ROLE REVERSALS: AN ANALYSIS OF THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS ACHIEVED WITH DISRUPTIVE BOYS DURING THEIR APPOINTMENTS AS PEER MONITORS

Three 7-year-old boys with histories of negative interactions were appointed to monitor individual classmates during daily noon recess. As monitors, the boys awarded points to their classmates for playing appropriately and, on rare occasions, withdrew a point for negative interactions. The three boys immediately decreased their own rates of negative interactions during the sessions in which they were appointed as monitors. Two of the boys concomitantly increased their rates of positive interactions. Their reductions in negative interactions were not maintained during reversals and did not clearly generalize to the morning or afternoon recess periods. Subsequent appointment of the boys as peer monitors during the morning recess produced similar improvements in their behavior. Results suggest that appointment to the role of peer monitor may itself function as an intervention.     

Incongruous stimulus pairing and conditional discrimination training: effects on relational responding

In Experiment 1, 5 subjects were exposed to a stimulus-pairing procedure in which two nonsense syllables, identified by a letter-number code as A1 and C2, each predicted the onset of a sexual film clip, and the nonsense syllables A2 and C1 each predicted the onset of a nonsexual film clip. Subjects were then exposed to a matching-to-sample test in which the nonsense syllables A1 and A2 were presented as sample stimuli and C1 and C2 were presented as comparison stimuli and vice versa (i.e., C stimuli as samples and A stimuli as comparisons). All subjects matched A1 with C2 and A2 with C1. Subjects were then trained on the conditional discriminations A1-B1, A2-B2, B1-C1, B2-C2, after which the matching-to-sample test was again administered. All subjects continued to match A1 with C2 and A2 with C1 in accordance with the earlier stimulus-pairing contingencies. An additional 5 subjects were exposed first to conditional discrimination training and testing before being exposed to the incongruous stimulus pairing and matching-to-sample testing. Under these conditions, 4 of the 5 subjects always matched A1 with C1 and A2 with C2. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, except that a matching-to-sample test was not administered following the initial training procedure. Under these conditions, matching-to-sample test performances were controlled by the contingencies that had immediately preceded the test. Experiment 3 indicated that initial matching-to-sample test performances were unlikely to change, even after repeated exposure to incongruous training and testing. Experiment 4 demonstrated that pretraining with unrelated stimulus sets increased the sensitivity of matching-to-sample test performances to incongruous contingencies when they were similar in format to those arranged during pretraining. These data may have implications for a behavior-analytic interpretation of attitude formation and change.     

Group versus individual reinforcement contingencies within the context of group study conditions

We investigated the effects of two teaching variables on students' Spanish vocabulary quiz performance: (a) group study and (b) individual versus group contingencies. In Experiment 1, we compared students' quiz scores under conditions in which students either studied independently and received no programmed reinforcement or studied in groups and received individual rewards for high scores. The results showed that, on average, the group-study individual-reward condition produced superior quiz scores. In Experiment 2, we compared individual (i.e., the superior condition in Experiment 1) and group contingencies within the context of the group study condition. On average across the class, group contingencies produced performance superior to individual contingencies. In both studies, however, benefits for the classes as a whole were mitigated by effects on individual students. These results extend the literature on the effects of group-based instructional activities and reinforcement contingencies. Educators who choose such procedures may encounter conflicting findings depending on whether they examine results at the group or individual level.     

SETTING GENERALITY AND STIMULUS CONTROL IN AUTISTIC CHILDREN1

This study was designed to assess the transfer of treatment gains of autistic children across settings. In the first phase, each of 10 autistic children learned a new behavior in a treatment room and transfer to a novel extra-therapy setting was assessed. Four of the 10 children showed no transfer to the novel setting. Therefore, in the second phase, each child who failed to transfer participated in an analysis of stimulus control in order to determine the variables influencing the deficit in transfer. Each of the four children who did not transfer were selectively responding to an incidental stimulus during the original training in the treatment room. Utilizing a reversal design, each of the four children responded correctly in the extra-therapy setting when the stimulus that was functional during training was identified and introduced into the extra-therapy setting. The extreme selective responding and the resulting bizarre stimulus control found are discussed in relation to the issue of setting generality of treatment gains.     

REPLICATION OF THE ACHIEVEMENT PLACE MODEL IN CALIFORNIA1

Attempting to replicate procedures from Achievement Place, token reinforcement procedures were used to modify savings, conversational interruptions, and table-setting of delinquent boys residing in a home-style, community based, treatment setting. The tokens (points) were redeemable for various privileges and could be earned for specified appropriate behaviors and lost for specified inappropriate behaviors. Contingent point fines reduced the frequency of interruptions. Point rewards improved table-setting, but even large point rewards did not substantially increase savings. Baseline data indicated that lateness to dinner was not a problem, as it was in Achievement Place. Withdrawal of contingent points and back-up rewards did not disrupt the clean-up behavior of two boys.     

Reinforcement contingencies and signal detection.

Pigeons were trained to discriminate temporal stimuli in a discrete-trial signal-detection procedure. Pecks to one side key were reinforced intermittently after exposure to one duration, and pecks to the other side key were reinforced intermittently after exposure to a different duration. In Experiment I, the allocation of reinforcers was varied systematically for correct responses and for errors, using a procedure that controlled the obtained numbers of reinforcers. When reinforcers were allocated symmetrically, the level of discrimination decreased as the proportion of reinforcers for errors increased. When reinforcers were allocated asymmetrically, the decrease in discrimination was less systematic. Bias toward one or the other side key roughly matched the ratio of reinforcers obtained by pecks at those keys, independent of the level of discrimination. In Experiment II, the overall rate of reinforcement for correct responses was varied both within and between experimental conditions. The level of discrimination was positively related to the overall rate of reinforcement. The discrimination data of both experiments were interpreted in relation to the contingencies of reinforcement and nonreinforcement, characterized by the average difference in reinforcement probability for correct responses and errors.     

