Noncontingent Reinforcement
Study: Tomlin & Reed (2012)

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:

Classroom teachers were asked to identify two students in their class who exhibited disruptive challenging behavior and whose disruptive behaviors may be maintained by positive social reinforcement in the form of attention.

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional/behavioral difficulties (BI):

Participant 1 (NJO) had been identified as having emotional and/or behavioral disorder by an educational psychologist. Participant 2 (NJE) had been identified as having emotional and/or behavioral disorder by an educational psychologist and had been diagnosed with cerebral palsy by a pediatrician. Both Participants 1 and 2 had statements of special education needs from their local education authority as having below average intellectual functioning with a low reading ability. Participant 3 (JR) was diagnosed with Down syndrome, and Participant 4 (JS) was diagnosed on the autism spectrum by a pediatrician. Participants 3 and 4 had been formally assessed by an educational psychologist and had statements of special education needs from their local education authority as having below average intellectual functioning.Topographies of disruptive behavior included verbal disruptions for Participants 1, 2, and 4; and disrupting a lesson by playing, grabbing, or touching items during a lesson without being asked to do so, or refusing to hand back an object for more than 7 s on request of the teacher for Participant 3.

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?

%

Please describe the study design:

Multiple baseline across four participants A=baseline B=fixed time schedule (NCR) B’=schedule thinning

Clarify and provide a detailed description of the treatment in the submitted program/intervention:

For the two secondary students (NJO and NJE), intervention sessions were conducted in the context of independent academic activities including Mathematics, English, Science, Religious education, Pastoral studies, and Geography. For the two younger students (JR and JS), intervention sessions were conducted during less formally structured lessons including both individual tasks and group activities (lessons included number, color, shape, letter activities, reading, computer work, science, and fine or gross motor tasks). During the initial fixed time (FT) schedule of reinforcement (NCR), all participants’ targeted disruptive behavior was ignored, and either the teacher or learning support assistant (LSA) provided verbal praise and pats on the arm according to the FT schedule in effect. The participants’ initial FT schedules of reinforcement were determined by mean latency to the first occurrence of problem behavior encountered during the baseline condition. Initial FT schedules were 63 s for NJO, 41 s for NJE, 26 s for JR, and 58 s for JS. The procedure used to administer the FT schedule was assisted by the use of a preset vibrating timer. If the student engaged in the targeted disruptive behavior immediately prior to the FT schedule of reinforcement, the teacher/LSA would delay the delivery of attention for 10 s. If problem behavior occurred at any other time, it was ignored by the teacher/LSA. *The reinforcer (adult attention) was selected based on results of a functional assessment interview.

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]):

During the baseline condition, the special education classroom environment was not manipulated. This suggests that problem behavior was not put on extinction during baseline, but was put on extinction during intervention. (No additional information is provided.)

Please describe how replication of treatment effect was demonstrated (e.g., reversal or withdrawal of intervention, across participants, across settings)

Replications of treatment effect were demonstrated across participants (multiple baseline across four participants).

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).

Four demonstrations of experimental control via multiple baseline design across four participants

If the study is a multiple baseline, is it concurrent or non-concurrent?

Concurrent

How was the program delivered?

Individually
Small Group
Classroom

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.

If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:

No additional measures were reported.