The Good Behavior Game in preschool classrooms: An evaluation of feedback

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a popular group contingency implemented to decrease disruptive behavior in classrooms. However, despite numerous replications of the GBG, there are few direct comparisons evaluating the effectiveness of specific components of the GBG. In the present study, we directly compared the type of feedback delivered during the GBG on the effectiveness of the GBG to reduce disruptive behavior in two preschool classrooms. Results showed that delivering vocal feedback (e.g., “raise your hand”) alone or in combination with visual feedback (i.e., hatch marks) was superior to no feedback or visual feedback alone during the GBG. These results suggest that different variations of the GBG are not equally effective and that a collection of effective procedural variations from which teachers can choose would be beneficial.     

Comparison of components of the Good Behavior Game in a preschool classroom

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is an effective intervention package for decreasing disruptive behavior in various populations and environments. There is, however, limited research evaluating the GBG with preschoolers. Furthermore, few studies have evaluated the effects of components of the GBG, and of those that have, most have done so only after exposure to the GBG package. We evaluated the effects (a) of the GBG on disruptive behavior of preschoolers during group instruction and (b) the major components of the GBG before and after implementation of the GBG package (c) at both the group and individual level. Results suggest that the GBG package was necessary for decreasing disruptive behavior. However, after exposure to the GBG, a response‐independent contingency was effective for maintaining low levels of disruptive behavior at both the group and individual level.     

Effects of the Good Behavior Game on student and teacher behavior in an alternative school

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom behavior management procedure that has been shown to be effective in reducing disruptive behavior across many settings and populations (Flower, McKenna, Bunuan, Muething, & Vega, 2014). We investigated the effects of the GBG on student and teacher behavior in two classrooms containing fourth‐ to eighth‐grade students in an alternative school for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Results indicated the GBG reduced disruption and increased the teacher's use of praise relative to reprimands. Social validity measures, collected from both teachers and students, indicated strong approval of the GBG.     

Using the Good Behavior Game with High School Special Education Students: Comparing Student- and Teacher-Selected Reinforcers

The authors investigated the implementation of the Good Behavior Game (GBG) on disruptive behaviors of high school special education students. Additionally, the study compared the effect of student-selected rewards versus teacher-selected rewards. A multielement withdrawal (A/[B?+?C]/A/[B?+?C]) design was used in the classroom to monitor behavior and compare the reward topography. Results suggested that the GBG decreased the frequency of disruptive behavior in both teams; however, there were no notable differences across reward type for either team. Effect sizes were reported using nonoverlap of all pairs. Nonoverlap of all pairs scores indicated moderate-to-large effects for the GBG, but small effects for reward topographies. Limitations and future directions are also discussed.     

An evaluation of interdependent and independent group contingencies during the good behavior game

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) uses an interdependent group contingency to improve classroom behavior. Despite the wealth of research on the effectiveness of the GBG, some teachers may have concerns about their students’ abilities to work in teams, particularly if they have a history of poor social skills. We used an alternating treatments design to compare the relative effectiveness of the GBG with interdependent and independent group contingencies in a classroom for children with emotional and behavioral disorders. Our results showed that both versions of the GBG reduced verbal disruptions, inappropriate sitting, and off‐task behaviors for all children. However, the majority of children preferred the interdependent arrangement. We discuss how these results may promote more widespread use of the GBG with children with substantial behavioral challenges.     

Responding to rule violations or rule following: A comparison of two versions of the Good Behavior Game with kindergarten students

The purpose of this study was to examine the differential effects of 2 versions of the Good Behavior Game (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969), allocating teacher attention to rule violations (GBG-response cost) and to rule following (GBG-reinforcement), on student and teacher behavior. The participants were 6 kindergarten students who were nominated as the 3 most disruptive students in each classroom. The study was conducted using single-case A/B/A/C/B/C reversal design with each teacher randomly assigned to either GBG-response cost or GBG-reinforcement condition for implementation in the first B phase. Results indicated that both versions were effective at reducing rule violations and that GBG-reinforcement consistently resulted in either comparable or lower levels of rule violations across classrooms and students. In addition, GBG-reinforcement was preferred by the teachers as a better fit to their classrooms. The implications of the findings to teachers and school psychologists in classroom settings are discussed.     

Reducing disruptive behavior in an urban school cafeteria: An extension of the Good Behavior Game

Non-classroom settings are often the most violence-prone areas within a school. This study investigated the impact of an interdependent group contingency on the disruptive behaviors of students in grades K-6 in an urban school cafeteria. Nine female noontime aides and National School and Community Corps staff members implemented the Lunchroom Behavior Game (LBG), a modification of the Good Behavior Game (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969), within a multiple-baseline design across three lunch periods. Results showed a decrease in the level of disruptive behaviors following the implementation of the LBG in each lunch period and a decreasing trend for two of the three lunch periods. Discussion focuses on the use of the LBG in preventing antisocial behavior and role expansion for school psychologists interested in promoting school-based prevention strategies.     

