In-vivo rating of treatment acceptability by children: Effects of probability instruction on student's spelling performance under group contingency conditions
- 48 Downloads
In prior studies, Shapiro and Goldberg (1986, 1990) failed to find a relationship between in-vivo ratings by children of treatment acceptability and treatment effectiveness. These studies involved the use of interdependent and dependent group contingencies designed to improve the spelling performance of sixth grade students. To investigate whether the failure to link treatment acceptability and effectiveness may have been due to the subjects' inability to understand the differences in treatment conditions, this study utilized a pre-intervention training package to enhance salient differences between two types of group contingencies. Results of this study showed that both group contingencies were successful at improving the spelling performance of students, particularly the poorer spellers. Prior to treatment, students preferred the interdependent condition, with the higher-achieving students expressing the strongest preference. After implementation of the training package, both conditions were now rated as equally acceptable. Pre- and post-test acceptability ratings of each condition tended to be significantly correlated but correlations between acceptability ratings and treatment effectiveness were negligible at all points in the study. Limitations of the present study and suggestions for further research are discussed.
Key wordstreatment acceptability treatment effectiveness spelling performance children
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Barlow, D. H., & Hayes, S. C. (1979). Alternating treatment design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject.Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 12, 199–210.Google Scholar
- McLaughlin, T. F. (1982). A comparison of individual and group contingencies on spelling performance with special education students.Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 4, 1–10.Google Scholar
- McReynolds, W. T., Grange, J. J., & Speltz, M. L. (1981). Effects of multiple individual and group operant contingencies on student performance.Education and Treatment of Children, 4, 227–241.Google Scholar
- Reimers, T. M., & Wacker, D. P. (1988). Parents ratings of the acceptability of behavioral treatment recommendations made in an outpatient clinic: A preliminary analysis of the influence of treatment effectiveness.Behavioral Disorders, 14, 7–15.Google Scholar
- Reimers, T. M., Wacker, D. P., Cooper, L. J., & DeRaad, A. O. (1992). Acceptability of behavioral treatments for children: Analog and naturalistic evaluations by parents.School Psychology Review, 21, 627–642.Google Scholar
- Reimers, T. M., Wacker, D. P., & Keoppl, G. (1987). Acceptability of behavioral interventions: A review of the literature.School Psychology Review, 16, 212–227.Google Scholar
- Shapiro, E. S., & Goldberg, R. (1986). A comparison of group contingencies in increasing spelling performance among sixth grade students.School Psychology Review, 15, 546–557.Google Scholar
- Singh, N. N., & Katz, R. C. (1985). On the modification of acceptability ratings for alternative child treatments.Behavioral Modification, 9, 375–386.Google Scholar
- Witt, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.),Advances in School Psychology, (Vol. 4, pp. 251–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar