Implementation of the Good Behavior Game in Classrooms for Children with Delinquent Behavior
Joslyn, P.R., Vollmer, Timothy R., & Hernández, V. (2014). Acta de Investigación Psicológica, 4(3) 1673-1682. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2007-4719(14)70973-1.
-
examining10Students, grades2-3
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2023
- Single Study Review (findings for Good Behavior Game)
- Single Case Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a SCD design where the independent variable is manipulated by the researcher, each outcome is measured systematically over time by multiple assessors with a sufficient number of assessment points and inter-assessor agreement, but there are an insufficient number of phases and/or assessments per phase to meet without reservations.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
To view more detailed information about the study findings from this review, please download findings data here.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 20%
Male: 80% -
Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Florida
-
Race Black 72% Two or more races 4% White 24% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in one public alternative elementary school in Florida offering services for children who engage in severe problem behavior.
Study sample
This review focuses on the reversal-withdrawal single case design for one classroom, "Classroom 1." Six to 10 students were in the class throughout the study, though the class size fluctuated throughout sessions due to student absences and new students entering and exiting the study school. All students had severe behavioral problems and were in grades 2 or 3. The study did not provide additional student characteristics separately for this classroom, but across all three classrooms that participated in the study, 80% of students were male, 72% were Black, 24% were White, and 4% were described as biracial.
Intervention Group
The Good Behavior Game is a classroom management strategy that promotes students collaborating together to create a positive learning environment. Students are placed into teams and are rewarded for demonstrating appropriate behaviors and not violating classroom rules. In this study, the teacher divided the class into two groups listed on a board at the front of the room, along with Good Behavior Game rules. Before the game started, the researcher reminded the students of the rules, which included remaining seated, not talking without permission, and refraining from touching others. When a student broke a rule, the researcher reminded the class of the rule and added a tally mark next to the team’s name. At the end of the session, the team with fewer tally marks would win the game; both teams could win if they both met a criterion that was at least an 80% reduction in the average frequency of disruptive behavior observed during baseline sessions. Winning teams earned a choice of prizes such as snacks, stickers, pencils, or free time. Sessions took place three to five times a week, for 30 to 60 minutes, during silent work time or group instruction led by the teacher.
Comparison Group
There is no comparison group in single case designs. In the baseline and withdrawal phases of the single case design, the teacher used standard class rules that required students to remain seated, stay quiet unless addressed, and not make physical contact with other students. Teachers sporadically enforced class rules with verbal statements. Sessions took place 3 to 5 times a week, for 30 to 60 minutes, during silent work time or group instruction led by the teacher.
Support for implementation
The researcher implemented Good Behavior Game in the classroom, instead of the teacher. The teacher continued classroom instruction as usual.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).