Feasibility of and teacher preference for student‐led implementation of the good behavior game in early elementary classrooms

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classwide group contingency shown to reduce disruptive student behavior. We examined the feasibility of training young students to lead the GBG in one first‐grade and three kindergarten classes. We also examined teacher preference for teacher‐led GBG, student‐led GBG, or no GBG using a concurrent chains procedure. We successfully trained students in all classes to lead the GBG, and the GBG reduced disruptive behavior regardless of who implemented it. Preference for who implemented the game varied across teachers. Results of this study suggest that students as young as kindergarten age can be trained to implement the GBG and that teacher preference should be taken into account when determining how classwide interventions are to be implemented.     

An evaluation of the good behavior game in kindergarten classrooms

The good behavior game (GBG) is a classwide group contingency that involves dividing the class into two teams, creating simple rules, and arranging contingencies for breaking or following those rules. Five kindergarten teachers and classrooms participated in this evaluation of the GBG. Disruptive behavior markedly decreased in all five classrooms as a result of the intervention. This study extends the GBG literature by systematically replicating the effects of the GBG with the youngest group of students to date.     

Stimulus presentation versus stimulus removal in the Good Behavior Game

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is an effective intervention to reduce disruptive behavior. The GBG typically involves immediate stimulus presentation (e.g.., delivery of a token) following disruptions; however, experimenters have also removed tokens contingent upon disruptions. In the present study, we compared the effects of the GBG-stimulus presentation (P) and GBG-stimulus removal (R) on levels of disruptions in a 2nd-grade general education classroom. In addition, we measured student prompts, teacher praise and correctives, and student and teacher preference. The GBG-P and GBG-R versions of the game were similarly effective in reducing disruptions. However, the teacher chose to implement the GBG-R and the majority of students reported a preference for the GBG-R.     

Education for all: The Good Inclusion Game

The term “education for all” in the context of inclusive schooling describes the aim that children with identified special/additional needs are fully included in education together with their typically developing peers. However, this is easier said than done as there are few easy‐to‐use methods that teachers can use while at the same time teaching the approbate curriculum to children with a full range of different abilities. The Good Inclusion Game (GIG) is a group contingency‐based tool to create inclusive classrooms that utilizes principles of the applied branch of the science of behavior analysis (applied behavior analysis) and can be used across settings and academic subjects. The GIG was evaluated across nine classrooms including 93 boys and girls aged between 9 and 15 years of age, including 20 children with identified special educational needs. Findings show that the GIG reliably led to a significant increase of inclusive curriculum‐focused activities with the collateral effect of decreasing disruptive behaviors for all children. Findings are discussed in the context of inclusive schooling and evidence‐based education.     

The Positive Plus Program: Affirmative classroom management to improve student behavior

This study describes the Positive Plus Program, a multicomponent intervention combining behavior‐specific praise with an interdependent group contingency and teacher feedback. An elementary school teacher wanting to improve her classroom management skills implemented the Positive Plus Program. Four second‐grade students participated in the study, and each of the students emitted disruptive behavior in class previously. This study, using an ABAB design, indicated that when the teacher reliably delivered high levels of behavior‐specific praise and awarded points, disruptive behavior was less likely. Student outcomes showed increased academic engagement and decreased off‐task motor and verbal behavior from pre‐ to post‐intervention. Teacher ratings indicated high levels of social validity. In light of these findings, implications for future research and implementation are discussed.     

THE EFFECTS OF A GOOD BEHAVIOR GAME ON THE DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR OF SUDANESE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

An endemic version of the Good Behavior Game was applied in a rural Sudanese second-grade classroom. Official letters of commendation, extra time for recess, victory tags, and a winner's chart were used as backup reinforcers. The class was divided into two teams, and the teacher indicated she would place a check on the board after every rule violation. The students were also told that the team with the fewest marks would win the game and receive the aforementioned prizes. After an initial adaptation period, the rate of disruption was charted across four treatment phases: viz., baseline I, introduction of the game, baseline II, and reintroduction of the game. It was observed that the game phases were associated with marked decreases in the rate of seat leaving, talking without permission, and aggression. The teacher, principal, parents, and students were consequently individually interviewed, and their comments spoke strongly for the social validity of the game.     

The Good Behavior Game

The Good Behavior Game was implemented with four children attending a church-affiliated preschool in efforts to increase concurrent compliance and cooperation. Sessions were conducted individually with each child pair while in free play. The children were given various instructions by “Buddy Bear” (a puppet). Children were praised individually for compliant behavior while noncompliant and inappropriate behaviors were ignored. Further instances in which children complies (i.e., cooperation) were rewarded with tokens make of felt, shaped like happy faced or dinosaurs and placed on a large felt board. If the children earned their criterion levels of tokens, they received animal snacks. Improvements in compliance were noted, with generalization occurring across therapists but not settings. Factors influencing the results and implications of the findings are discussed.     

