Effects of manipulating an antecedent event on mathematics response rate.
Have kids say the math problem aloud before writing and you get more right answers with fewer mistakes, even after you stop asking them to speak.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The researchers asked kids to say each math problem out loud before writing the answer.
They used an ABAB reversal design. Kids served as their own control.
The study took place in a regular classroom. The goal was to see if talking first would boost correct answers.
What they found
When kids spoke the problem first, their correct answers shot up and errors dropped.
Even after the teacher stopped the verbal prompt, the gains stuck around.
The simple act of talking before writing acted like a built-in self-check.
How this fits with other research
Hursh et al. (1974) extends this idea to reading. They showed that teacher prompts can get kids to ask questions and lift reading scores.
Leander et al. (1972) looks like a clash at first. They used praise and feedback instead of prompts and still raised math work. The difference is tool: one tweaks what happens before the kid starts, the other rewards after the answer.
Lovitt et al. (1969) followed one year later. They let kids set their own goals and rewards. Math output rose even more, showing the field moved from teacher cues to student power.
Why it matters
You can add a five-second talk step to any math sheet tomorrow. No extra materials, no tokens.
Try it during fluency timings or independent work. Drop the prompt once accuracy holds.
This quick antecedent trick gives you a free boost before you ever reach for candy or points.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Before the next math worksheet, tell the learner to whisper each problem out loud, then write the answer; remove the rule once accuracy stays high for two days.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to assess the effects on performance rate of simply writing the answers to mathematics problems versus verbalizing the problems before making a written response. The subject was an 11-yr-old boy whose response accuracy on mathematics problems was very erratic. Three experiments were conducted, each consisting of three phases. In each first phase, the subject was requested to write the answers to sets of mathematics problems. In the second, he was required to verbalize the problem before writing the answer. In the third phase, the subject was told to write the answer again without prior verbalization. The results indicated that the subject's correct answer rate increased and his error rate decreased as a result of his verbalizing the problems before making a written response. Results further revealed that in the final phase of each experiment, the return to the original conditions, his correct answer rate continued to increase.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1968 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1968.1-329