Application of an interdependent group contingency mediated by an automated feedback device: An intervention across three high school classrooms

School Psychology Review

Volumn 35, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 78-90

  Christ, Theodore J ^a,c   Christ, Jennifer A ^b,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b Petal School District   (United States)

^c School Psychology Program   (United States)

^d University of Minnesota ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646749721     PISSN: 02796015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C. (1999). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
2. Bailey, D. B., Bender, W. N., Stuck, G. B., & Wyne, M. D. (1984). Generalized effects of a highly structured time-on-task intervention. Psychological Reports, 54, 483-490.
3. Balcazar, F. E., Hopkins, B. L., & Suarez, Y. (1985). A critical, objective review of performance feedback. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 7, 65-89.
4. Curtis, M. J., Hunley, S. A., & Grier, J. E. C. (2004). Relationships among the professional practices and demographic characteristics of school psychologists. School Psychology Review, 31, 30-42.
5. Eleftherios, C. P., Shoudt, J. T., & Strang, H. R. (1972). The game machine: A technological approach to classroom control. Journal of School Psychology, 10, 55-60.
6. Gettinger, M. (1988). Methods of proactive classroom management. School Psychology Review, 17, 227-242.
7. Gettinger, M. (1995). Best practices for increasing academic learning time. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology III (pp. 943-954). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
8. Gettinger, M., & Seibert, J. K. (2002). Best practices in increasing academic learning time. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology TV (pp. 773-787). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
9. Gonzalez, J. E., Nelson, J. R., Gutkin, T. B., & Shwery, C. S. (2004). Teacher resistance to school-based consultation with school psychologists: A survey of teacher perceptions. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 12, 30-37.
10. Greenwood, C. R., Hops, H., Delquadri, J., & Guild, J. (1974). Group contingencies for group consequences in classroom management: A further analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 413-425.
11. Greenwood, C. R., Horton, B. T., & Utley, C. A. (2002). Academic engagement: Current perspectives on research and practice. School Psychology Review, 31, 328-349.
12. Gresham, F. M. (1989). Assessment of treatment integrity in school consultation and prereferral intervention. School Psychology Review, 18, 37-50.
13. Gresham, F. M., & Kendell, G. K. (1987). School consultation research: Methodological critique and future research directions. School Psychology Review, 16, 306-316.
14. Hayes, L. A. (1976). The use of group contingencies for behavioral control: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 628-648.
15. Kratochwill, T. R., Elliot, S. N., & Rotto, P. C. (1990). Best practices in behavioral consultation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology II (pp. 195-206). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
16. Kratochwill, T. R., Elliott, S. N., & Rotto, P. C. (1995). Best practices in school-based behavioral consultation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology III (pp. 519-538). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
17. Kratochwill, T. R., Elliott, S. N., & Callan-Stoiber, K. (2002). Best practices in school-based problem-solving consultation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology W (pp. 583-608). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
18. Litow, L., & Pumroy, D. K. (1972). A conceptual schema of classroom group contingencies. UMJC: University of Maryland Counseling and Personnel Services, 3, 8-20.
19. Litow, L., & Pumroy, D. K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 341-347.
20. Mallot, R., & Trojan-Suarez, E. A. (2004). Principles of behavior (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21. Martens, B. K., Kelly, S. Q., & Diskin, M. T. (1986). The effects of two sequential-request strategies on teachers' acceptability and use of a classroom intervention. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 7, 211-221.
22. Martens, B. K., Witt, J. C., Elliott, S. N., & Daarveaux, D. (1985). Teacher judgements concerning the acceptabilty of school-based interventions. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 16, 191-198.
23. Noell, G. H., Witt, J. C., Gilbertson, D. N., Ranier, D. D., et al. (1997). Increasing teacher intervention implementation in general education settings through consultation and performance feedback. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 77-88.
24. Packard, R. G. (1970). The control of "classroom attention": A group contingency for complex behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 13-28.
25. Romeo, F. F. (1998). The negative effects of using a group contingency system of classroom management. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25, 130-133.
26. Rosenberg, M. S. (1986). Maximizing the effectiveness of structured classroom management programs: Implementing rule-review procedures with disruptive and distractible students. Behavioral Disorders, 11, 239-248.
27. Schmidt, G. W., & Ulrich, R. E. (1969). Effects of group contingent events upon classroom noise. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2, 171-179.
28. Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Academic skills problems workbook. New York: Guilford.
29. Starkey, C. T. (1974). An analysis of the components of a group contingency to control disruptive classroom behavior. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 10A. (UMI No. 6489)
30. Theodore, L. A. (2002). A comparative study of group contingencies and randomized reinforcers to reduce disruptive classroom behavior. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 53, 4-A. (UMI No. 1258)
31. Theodore, L. A., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., & DioGuardi, R. J. (2003). Contemporary review of group-oriented contingencies for disruptive behavior. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 20, 79-101.
32. Wasserman, T. H. (1977). The utilization of a clock-light cueing device to signal group progress towards reinforcement in a classroom setting. Psychology in the Schools, 14, 471-479.
33. Woodward, G. L., Ollendick, D. G., & Butcher, K. J. (1981). A rapid, effective technique for controlling disruptive classroom behaviors. Journal of Educational Research, 74, 397-399.
34. Zins, J. E., & Erchul, W. P. (1995). Best practices in school consultation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology III (pp. 609-623). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
35. Zins, J. E., & Erchul, W. P. (2002). Best practices in school consultation. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 625-644). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.