Home-Based Treatment of Disruptive Junior High School Students: An Analysis of the Differential Effects of Positive and Negative Consequences

Abstract

The effects of two types of home-based treatments designed to reduce the school problems of disruptive junior high school students were investigated. Ten disruptive students were randomly assigned to the two treatments: One program instructed parents to use only positive consequences in response to daily reports brought home from school and the other had parents use a combination of positive and negative consequences. The students whose parents delivered both positive and negative consequences demonstrated a significant decrease from pre- to posttreatment in their rate of referrals to the office for conduct problems. This group also showed a significant pre- to posttreatment decrease in their depression scores on the Children's Depression Inventory. The students whose parents delivered only positive consequences showed no significant pre- to posttreatment changes on these measures. These results are discussed in terms of the importance of “prudent” (calm, concrete, and consistent) negative consequences for the home-based treatment of students with behavior problems.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acker

M. M.

, & O'Leary

S. G.

(1987). Effects of reprimands and praise on appropriate behavior in the classroom. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15, 549–557.

Atkeson

B. M.

, & Forehand

(1979). Home-based reinforcement programs designed to modify classroom behavior: A review and methodological evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 1298–1308.

Ayllon

, Garber

, & Pisor

(1975). The elimination of discipline problems through a combined school-home motivational system. Behavior Therapy, 6, 616–626.

Bailey

J. S.

, Wolf

M. M.

, & Phillips

E. L.

(1970). Home-based reinforcement and the modification of predelinquents' classroom behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 223–233.

Barth

(1979). Home-based reinforcement of school behavior: A review and analysis. Review of Educational Research, 49, 436–458.

Broughton

S. F.

, Barton

E. S.

, & Owen

P. R.

(1981). Home-based contingency systems for school problems. School Psychology Review, 10, 26–36.

Coopersmith

(1981). SEI: Self-esteem inventories. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Karraker

R. J.

(1972). Increasing academic performance through home-managed contingency programs. Journal of School Psychology, 10, 173–179.

Kovacs

(1983). The children's depression inventory: A self-rated depression scale for schoolaged youngsters. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine.

10.

McKenzie

, Clark

, Wolf

, Kothera

, & Benson

(1968). Behavior modification of children with learning disabilities using grades as tokens and allowances as back-up reinforcers. Exceptional Children, 43, 745–752.

11.

Pfiffner

L. J.

, & O'Leary

S. G.

(1987). The efficacy of all-positive management as a function of the prior use of negative consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 265–271.

12.

Rosén

L. A.

, O'Leary

S. G.

, Joyce

S. A.

, Conway

, & Pfiffner

L. J.

(1984). The importance of prudent negative consequences for maintaining the appropriate behavior of hyperactive students. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 12, 581–604.

13.

Schumaker

J. B.

, Hovell

M. F.

, & Sherman

J. A.

(1977). An analysis of daily report cards and parent-managed privileges in the improvement of adolescents' classroom performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 449–464.

14.

Todd

D. D.

, Scott

R. B.

, Bostow

D. E.

, & Alexander

S. B.

(1976). Modification of the excessive inappropriate classroom behavior of two elementary school students using home-based consequences and daily report-card procedures. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 106.