Individualizing the Good Behavior Game across type and frequency of behavior with emotionally disturbed adolescents.

The team ran the Good Behavior Game in three special-ed classes for teens with emotional disturbance. They let each student pick his own top problem behavior to watch, like cursing or touching others.

The game stayed the same: teams earn points for following rules and lose points for rule breaks. Only the target behavior changed from student to student.

Cursing, touching, and negative comments dropped in every class. When the game stopped, the behaviors rose; when it came back, they fell again.

Teachers and students both said they liked the new version. No extra prizes were needed.

Dadakhodjaeva et al. (2020) later asked, "Can we run GBG less often after daily training?" They kept gains while thinning to a few days a week. Together the two studies show you can either tailor the target or trim the schedule and still win.

Wiskow et al. (2019) tested vocal versus silent feedback in preschool GBG. Vocal reminders worked best. Hansen et al. (1989) used vocal teacher feedback too, so the tip holds across ages.

Foster et al. (1979) used a token economy plus biofeedback in similar special-ed rooms and also cut hyperactivity. The GBG gives the same outcome without extra gadgets.

You can run the Good Behavior Game tomorrow without buying anything. Ask each student to name the one behavior that gets them in the most trouble. Write those behaviors on the board, split the class into teams, and start the timer. Watch the counts drop and keep the plan in your back pocket for rough days.