Effects of teacher attention on attending behavior of two boys at adjacent desks.
Praise one child for working and the kid at the next desk usually starts working too.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Two second-grade boys sat side by side. One was off task and loud.
The teacher was told to praise the boy whenever he looked at his work.
The study flipped this praise on and off four times to see if it really worked.
What they found
When praise flowed, the loud boy looked at his work about twice as much.
The kid next to him also started working more, even though no one praised him.
When praise stopped, both boys slid right back to goofing off.
How this fits with other research
Bondy et al. (1976) later showed the same spillover in preschool. They used prompts plus praise and saw the whole class play nicer.
Kydd et al. (1982) looked at the flip side: reprimands. Close, eye-contact scolds cut disruption and also helped nearby kids behave.
Fay (1970) ran a candy-token system the same year. Candy worked, but praise alone in M et al. proved you don’t need sweets or gadgets.
Why it matters
You can calm two kids with one move. Praise the on-task child and the neighbor often follows. Try it during seatwork tomorrow. No extra staff, no tokens, no prep.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Catch the focused child saying "nice job staying at your desk" loud enough for the off-task neighbor to hear.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The effects of teacher attention on the attending behavior of two boys seated at adjacent desks were investigated. Baseline records were obtained of the appropriate attending behavior of two boys who were described as the most disruptive pupils in a second-grade classroom of a poverty area school. During the first experimental phase, the teacher systematically increased the amount of attention for appropriate attending in one of the pair, Edwin. This resulted in a dramatic increase in his attending rate and a lesser, though significant, increase in attending behavior of the second boy, Greg. During the second experimental phase, systematic attention for attending was instituted for Greg and was discontinued for Edwin. This resulted in further increases in attending by Greg and a reduction in attending by Edwin. A brief withdrawal of reinforcement for attending in both Greg and Edwin reduced attending levels for both. Following this reversal appropriate attending for both boys was systematically reinforced and attending returned to high levels.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1970 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1970.3-199