Behavioral Disorders

Publication bias occurs when studies with statistically significant results and large effects are more likely to be published than similarly rigorous studies with null and mixed findings. Results-blind peer review requires peer reviewers to consider only the “Introduction” and “Method” sections of submitted manuscripts prior to making editorial recommendations. This process ensures recommendations for publication focus on methodological rigor and not the direction, significance, or magnitude of the reported effects. The current investigation experimentally tested whether reviewers’ editorial recommendations and perceptions of manuscript importance, quality, and rigor varied as a function of type of review (i.e., results-blind or results-included) among 44 reviewers. Results indicated reviewer recommendations did not vary as a function of review type. However, reviewers found results-blind manuscripts less rigorous than results-included and reported less confidence in their recommendations on result-blinded manuscripts. Descriptive findings of results-blind reviewing were mixed with some support for the method, but a lack of confidence in its overall effectiveness. We discuss findings in relation to the conceptual benefits of results-blind reviewing and the increased focus on open and transparent science within special education and preview the papers included in the special section.

Antecedent interventions are often used preventatively to address engagement, but few studies have evaluated their effectiveness with students at risk for disability. This study evaluated the effectiveness of two commonly recommended antecedent interventions that have limited empirical support for use with students at risk: social stories and visual supports. Both interventions were evaluated separately in the context of two single-case alternating treatments designs across five elementary students at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders. Social stories were not effective for improving students’ levels of engagement during targeted activities; visual supports resulted in increases in students’ engagement relative to baseline conditions. Future use of visual supports for students at risk should include evaluations of the feasibility of implementation by teaching staff.

Class-wide behavioral interventions are a feasible and effective method to support the behavior of all students. In six peer-reviewed studies, Tootling, a class-wide intervention that combines positive peer reporting with an interdependent group contingency, has increased positive peer reports and academically engaged behavior (AEB), and decreased disruptive behavior (DB). However, no prior studies have been conducted with middle school students, and none have employed strategies to promote enduring behavior change. A withdrawal design with maintenance phase, implemented across two middle school classrooms, found moderate effects (nonoverlap of all pairs [NAP] = 0.74, Tau-U = −0.48) of Tootling on decreasing DB and moderate to large effects (NAP = 0.76, Tau-U = 0.68) on increasing AEB, although internal threats to validity prevented the demonstration of a clear functional relationship across both classrooms. Results from the maintenance phase, in which the group contingency reward was removed, suggest promising strategies to support durable behavioral change. Limitations of the present study, directions for future research, social validity, and implications for practice are discussed.

Using an ABAB withdrawal design, the study evaluated the direct and generalized effects of a combined independent and interdependent group contingency on the engagement and disruptive behavior of two groups of students enrolled in an alternative school serving students with emotional and behavioral disorders. Class 1 included seven middle school students and Class 2 included eight high school students. For both classes, systematic direct observation behavior data were collected both in the targeted class period and a second class period identified by teachers as also having high rates of inappropriate behavior. Following baseline, the group contingency was introduced in the targeted period only and then withdrawn before being re-introduced. Visual analysis indicates that implementation of the group contingency led to improvements in classroom behavior in the targeted class period for both groups of students. Also, improvements in student behavior were observed in secondary settings that shared common environmental variables that may have promoted generalization. Discussion focuses on implications for practice and future research examining methods for promoting generalization of behavior change.