Honesty and Success in Self-Modification Projects for a College Class

Instructionally-Based Training in Self-Control: Behavior-Specific and Generalized Outcomes Resulting from Student-Implemented Self-Modification Projects

“…Moreover, "unsuccessful" as compared to "successful" students reported significantly less implementation of self-control techniques (29% and 66%, respectively) and rated self-monitored data as considerably lessaccurate(53% ascompared to79%). Although thesefindings are merely suggestive because of the post hoc nature of measurement, similar results have been reported by previous investigators in the self-control area (Perri & Richards, 1977;Worthington, 1977Worthington, , 1979. These data suggest that steps should be taken to prevent afailure-induced demoralization by increasing instructorlstudent contact (thus providing opportunities for positive feedback and increased project consultation), or by furnishing a greater variety of options for students insufficiently interested in conducting SM projects.…”

“…Although success at SM has been previously associated with the use of self-reinforcement, implementation of a greater number of SM techniques, longer sustained interventions, a focus on decelerative target behaviors, internal locus of control, grade point average, and initial motivation for self-change (e.g., Perri & Richards, 1977;Schallow, 1975;Worthington, 1977;Younger & Mallue, Note 2), several of these variables have received contradictory confirmation and others (e.g., amount of positive project feedback received; confidence in SM skills) have not yet been evaluated empirically. Additionally, while Worthington (1977Worthington ( , 1979 has provided data on the use and rated helpfulness of several SM techniques, information regarding a more comprehensive list of potential self-control strategies is not currently available. Knowledge concerning variables associated with successful SM as well as the reported use, implementation, and rated helpfulness of particular SM techniques would be useful for instructors interested in implementing and maximizing the effects of SM projects in their undergraduatelgraduate classes.…”

An Empirical Evaluation of a Behavioral Self-Management Course in a College Setting

“…The success rate of 78%, defined in the present study as achievement of minimal goals on the GAS, compares favorably with the success rates (43 -95 percent) reported by others, despite instructional content beyond basic behavioral self-management which varied across the classroom "packages," including extensive technical study of self-management , helping and empathetic skills (Payne & Woudenberg, 1978), educational psychology (McGaghie & Menges, 1975;McGaghie et al 1976), psychology of adjustment (Worthington, 1977(Worthington, , 1979, behavioral community psychology (Jason, 1981), and coping, cognitive, and social skills in the present investigation. Future research must establish the unique contribution to change of each instructional component.…”

“…Self-report of problem severity was also significantly reduced at posttest. These results, essentially replicating earlier findings by the same author (Worthington, 1977), were maintained at six month follow-up.…”

“…Finally, the instructor repeatedly emphasized that course grades were dependent only on class attendance and the design and implementation, but not success, of the project. Worthington (1977Worthington ( , 1979 provides data suggesting that under such circumstances, students in self-modification courses report honest data approximately 85% of the time. In addition, veracity was encouraged by the regular weekly group meetings, during which each individual's raw self-monitored data were examined by the facilitator and discussed in the context of the intervention project.…”