Reactivity in self-recording: obtrusiveness of recording procedure and peer comments.
A big visible clicker plus peer praise quickly raises elementary math work output, but the trick is task-specific.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team asked 24 third-graders to count their own correct math problems.
Half wore a big red clicker on their desk. The other half used a small counter hidden in a folder.
Some days classmates were told to say “nice job” when they saw clicks. The kids worked alone for 20 minutes each session.
What they found
The big red clicker group finished 30 % more problems than the hidden group.
When peers gave comments, the jump was even larger.
On a reading task the tool made no difference, so the boost stayed with math.
How this fits with other research
Rosenbloom et al. (2019) and Fiene et al. (2015) swapped the clicker for a phone app and a vibrating watch. They still saw gains with students with autism, showing the idea works across ages and diagnoses.
Castells et al. (1979) warned that any self-recording can feel fake at first. Duker et al. (1991) prove the warning was partly right: reactivity shows up only when the task fits the tool.
Renne et al. (1976) used hidden “bug” microphones at home and also found that hidden recording keeps behavior natural. Together the studies say: visible tools spark change, hidden tools give cleaner data, so pick your goal.
Why it matters
You can lift math output fast by letting kids click each correct answer on a clear counter and inviting peers to cheer. Switch to a quiet device when you need true baseline data. Always test one subject first; the effect may not move to reading or writing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Place a $3 hand counter on the desk, tell the child to click after every correct math problem, and teach two peers to give a thumbs-up when they hear the click.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Reactivity refers to behavior change that occurs during self-recording without specific programming of consequences. We analyzed the effects of obtrusiveness of recording procedure and peer comments on reactivity to self-recording. Three first-grade students in Experiment 1 completed math questions during a 5-min work period. When we gave the children recording devices and told them to try to complete more questions than the highest number they had previously completed, math performance increased, as did the number of verbalizations about it. Two children showed more reactivity when they used the more obtrusive recording device. Because the increase in math performance corresponded closely to increases in peer comments, we manipulated peer comments directly in Experiment 2. Four second-grade students completed a math task and an alphabet task. Three of the students showed increased math performance during periods when peer comments occurred compared to periods when peer comments did not occur. Although the data from the math task suggested that peer comments can enhance reactivity, we did not observe this relationship with the alphabet task. These results suggest that the conditions necessary to produce desirable results through self-recording are complex and contextually specific.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1991 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1991.24-487