The influence of behavior preceding a reinforced response on behavior change in the classroom.
Deliver praise the instant you see attention; the same words do little if the child is off task.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The teacher watched each student for ten seconds. If the child was looking at the lesson, the teacher gave praise right away. If the child was looking away, the teacher still gave praise, but only after the child looked back.
The class had students with intellectual disabilities. The teacher switched the rule every day for many days. Some days she praised only when the child was already paying attention. Other days she praised even if the child had just been off-task. The study tracked how much each child stayed on task under each rule.
What they found
Praise worked best when the child was already looking at the teacher. On-task time rose higher on those days. When praise followed off-task moments, the gain was smaller.
The order of events mattered. Reinforcement landed harder when it came right after attentive behavior.
How this fits with other research
Alba et al. (1972) showed the same idea earlier. They stopped giving extra help for digit reversals and only praised correct digits. Errors dropped fast. Both studies say the same thing: give attention to what you want to grow.
Farrant et al. (1998) took the idea further. They taught students to ask, “How am I doing?” The question pulled teacher praise and raised spelling scores. The 1977 paper shows the teacher side; the 1998 paper shows the student can trigger it.
Robinson et al. (2019) seems to clash at first. They let tokens pile up before cash-in and saw big gains. Their reinforcers did not follow each single good act. But they used a token board, not social praise. The tools differ, so both findings can live together.
Why it matters
You can raise on-task behavior just by timing your praise better. Watch for a second of eye contact, hand raised, or pencil moving. Deliver your “Nice job” right then. Skip praise that comes after a stare out the window. No new materials needed—just sharper timing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Count to three, see the student look at the board, then drop your praise immediately.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The influence of behavior that immediately precedes a reinforced target response on the effectiveness of a reinforcement contingency was examined in two experiments with mentally retarded children in a special-education classroom. Two reinforcement schedules were examined in each experiment. For each schedule, a prespecified period of attentive behavior served as the target response. The schedules differed in whether inattentive or attentive behavior was required immediately to precede the target response. These schedules were examined with one child in a simultaneous treatment design using praise as the reinforcer (Experiment I), and with two children in separate reversal designs using tokens as the reinforcer (Experiment II). While attentive behavior increased under each schedule, the increase was greater when attentive rather than inattentive behavior preceded the reinforced response. The results indicated that the effect of a contingency may be determined not only by the specific response reinforced but also by the behavior that immediately precedes that response.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1977 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1977.10-299