Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1974-12
A Review of Applications of Group-Contingency Procedures Used in Behavior Modification in the Regular Classroom: Some Recommendations for School Personnel
The increasing popularity of behavior modification techniques has led to the development of contingencies applied on a group-wide basis. The use of group contingencies in regular school classroom research is reviewed and specific studies discussed. A comparison between the effectiveness of group and individual contingencies is made. The positive and negative features of group contingencies are presented. Questions for future research are posed. Finally, recommendations are presented for the practitioner in the school.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrishM. M.SaundersM.WolfM. M.Good behavior game: Effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in the classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1969, 2, 119–124.
2.
DeitzS. M.ReppA. C.Decreasing classroom misbehavior through the use of DRL schedules of reinforcement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 457–463.
3.
DrabmanR.SpitalnikR.SpitalnikK.Systematic and disruptive behavior as a function of four types of token reinforcement programs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974, 7, 93–101.
4.
GrandyG. S.MadsenC. H.DeMerssemanL. M.The effects of individual and interdependent contingencies on inappropriate classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 1973, 10, 488–493.
5.
HamblinR. T.HathawayC.WordarskiJ.Group contingencies, peer tutoring and accelerating academic achievement. In RampE. A.HopkinsB. L. (Eds.), A new direction for education: Behavior analysis, 1971. Lawrence, Kansas: Support and Development Center for Follow Through, 1971. Pp. 41–53.
6.
HarrisV. W.ShermanJ. A.The use and analysis of the “Good Behavior Game” to reduce disruptive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 405–417.
7.
KazdinA. E.Methodological and assessment considerations in evaluating reinforcement programs in applied settingsJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 517–531.
8.
LongJ. D.WilliamsR. L.The comparative effectiveness of group and individually free time with inner-city junior high school students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6, 465–474.
9.
McLaughlinT. F.MalabyJ. E.Reducing and measuring inappropriate verbalizations in a token classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1972, 5, 329–333.
10.
McLaughlinT. F.MalabyJ. E.The utilization of an individual contingency program to control assignment completion in a token classroom: A case study. Psychology in the Schools, 1974, 11, 191–194.
11.
MedlandM. B.StachnikT. J.Good behavior game: A replication and systematic analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1972, 5, 54–61.
12.
O'LearyK. D.BeckerW. C.EvansM. B.SaudargasR. A.A token reinforcement program in a public school: A replication and systematic analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1969, 2, 3–13.
13.
SchmidtG. W.UlrichR. E.Effects of group contingent events upon classroom noise. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1969, 2, 171–179.