Self-selection of standards by children: The relative effectiveness of pupil-selected and teacher-selected standards of performance

This study examines the effects of contingent reinforcement under conditions of pupil-selected and teacher-selected performance standards upon pupils' academic response rates. The academic response rate was measured by the number of correct responses emitted per session. Thirty pupils (15 second-graders and 15 third-graders) were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups, based on matched triplets. One group worked under pupil-selected standards; the second group worked under standards selected by the experimenter with each pupil yoked to a member of the pupil-selected standards groups. Both groups participated in the calculation of their daily earnings. The third group served as a no-contingency control group. Baseline academic response rates on writing and math tasks were determined. During the experimental sessions reinforcement was provided in the form of points which were later traded for tangible rewards. The pupil-selected standards group showed a significantly greater number of correct responses in the writing and math tasks than the externally selected standards group.     

THE EFFECTS OF PEER TUTORING WITH GROUP CONTINGENCIES ON THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF COLLEGE STUDENTS1

Improving the academic performance of college students who do not demonstrate mastery of course material is a major concern in traditional and nontraditional systems of instruction, where students may drop out, take incompletes, or continue to perform at low levels. The present study examined within-course peer tutoring as a potential solution. Twenty-one undergraduate students enrolled in a three-credit introductory course in Educational Psychology served as subjects. The class met one and a half hours each weekday for five weeks. Five students withdrew from the course and one student was placed on independent study before assignments to experimental conditions were made. The primary source materials were portions of Skinner's Technology of Teaching, plus two additional articles. The material was divided into nine equal units, each unit accompanied by study objectives. Nine one-hour essay exams were administered, one every other class day. Two review days were scheduled before a cumulative final was administered. Students could score a total of 20 points on each exam and the final. If a student scored 90% or better on an exam a score of 10 was earned. If a student scored 80% to 90%, a score of eight was awarded, and so on. A total score of 90 of 100 possible points at semester's end earned a student an “A”, 80 a “B”, and so on. The study consisted of three phases: Baseline I, Intervention, and Baseline II. Baseline I: after an initial introductory class, three lectures were presented—one for each unit. Each lecture day was followed by an exam day. Intervention: following the third exam, students were rank ordered and divided into high, medium, and low levels of performance on the basis of their raw scores on the previous three exams, and assigned to a paired or independent group. This assignment procedure resulted in three high-low pairs, three middle-middle pairs, two high-middle pairs, three low-independent students, and two middle-independent students. If, and only if, both students in a pair met a 90% mastery criterion on an exam did each receive five bonus points for the exam(s) reaching the criterion. The bonus points were used to offset points lost on the cumulative final. If both students in a pair met the 90% mastery criterion for units 4, 5, and 6, the pair received an automatic score of 10 on the cumulative final and had the two review days off. Other students who studied independently received identical payoffs if they met the same mastery criterion. The previous lecture time was used for inclass study. Baseline II: Baseline I procedures were reinstituted for the final three units. The test scores are the independent and paired students are shown in Figure 1. Compared to baseline, performance during peer tutoring improved for every student paired with a high partner, and not for those students who studied independently. Between-group comparisons suggest that the effective variables were related to the tutoring or its combination with the group contingency. However, the opportunity for intergroup discussion about treatment procedures and unequal assignment of subjects to the tutored and independent groups make conclusions about the between-group portion of the experiment tentative. Half to two-thirds of the students in each performance category viewed the peer-tutoring procedure favorably, and two-thirds or more reported that the procedure was effective in improving academic performance. Proportionately fewer students assigned to independent study found that procedure effective or viewed it favorably. It appears that pairing students with others who do better on tests and rewarding them for their combined performance results in considerable improvement in the performance of lower-level students.     

A comparison of pacing contingencies in classes using a personalized system of instruction

This study compared the effects of multiple versus single deadline contingencies on distribution of unit-mastery test taking by students in four university classes taught using the personalized system of instruction. Rate of test taking was most uniform when multiple deadlines were imposed throughout the course. When deadlines were infrequent, a scalloped pattern of test taking developed.     

Correlation between self-reported rigidity and rule-governed insensitivity to operant contingencies

Adults were selected on the basis of their scores on the Scale for Personality Rigidity (Rehfisch, 1958a). Their scores served as a measure of hypothesized rule governance in the natural environment. Experiment 1 studied the effects of accurate versus minimal instructions and high versus low rigidity on performance on a multiple differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate (DRL) 4-s fixed-ratio (FR) 18 schedule. When the schedule was switched to extinction, accurate instructions and high rigidity were associated with greater perseveration in the response pattern subjects developed during the reinforcement phase. In Experiment 2, the effects of rigidity and of accurate versus inaccurate instructions were studied. Initially, all subjects received accurate instructions about an FR schedule. The schedule was then switched to DRL, but only half of the subjects received instructions about the DRL contingency, and the other half received FR instructions as before. Accurate instructions minimized individual differences because both high and low scorers on the rigidity scale earned points in DRL. However, when inaccurate instructions were provided, all high-rigidity subjects followed them although they did not earn points on the schedule, whereas most low-rigidity subjects abandoned them and responded appropriately to DRL. The experiments demonstrate a correlation between performances observed in the human operant laboratory and a paper-and-pencil test of rigidity that purportedly reflects important response styles that differentiate individuals in the natural environment. Implications for applied research and intervention are discussed.