Combining explicit timing with an interdependent group contingency program to decrease transition times: An investigation of the timely transitions game

Journal of Applied School Psychology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 11-27

  Campbell, Stephanie ^a   Skinner, Christopher H ^b  

^a Southpointe Family Resource Center   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavioral consultation; Class wide interventions; Empirical case study; Timely Transitions Game; Unknown criteria

Indexed keywords

EID: 49549091844     PISSN: 15377903     EISSN: 15377911     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J370v20n02_02     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Axelrod, S. (1973). Comparison of individual and group contingencies in two special classes. Behavior Therapy, 4, 83-90.
2. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
3. Derr, T. F., & Shapiro, E. S. (1989). A behavioral evaluation of curriculum-based assessment of reading. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 7, 148-160.
4. Derr-Minneci, T. F., & Shapiro, E. S. (1992). Validating curriculum-based measurement in reading from a behavioral perspective. School Psychology Quarterly, 7, 2-16.
5. Gettinger, M. (1995). Best practice of increasing academic learning time. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practice in school psychology-III (pp. 945-954). Washington, DC: The National Association of School Psychologists.
6. Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J. C., & Hall, R. V. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance. In W. L. Heward, T. E. Heron, J. Trap-Porter, & D. S. Hill (Eds.), Focus on behavior analysis in education (pp. 58-88). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
7. Gresham, F. M., & Gresham, G. N. (1982). Interdependent, dependent, and independent group contingencies for controlling disruptive behavior. Journal of Special Education, 16, 101-110.
8. Henington, C., & Skinner, C. H. (1998). Peer monitoring. In K. Toppins & S. Ely (Eds.) Peer Assisted Learning (pp. 237-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Hersen, M., & Barlow, D. H. (1982). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press.
10. Hughes, J. N. (2000). Reconsidering the role of theory in psychosocial intervention. Journal of School Psychology, 38, 389-401.
11. Kelshaw-Levering, K., Sterling-Turner, H. E., Henry, J. R., & Skinner, C. H. (2000). Randomized interdependent group contingencies: Group reinforcement with a twist. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 523-533.
12. Kratochwill, T. R., & Stoiber, K. C. (2002). Evidence-based interventions in school psychology: Conceptual foundations of the Procedural and Coding Manual of Division 16 and the Society for the Study of School Psychology Task Force. School Psychology Quarterly, 17, 341-389.
13. Lew, M., Mesch, D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1986). Positive interdependence, academic and collaborative-skills group contingencies and isolated students. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 341-347.
14. Litow, L., & Pumroy, D. K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 341-347.
15. Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1984). Practical implications of the matching law. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 367-380.
16. Page, D. P., & Edwards, R. P. (1978). Behavior change strategies for reducing disruptive classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 15, 413-418.
17. Paine, S. C. (1983). Structuring your classroom for academic success. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
18. Popkin, J., & Skinner, C. H. (2003). Enhancing academic performance in a classroom serving students with serious emotional disturbance: Interdependent group contingencies with randomly selected components. School Psychology Review, 32, 282-295.
19. Rhymer, K. N., Skinner, C. H., Henington, C., D'Reaux, R. A., & Sims, S. (1998). Effects of explicit timing on mathematics problem completion rates in African-American third-grade elementary students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 673-677.
20. Rhymer, K. N., Skinner, C. H., Jackson, S., McNeill, S., Smith, T., & Jackson, B. (2002).The 1-minute explicit timing intervention: The influence of mathematics problem difficulty. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29, 305-312.
21. Romeo, F. F. (1998). The negative effects of using a group contingency system of classroom management. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25, 130-133.
22. Skinner, C. H., Belfiore, P. J., Mace, H. W., Williams, S., & Johns, G. A. (1997). Altering response topography to increase response efficiency and learning rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 12, 54-64.
23. Skinner, C. H., Belfiore, P. B., & Watson, T. S. (1995-2002). Assessing the relative effects of interventions in students with mild disabilities: Assessing instructional time. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20, 345-356. (Reprinted from Assessment in Rehabilitation and Exceptionality, 2, 207-220, 1995).
24. Skinner, C. H., Cashwell, C. S., & Dunn, M. (1996). Independent and interdependent group contingencies: Smoothing the rough waters. Special Services in the Schools, 12, 61-78.
25. Skinner, C. H., Cashwell, T. H., & Skinner, A. L. (2000). Increasing tootling: The effects of a peer monitored interdependent group contingency on students' reports of peers' prosocial behaviors. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 97-110.
26. Skinner, C. H., Neddenriep, C. E., Robinson, S. L., Ervin, R., & Jones, K. (2002). Altering educational environments through positive peer reporting: Prevention and remediation of social problems associated with behavior disorders. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 191-202.
27. Skinner, C. H., Wallace, M. A., & Neddenriep, C. E. (2002). Academic remediation: Educational application of research on assignment preference and choice. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 51-65.
28. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning: Where behavioral and humanistic approaches to classroom management meet. The Elementary School Journal, 88, 29-37.
29. Stage, S. A., & Quiroz, D. R. (1997). A meta-analysis of interventions to decrease disruptive classroom behavior in public education settings. School Psychology Review, 26, 333-368.
30. Stoiber, K. C., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2000). Empirically supported interventions and school psychology: Rationale and methodological issues-Part I. School Psychology Quarterly, 15, 75-105.
31. Theodore, L. A., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., & Jenson, W. R. (2001). Randomization of group contingencies and reinforcers to reduce classroom disruptive behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 267-277.
32. Turco, T. L., & Elliott, S. N. (1990). Acceptability and effectiveness of group contingencies for improving spelling achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 28, 27-37.
33. Upson, L. M., & Skinner, C. H. (2002). A demonstration of class-wide data-based problem solving. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 21(4), 41-49.
34. VanHouten, R., & Thompson, C. (1976). The effects of explicit timing on math performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 227-230.
35. Van Houten, R., Hill, S., & Parsons, M. (1975). An analysis of a performance feedback system: The effects of timing and feedback, public posting, and praise upon academic performance and peer interaction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 581-591.