The Caterpillar Game: A SW-PBIS Aligned Classroom Management System

The Caterpillar Game is a classroom management system that is aligned with School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports standards. A single-case, multiple-baseline design was used to evaluate the effects of the Caterpillar Game on disruptive student behavior and teacher praise. Three classrooms were included in the study (preschool, Kindergarten, and second grade). When the Caterpillar Game was implemented, student disruptive behavior decreased and teacher behavior-specific praise increased across all 3 classrooms. Disruptive behavior and teacher praise remained similar to intervention 2–4 weeks later, and teacher satisfaction with the Caterpillar Game was high. This study adds further support for the use of the Caterpillar Game as a classroom management tool.     

Using the Step it UP! Game to increase physical activity during physical-education classes

The Step it UP! Game is an interdependent group reinforcement contingency based on the Good Behavior Game. We evaluated the effects of the Step it UP! Game on the number of steps taken by 3rd-grade students during physical-education (PE) classes at a local public elementary school. We divided the class into 2 teams and awarded a “Step it UP! Champ” badge to the members of the team with the highest mean step totals at the end of each game. We used a reversal design to compare the mean number of steps taken while playing the game and during regular PE classes. Overall, participants took more steps while playing the game than they did during class periods without the game. When given the opportunity to choose playing the Step it UP! Game or having regular PE class during a follow-up session, 16 of 18 participants voted to play the game.     

Gamification: The Intersection between Behavior Analysis and Game Design Technologies

Deterding et al. (Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, USA 15: 9–15, 2011) report a recent rise in popularity of video game inspired software designed to address issues in a variety of areas, including health, energy conservation, education, and business. These applications have been based on the concept of gamification, which involves a process by which nongame activities are designed to be more like a game. We provide examples of how gamification has been used to increase health-related behavior, energy consumption, academic performance, and other socially-significant behavior. We argue that behavior analytic research and practice stands to benefit from incorporating successful elements of game design. Lastly, we provide suggestions for behavior analysts regarding applied and basic research related to gamification.     

行为博弈与社会交换

行为博弈与社会交换看似两个毫无关联的现象和研究领域,却有着内在的、实质性的联系。行为博弈也是一种社会交换或以社会交换为机制,社会交换则表现为一种行为博弈或有着内在的博弈性质。行为博弈与社会交换互为表里、互为机制、水乳交融,行为博弈是社会交换的行为博弈,社会交换是行为博弈的社会交换。以行为博弈的眼光来看待社会交换或以社会交换的意识来研究行为博弈,跨领域的研究洞视,各自互为对方启动了一方别开生面的研究天地,为枯燥乏味的传统博弈研究和死水微澜的社会交换领域凭添了一丝新鲜气息。     

A COMPARISON OF TWO INTERVENTION ROLES: PEER MONITOR AND POINT EARNER

Two fifth-grade students' high levels of off-task and disruptive behavior decreased rapidly during an intervention in which they were appointed peer monitors or point earners. The children worked in dyads in which one child served as a peer monitor and the other child earned points from his or her monitor for good behavior. Points were accumulated as part of a group contingency. We introduced the two appointments in an independent math period and alternated the appointments across days. The peer monitor and point earner roles, when alternated on an every-other-day basis, were equally effective in reducing the students' inappropriate behavior. Furthermore, their behavior during intervention fell well within the range of inappropriate behavior levels exhibited by classmates. The speed with which both students completed their math problems increased during both appointments. The accuracy of their academic work, however, varied; one student improved slightly and the other student decreased slightly in accuracy.     

RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF TEACHER ATTENTION AND THE “GOOD BEHAVIOR GAME” IN MODIFYING DISRUPTIVE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR1

A variety of behavioral procedures have been employed in recent years to modify disruptive classroom behavior. Such methods have been developed with the belief that curtailing disruptive behavior would strengthen positive classroom performance. In this study, two procedures, the good behavior game and the teacher-attention method, were compared to determine short-run effectiveness. Four teachers (two fourth-grade and two fifth-grade) implemented both methods in their classrooms over a five-week period. Presentation of methods was alternated in a counterbalanced design to control for order effects. Each of the four classrooms consisted of 25 students. A time-sampling procedure was used to record the presence or absence of disruptive behavior within 15-second intervals. Disruptive behavior was defined as any talking-out or out-of-seat behavior without permission. The results indicated that both procedures were effective in modifying disruptive classroom behavior, but that the good behavior game reduced disruptive behavior significantly better than the teacher-attention method. In addition, all teachers preferred the game to the teacher-attention procedure. This reaction seemed related to the effort involved in initiating the two activities. The good behavior game required less effort on the teacher's part. However, use of the game alone raises certain ethical considerations. One such issue involves abuse of peer pressure. Also, there is a possibility that negative rules may tend to promote resentment. Positively stated rules would ameliorate that problem. Another relates to the possibility that some teachers might be carried away by the ease of the game's implementation to the extent that behavior control becomes the primary objective in the classroom. As a result, one might consider use of the game to maximize short-term change, but then phase out this procedure in favor of another method (e.g., teacher attention) for long-run effects.