beyond assessment of treatment acceptability: An examination of the factor structure of the Usage Rating Profile – Intervention (URP–I). School Psychology Quarterly24(1): 36–47. doi: 10.1037/a0015146
4.
ChafouleasS. M.Riley TillmanT. C.BrieschA. M.ChaneseJ. A. M. (2008) Generating usable knowledge: Initial development and validation of the Usage Rating Profile for Intervention (URP-I). Canadian Journal of School Psychology23(2): 175–189. doi: 10.1177/0829573508323989
5.
EckertT. L.RussoN.HierB. O. (2008) Best practices in school psychologists’ promotion of effective collaboration and communication among school professionals. In: ThomasA.GrimesJ. (eds) Best practices in school psychology V, Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists, pp. 541–551.
6.
ElliottS. N.WittJ. C.GalvinG. A.PetersonR. (1984) Acceptability of positive and reductive behavioral interventions: Factors that influence teachers’ decisions. Journal of School Psychology22: 353–360. doi: 10.1016/0022-4405(84)90022-0
7.
HallC. W.DidierE. (1987) Acceptability and utilization of frequently-cited intervention strategies. Psychology in the Schools24: 153–161. doi: 10.1002/1520-6807(198704)24:2<153::AID-PITS2310240210>3.0.CO;2-L
8.
HyattS. P.TingstromD. H. (1993) Consultants’ use of jargon during intervention presentation: An evaluation or presentation modality and type of intervention. School Psychology Quarterly8(2): 99–109. doi: 10.1037/h0088838
9.
HyattS. P.TingstromD. H.EdwardsR. (1991) Jargon usage in intervention presentation during consultation: Demonstration of a facilitative effect. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation2(1): 49–58. doi: 10.1207/s1532768xjepc0201_3
10.
KazdinA. E. (1981) Acceptability of child treatment techniques: The influence of treatment efficacy and adverse side effects. Behavior Therapy12: 493–506. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(81)80087-1
11.
KazdinA. E.ColeP. M. (1981) Attitudes and labeling biases toward behavior modification: The effects of labels, content, and jargon. Behavior Therapy12: 56–68. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(81)80106-2
12.
KnotekS. E. (2003) Making sense of jargon during consultation: Understanding consultees’ social language to effect change in student study teams. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation14(2): 181–207. doi:10.1207/s1532768xjepc1402_5
13.
KutsickK. A.GutkinT. B.WittJ. C. (1991) The impact of treatment development process, intervention type, and problem severity on treatment acceptability as judged by classroom teachers. Psychology in the Schools28: 325–331. doi: 10.1002/1520-6807(199110)28:4<325::AID-PITS2310280407>3.0.CO;2-Y
14.
MartensB. K.WittJ. C.ElliottS. N.DarveauxD. X. (1985) Teacher judgments concerning the acceptability of school-based interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice16(2): 191–198. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.16.2.191
15.
National Center for Education Statistics (2011). Table 208.20 Public and private elementary and secondary teachers, enrollment, pupil/teacher ratios, and new teacher hires: Selected years, fall 1955 through fall 2023. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_208.20.asp.
16.
ReimersT. M.WackerD. P.KoepplG. (1987) Acceptability of behavioral interventions: A review of the literature. School Psychology Review16(2): 212–227.
17.
RhoadesM. M.KratochwillT. R. (1992) Teacher reactions to behavioral consultation: An analysis of language and involvement. School Psychology Quarterly7(1): 47–59. doi: 10.1037/h0088247
18.
WittJ. C.MartensB. (1983) Assessing the acceptability of behavioral interventions used in classrooms. Psychology in the Schools20: 510–517. doi: 10.1002/1520-6807(198310)20:4<510::AID-PITS2310200420>3.0.CO;2-1
19.
WittJ. C.MartensB. K.ElliottS. N. (1984) Factors affecting teachers’ judgments of the acceptability of behavioral interventions: Time involvement, behavior problem severity, and type of intervention. Behavior Therapy15: 204–209. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(84)80022-2
20.
WittJ. C.MoeG.GutkinT. B.AndrewsL. (1984) The effect of saying the same thing in different ways: The problem of language and jargon in school-based consultation. Journal of School Psychology22: 361–367. doi: 10.1016/0022-4405(84)90023-2
21.
WoolfolkR. L.WoolfolkA. E. (1979) Modifying the effect of the behavior modification label. Behavior Therapy10: 575–578. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7894(79)80060-X
22.
WoolfolkA. E.WoolfolkR. L.WilsonG. T. (1977) A rose by any other name … : Labeling bias and attitudes toward behavior modification. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology45(2): 184–191. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.45.2.184
