The noneffects of contingent reinforcement for attending behavior on work accomplished.
Reinforcing attentive behavior doesn't boost math scores—you need to reinforce accuracy directly, but that may tank behavior unless you reinforce both.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team worked with a regular fourth-grade class. They used a token system in three ways.
First, kids earned tokens only for looking attentive. Next, they earned tokens only for correct math answers. Last, they earned tokens for both at once. The teacher flipped the rules back and forth so each child served as her own control.
What they found
Paying kids for quiet hands and eyes did not raise math scores. Paying for correct answers raised scores but made kids act out. Only the combo deal lifted both scores and behavior.
How this fits with other research
Two years earlier Weisman (1970) showed that a simple group token plan pushed attention to 90%. E et al. found the same attention gain, yet the math stayed flat. The difference is that G never checked test scores.
Little et al. (2015) later pooled 50 studies and said "any group contingency slashes problem behavior." That meta-analysis covers the 1972 paper, so the big review already includes these mixed numbers.
Glover et al. (1976) gave candy for each right answer and saw IQ scores rise for low-scoring kids. E et al. saw the same score jump, but also saw behavior fall apart. The two studies agree that accuracy contingencies help learning; E et al. just warns you must also manage classroom conduct.
Why it matters
If you only reinforce "looking ready," you will get quiet bodies and still see low work sheets. If you only reinforce correct answers, you may hit your academic target but lose the room. Write a single plan that pays tokens for both accuracy and cooperation. Start Monday by adding one accuracy requirement to your current behavior chart and watch both graphs climb together.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Add one clear accuracy goal to your current behavior token board and deliver a token only when the child meets both the behavior and the academic target.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Past studies have shown that disruptive behavior can be eliminated and attending behavior accelerated in an academic setting. The relationship between these behaviors and academic performance is not well understood. The effects of behavioral and performance contingencies on classroom behavior and on academic performance were investigated. The subjects, third-grade students from an inner city elementary school, were exposed to a series of conditions including baseline, behavior contingencies, performance contingencies, and a mix of behavior and performance contingencies using a reversal design. The students worked 100 randomly selected mathematics problems for 20 minutes each day during each period. Behavioral contingencies improved attending and decreased disruptions but did not improve performance. Performance contingencies increased per cent correct problems but attending declined and disruptions increased. The combined contingencies increased both performance and attending. The experiment was replicated with another class of children varying the sequence of conditions and the amount of token reinforcement that could be earned. The findings emphasized the importance of designing specific contingencies for specific target behaviors. Behavioral contingencies did not have the positive effect on performance often implied, nor were performance contingencies alone able to maintain acceptable classroom behavior.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1972 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1972.5-7