Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This investigation evaluated the differential effectiveness of two reinforcement contingencies for improving cooperation among students when solving a mathematics estimation task. The two reinforcement paradigms were a dependent group-oriented contingency and an individual reinforcement contingency. Subjects were 371 children enrolled in grades 2 through 5 at two public schools. The two schools were randomly assigned to the two reinforcement conditions. The estimation task required guessing the number of objects in a container on three occasions, at weekly intervals. Feedback (high, low, or correct) was provided each week. Results showed that the group reinforcement contingency resulted in superior estimation accuracy and was associated with a higher degree of cooperation among students. These findings were discussed within the context of the literature pertaining to group-oriented reinforcement contingencies for improving cooperation and academic skills.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Benton, S. E. (1986). A summary of research on teaching and learning estimation. In H. L. Schoen & M. J. Zweng (Eds.), Estimation and mental computation, 1986 yearbook (pp. 239-248). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Greenwood, C. R. , Carta, J. J. , & Hall, R. V. (1988). The use of peer tutoring strategies in classroom management and educational instruction. School Psychology Review, 17, 258-275.

Greenwood, C. R. , Delqudri, J. C. , & Hall, R. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of classwide peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 371-383.

Gresham, F. M. , & Gresham, G. N. (1982). Interdependent, dependent, and independent group contingencies for controlling disruptive behavior. JournalofSpecialEducation, 16, 101-110.

Kagan, S. (1985). Dimensions of cooperative classroom structures. In R. Slavin , S. Sharon , S. Kagan , R. Hertz-Lazarowitz , C. Webb , & R. Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 67-96). New York: Plenum.

Kazdin, A. E. , & Geesey, S. (1977). Simultaneous treatment design comparisons of the effects of earning reinforcers for one's peers versus oneself. Behavior Therapy, 8, 682-693.

Leutzinger, L. P. , Rathmell, E. C. , & Urbatsch, T. D. (1986). Developing estimation skills in the primary grades. In H. L. Schoen & M. J. Zweng (Eds.), Estimation and mental computation, 1986 yearbook (pp. 82-92). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Litow, L. , & Pumroy, D. K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 341-347.

Long, J. D. , & Williams, R. L. (1973). The comparative effectiveness of group and individually contingent free time with inner city junior high school students. Journal ofApplied Behavior Analysis, 6, 465-474.

10.

McLaughlin, T. F. , & Williams, R. L. (1988). The token economy. In J. C. Witt , S. N. Elliott , & F. M. Gresham (Eds.), Handbook of behavior therapy in education (pp. 469-487). New York: Plenum.

11.

Pigott, H. E. , & Heggie, D. L. (1986). Interpreting the conflicting results of individual versus group contingencies in classrooms: The targeted behavior as a mediating variable. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 7, 1-15.

12.

Powers, M. D. , & Franks, C. M. (1988). Behavior therapy and the educative process. In J. C. Witt , S. N. Elliott , & F. M. Gresham (Eds.), Handbook of behavior therapy in education (pp. 3-36). New York: Plenum.

13.

Reys, R. E. (1988). Testing computational estimation -some things to consider. Arithmetic Teacher, 35, 28-28.

14.

Schmuck, R. (1985). Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn: Basic concepts. In R. Slavin , S. Sharon , S. Kagan , R. Hertz-Lazarowitz , C. Webb , & R. Schmuck (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 1-4). New York: Plenum.

15.

Shapiro, E. S. , Albright, T. S. , & Ager, C. L. (1986). Group versus individual contingencies in modifying two disruptive adolescents' behavior. Professional School Psychology, 1, 105-116.

16.

Shapiro, E. S. , & Goldberg, R. (1986). A comparison of group contingencies for increasing spelling performance among sixth grade students. School Psychology Review, 15, 546-557.

17.

Slavin, R. E. (1987). Grouping for instruction in the elementary school. Educational Psychologist, 22, 109-127.

18.

Slavin, R. E. , & Karweit, N. L. (1985). Effects of whole class, ability grouped, and individualized instruction on mathematics achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 351-367.

19.

Slavin, R. , Sharon, S. , Kagan, S. , Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. , Webb, C. , & Schmuck, R. (Eds.). (1985). Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. New York: Plenum.

20.

Williamson, D. A. , Sewell, W. R. , Sanders, S. H. , Haney, J. N. , & White, D. (1977). The treatment of reluctant speech using contingency management procedures. JournalofBehavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 8, 151-156.

Increasing Cooperation among Children Using Dependent Group-Oriented Reinforcement Contingencies

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References