Group Contingency
Study: Rodriguez & Anderson (2013)
Summary
A group contingency is a behavior management strategy used to promote and reinforce positive behavior. In a classroom setting, the steps to establish a group contingency include defining behavioral expectations, dividing students into groups, setting contingencies for how students will earn points, setting goals, and selecting rewards. Once these components are established, a teacher monitors student behavior during a specified activity or time, awarding points to students meeting the predetermined contingency. Once the period is over, the teacher provides the reward to the individuals or groups who met the goal. Group contingencies can be independent, dependent, or interdependent. In an independent group contingency, the contingencies are in place for all involved and any individual who meets the goal can earn the reward. In a dependent group contingency, if a specified individual or small group meets the goal, the entire group gets the reward. In an interdependent group contingency, all members of a group or team must meet expectations collectively as a unit for everyone to be able to access the reward.
- Target Grades:
- K, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- Target Populations:
-
- Students with disabilities only
- Students with learning disabilities
- Students with emotional or behavioral disabilities
- Any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties
- Area(s) of Focus:
-
- Noncompliance
- High Levels of Disengagement
- Disruptive Behavior
- Where to Obtain:
- N/A
- Initial Cost:
- Free
- Replacement Cost:
- Contact vendor for pricing details.
-
Because the intervention is non-branded there is little to no cost for the program beyond the materials.
- Staff Qualified to Administer Include:
-
- Special Education Teacher
- General Education Teacher
- Reading Specialist
- Math Specialist
- EL Specialist
- Interventionist
- Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
- Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
- Paraprofessional
- Other:
- Training Requirements:
- Training not required
-
Despite the non-branded nature of the group contingency, there are program manuals available for purchase. Probably the most well know of these is the PAX Good Behavior Game manual which has undergone field testing. For the current purposes, the PAX specific research will not be reviewed given the emphasis here on non-branded research for the intervention framework. However, research on the non-branded Good Behavior Game intervention will be presented given that it is among the most commonly researched intervention programs irrespective of the PAX branding.
- Access to Technical Support:
- Not available
- Recommended Administration Formats Include:
-
- Individual students
- Small group of students
- BI ONLY: A classroom of students
- Minimum Number of Minutes Per Session:
- 15
- Minimum Number of Sessions Per Week:
- 5
- Minimum Number of Weeks:
- Detailed Implementation Manual or Instructions Available:
- No
- Is Technology Required?
- No technology is required.
Program Information
Descriptive Information
Please provide a description of program, including intended use:
A group contingency is a behavior management strategy used to promote and reinforce positive behavior. In a classroom setting, the steps to establish a group contingency include defining behavioral expectations, dividing students into groups, setting contingencies for how students will earn points, setting goals, and selecting rewards. Once these components are established, a teacher monitors student behavior during a specified activity or time, awarding points to students meeting the predetermined contingency. Once the period is over, the teacher provides the reward to the individuals or groups who met the goal. Group contingencies can be independent, dependent, or interdependent. In an independent group contingency, the contingencies are in place for all involved and any individual who meets the goal can earn the reward. In a dependent group contingency, if a specified individual or small group meets the goal, the entire group gets the reward. In an interdependent group contingency, all members of a group or team must meet expectations collectively as a unit for everyone to be able to access the reward.
The program is intended for use in the following age(s) and/or grade(s).
Age 3-5
Kindergarten
First grade
Second grade
Third grade
Fourth grade
Fifth grade
Sixth grade
Seventh grade
Eighth grade
Ninth grade
Tenth grade
Eleventh grade
Twelth grade
The program is intended for use with the following groups.
Students with learning disabilities
Students with intellectual disabilities
Students with emotional or behavioral disabilities
English language learners
Any student at risk for academic failure
Any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties
Other
If other, please describe:
ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: Please indicate the academic area of focus.
Early Literacy
Alphabet knowledge
Phonological awareness
Phonological awarenessEarly writing
Early decoding abilities
Other
If other, please describe:
Language
Grammar
Syntax
Listening comprehension
Other
If other, please describe:
Reading
Phonics/word study
Comprehension
Fluency
Vocabulary
Spelling
Other
If other, please describe:
Mathematics
Concepts and/or word problems
Whole number arithmetic
Comprehensive: Includes computation/procedures, problem solving, and mathematical concepts
Algebra
Fractions, decimals (rational number)
Geometry and measurement
Other
If other, please describe:
Writing
Spelling
Sentence construction
Planning and revising
Other
If other, please describe:
BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Please indicate the behavior area of focus.
