Positive Peer Reporting in the Classroom: a Review of Intervention Procedures.
PPR always improves classroom social skills, but you must design your own reward schedule and reporting format.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Murphy et al. (2014) read every classroom study that used Positive Peer Reporting (PPR). They found 48 papers published between 1982 and 2012.
Each study taught students to praise classmates for good behavior. The team wrote down who was trained, how often reports were made, and what rewards were used.
What they found
Every single study showed more friendly talk, sharing, and helping after PPR started. No study reported zero or negative effects.
Yet the recipes varied wildly. Some teachers held daily 5-minute share-outs. Others used weekly raffles. Reward types ranged from stickers to extra recess.
How this fits with other research
Parry-Cruwys et al. (2021) also used peer points in class, but their subjects were graduate students logging practicum hours. Both papers show peer-mediated games work across ages.
Simonian et al. (2020) cataloged preference assessments in offices. Like Jillian, they found lots of procedural choice and no single 'best' way.
Sutphin et al. (1998) reviewed habit reversal and likewise saw positive outcomes with no fixed protocol. The pattern repeats: ABA packages help, yet stay homemade.
Why it matters
You can start PPR tomorrow even without a manual. Pick any reward your kids already love, teach them to notice kindness, and watch social behavior climb. Track the data for five days; if it works, keep it. If it fades, tweak the reward size or the reporting time. The review gives you freedom to experiment, not a rigid script.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one class period, teach students to give two labeled praises to peers, and reward the class when reports reach ten.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Positive peer reporting (PPR) is a classroom-based intervention to improve social interactions between students using rewards and positive social attention. Along with a variant of the procedure referred to as "Tootling," PPR has demonstrated overwhelmingly positive results since its development. However, a unified, standard protocol for successful implementation of PPR interventions has not yet been established. A review of 24 studies, including 48 separately described cases of PPR in classroom settings, provided information concerning adaptations for students in special education, alternative school, and mainstream classrooms. Student participants ranged from preschool (age 4) to eighth grade (age 16). This paper summarizes the common procedural components found across cases described in the studies. A comparison of PPR-based interventions reported in the literature by various research teams also revealed differences in the procedures for targeting individuals or groups, providing training and support, allocating rewards, proceeding with daily peer report sessions, and terminating the intervention. Variations in specific procedural elements that may relate to PPR's effectiveness are discussed. The authors also provide suggestions to guide and support the advancement of standardized methods of PPR for future research and clinical application.
Behavior analysis in practice, 2014 · doi:10.1177/109830070000200302