Goal setting and behavior contracting for students with emotional and behavioral difficulties: Analysis of daily, weekly, and total goal attainment

Ruth, William J.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6807(199604)33:2<153::aid-pits8>3.3.co;2-u

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Goal-setting techniques are more effective when they are combined with other behavioral approaches (i.e., self-monitoring, direct instruction, self-graphing, contingency contracting), than when they are used in isolation (Miller & Kelley, 1994;Ruth, 1996;Trammel & Schloss, 1994). • Students need to receive explicit instruction in goal setting to be successful (Graham, Harris, & Reid, 1992;Laase, 1996).…”

Section: The Act-react Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfiguring it Out

Rock¹

2004

TEACHING Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Act-react Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfiguring it Out

Rock¹

2004

TEACHING Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Individuals with disabilities have been participants in much of the research investigating the effectiveness of behavior contracts. Research has included students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD; Ruth, 1996), autism (Mruzek, Cohen, & Smith, 2007), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; Gurrad et al, 2002), intellectual disabilities (Jenkins & Gorrafa, 1974), and traumatic brain injury (Hufford, Williams, Malec, & Cravotta, 2012). In addition, several mental health studies have used behavior contracts as part of treatment for borderline personality disorder (L.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research on Behavior Contracts

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to quantitatively summarize the single-case research (SCR) literature on the use of behavior contracts with children and youth. This study examined the efficacy of behavior contracts on problem behaviors and academic behaviors across 18 SCR studies. Academic and behavioral outcomes were examined for 58 children and youth ages 5 to 21 using the TauU effect size index. Results indicated the overall moderate effect of the use of behavior contracts was ES = .57 (95% confidence interval [CI95] = [0.55, 0.58]) with a range of effects across studies (ES = .27 to ES = 1.00). Moderator analyses indicated that behavior contracts are beneficial for students regardless of grade level, gender, or disability status. Findings suggest that the intervention is more effective in reducing inappropriate behaviors than increasing appropriate behaviors, and that academic outcomes are positively affected by behavior contracting.

show abstract