Externalizing Behavior
Verbal Threats
Property Destruction
Noncompliance
High Levels of Disengagement
Disruptive Behavior
Social Behavior (e.g., Peer interactions, Adult interactions)
Other
If other, please describe:
Internalizing Behavior
Anxiety
Social Difficulties (e.g., withdrawal)
School Phobia
Other
If other, please describe:
Acquisition and cost information
Where to obtain:
- Address
- Phone Number
- Website
Initial cost for implementing program:
- Cost
- $0.00
- Unit of cost
Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:
- Cost
- Unit of cost
- Duration of license
Additional cost information:
Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the program. Also, provide information on what is included in the published program, as well as what is not included but required for implementation (e.g., computer and/or internet access)
Because the intervention is non-branded there is little to no cost for the program beyond the materials.Program Specifications
Setting for which the program is designed.
Small group of students
BI ONLY: A classroom of students
If group-delivered, how many students compose a small group?
2-25Program administration time
- Minimum number of minutes per session
- 15
- Minimum number of sessions per week
- 5
- Minimum number of weeks
- If intervention program is intended to occur over less frequently than 60 minutes a week for approximately 8 weeks, justify the level of intensity:
Does the program include highly specified teacher manuals or step by step instructions for implementation?- No
BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Is the program affiliated with a broad school- or class-wide management program?- No
-
If yes, please identify and describe the broader school- or class-wide management program: -
Does the program require technology? - No
-
If yes, what technology is required to implement your program? -
Computer or tablet
Internet connection
Other technology (please specify)
If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:
Training
- How many people are needed to implement the program ?
- 1
Is training for the instructor or interventionist required?- No
- If yes, is the necessary training free or at-cost?
- Free
Describe the time required for instructor or interventionist training:- Training not required
Describe the format and content of the instructor or interventionist training:
What types or professionals are qualified to administer your program?
General Education Teacher
Reading Specialist
Math Specialist
EL Specialist
Interventionist
Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
Paraprofessional
Other
If other, please describe:
- Does the program assume that the instructor or interventionist has expertise in a given area?
-
No
If yes, please describe:
Are training manuals and materials available?- Yes
-
Describe how the training manuals or materials were field-tested with the target population of instructors or interventionist and students: - Despite the non-branded nature of the group contingency, there are program manuals available for purchase. Probably the most well know of these is the PAX Good Behavior Game manual which has undergone field testing. For the current purposes, the PAX specific research will not be reviewed given the emphasis here on non-branded research for the intervention framework. However, research on the non-branded Good Behavior Game intervention will be presented given that it is among the most commonly researched intervention programs irrespective of the PAX branding.
Do you provide fidelity of implementation guidance such as a checklist for implementation in your manual?- No
-
Can practitioners obtain ongoing professional and technical support? -
No
If yes, please specify where/how practitioners can obtain support:
Summary of Evidence Base
- Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, all the research studies that have been conducted to date supporting the efficacy of your program, including studies currently or previously submitted to NCII for review. Please provide citations only (in APA format); do not include any descriptive information on these studies. NCII staff will also conduct a search to confirm that the list you provide is accurate.
-
Donaldson, J. M., Vollmer, T. R., Krous, T., Downs, S., & Berard, K. P. (2011). An evaluation of the good behavior game in kindergarten classrooms. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 44(3), 605-609.
Kleinman, K. E., & Saigh, P. A. (2011). The effects of the Good Behavior Game on the conduct of regular education New York City high school students. Behavior Modification, 35(1), 95-105
Kowalewicz, E. A., & Coffee, G. (2014). Mystery Motivator: A Tier 1 classroom behavioral intervention. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(2), 138.
Lambert, A. M., Tingstrom, D. H., Sterling, H. E., Dufrene, B. A., & Lynne, S. (2015). Effects of Tootling on Classwide Disruptive and Appropriate Behavior of Upper-Elementary Students. Behavior modification, 39(3), 413-430.
Ling, S., Hawkins, R. O., & Weber, D. (2011). Effects of a classwide interdependent group contingency designed to improve the behavior of an at-risk student. Journal of Behavioral Education, 20(2), 103-116.
Maggin, D. M., Fallon, L. M., Sanetti, L. M. H., & Ruberto, L. M. (2012). Training paraeducators to implement a group contingency protocol: Direct and collateral effects. Behavioral Disorders, 18-37.
Rodriguez, B. J., & Anderson, C. M. (2013). Integrating a social behavior intervention during small group academic instruction using a total group criterion intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1098300713492858.
Study Information
Study Citations
Rodriguez, B. J. & Anderson, C. M. (2013). Integrating a Social Behavior Intervention During Small Group Academic Instruction Using a Total Group Criterion Intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, ()
Participants
- Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:
- The students were selected based on their enrollment in early intervention reading groups. Baseline data indicated that the students were demonstrating high rates of off-task behaviors.
-
Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional/behavioral difficulties (BI): - The students in the small group reading instruction were identified as being at risk for reading disabilities though there is no indication that the students had emotional behavioral difficulties aside from the high rates of off-task behavior.
-
ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:- below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
- identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?
- %
-
BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:- emotional disability label,
- placed in an alternative school/classroom,
- non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
- designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?
- %
Provide a description of the demographic and other relevant characteristics of the case used in your study (e.g., student(s), classroom(s)).
Case (Name or number) | Age/Grade | Gender | Race / Ethnicity | Socioeconomic Status | Disability Status | ELL status | Other Relevant Descriptive Characteristics |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
test | test | test | test | test | test | test | test |
Design
- Please describe the study design:
- The research design was a multiple baseline across the five groups which provided the opportunity to determine whether the intervention effect could be reproduced across all five legs.
Clarify and provide a detailed description of the treatment in the submitted program/intervention:- The group contingency consisted of the teacher noting that students could earn smiley faces for displaying appropriate behavior; students could earn a reward if the number of smiley faces exceeded a randomly drawn number that was revealed toward the end of the class period; instructional assistants reviewed the expectations and role played these expectations if they were not met the previous day.
Clarify what procedures occurred during the control/baseline condition (third, competing conditions are not considered; if you have a third, competing condition [e.g., multi-element single subject design with a third comparison condition], in addition to your control condition, identify what the competing condition is [data from this competing condition will not be used]):- It appears as though the instructional tasks did not vary from baseline to intervention and that the implementation of the group contingency procedures were the only difference.
Please describe how replication of treatment effect was demonstrated (e.g., reversal or withdrawal of intervention, across participants, across settings)- The multiple baseline across the five groups provided a sufficient number of opportunities for the intervention effect to be replicated.
-
Please indicate whether (and how) the design contains at least three demonstrations of experimental control (e.g., ABAB design, multiple baseline across three or more participants). - There were a total of five opportunities for the intervention effect to be demonstrated.
If the study is a multiple baseline, is it concurrent or non-concurrent?- Concurrent
Fidelity of Implementation
- How was the program delivered?
-
Individually
Small Group
Classroom
If small group, answer the following:
- Average group size
- 5
- Minimum group size
- Maximum group size
What was the duration of the intervention (If duration differed across participants, settings, or behaviors, describe for each.)?
- Weeks
- 3.00
- Sessions per week
- 5.00
- Duration of sessions in minutes
- 30.00
- Weeks
- 3.50
- Sessions per week
- 5.00
- Duration of sessions in minutes
- 45.00
- Weeks
- Sessions per week
- Duration of sessions in minutes
- What were the background, experience, training, and ongoing support of the instructors or interventionists?
- The intervention was implemented by instructional assistants with no experience in behavior management or teaching. Their experience as instructional assistants ranged from 4 to 15 years.
Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained.- Fidelity data was reported and consisted of a checklist indicating the proportion of steps implemented.
What were the results on the fidelity-of-treatment implementation measure?- Fidelity was reported to average 83% across all intervention sessions and interventionists.
Was the fidelity measure also used in baseline or comparison conditions?- No
Measures and Results
Measures Broader :
Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:
-
Targeted measures
Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills, that the program was directly targeted to improve.- In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
- In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
-
Broader measures
Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.- In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
- In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be on-task behavior in another setting.
- Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates, which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.
Targeted Measure | Reverse Coded? | Evidence | Relevance |
---|---|---|---|
Targeted Measure 1 | Yes | A1 | A2 |
Broader Measure | Reverse Coded? | Evidence | Relevance |
---|---|---|---|
Broader Measure 1 | Yes | A1 | A2 |
Administrative Data Measure | Reverse Coded? | Relevance |
---|---|---|
Admin Measure 1 | Yes | A2 |
- If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:
Results
- Describe the method of analyses you used to determine whether the intervention condition improved relative to baseline phase (e.g., visual inspection, computation of change score, mean difference):
- Visual inspection was used to determine the overall effectiveness of the intervention for both on-task behaviors.
Please present results in terms of within and between phase patterns. Data on the following data characteristics must be included: level, trend, variability, immediacy of the effect, overlap, and consistency of data patterns across similar conditions. Submitting only means and standard deviations for phases is not sufficient. Data must be included for each outcome measure (targeted, broader, and administrative if applicable) that was described above.- The baseline data across all groups indicated that there were persistent issues with problem behavior in the readings groups. Across all five groups, the baseline data either demonstrate a relatively stable trend suggesting problem behavior or an increasing trend away from the therapeutic direction. The lone exception to this might be Natasha’s group whose data are moderately variable though the level does seem remain high enough to note a concern. The intervention phase data patterns generally demonstrate a reduction in the level of intervals with problem behavior. However, Candice’s group does appear to not support the inference that the intervention worked for this group. The other groups do seem to have dropped in overall level however.
Additional Research
- Is the program reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA?
- No
- Summary of WWC / E-ESSA Findings :
What Works Clearinghouse Review
This program was not reviewed by What Works Clearinghouse.
- How many additional research studies are potentially eligible for NCII review?
- 0
- Citations for Additional Research Studies :
Data Collection Practices
Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.