良好行为游戏的社会和生态有效性:系统回顾

IF 1.2 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Dylan M. Zimmerman, Milad Najafichaghabouri, P. Raymond Joslyn, Sarah E. Pinkelman
{"title":"良好行为游戏的社会和生态有效性:系统回顾","authors":"Dylan M. Zimmerman, Milad Najafichaghabouri, P. Raymond Joslyn, Sarah E. Pinkelman","doi":"10.1007/s10864-024-09562-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom management intervention that utilizes group contingencies to address an array of student behavior. Despite numerous reviews and a substantial literature base, there has not yet been a thorough examination of the social and ecological validity of the GBG. Thus, the purpose of this literature review is to examine the social and ecological validity of this intervention and identify how researchers can better integrate these concepts into GBG research. Our search identified 51 articles meeting final inclusion criteria. These were individually coded to identify how researchers incorporate social and ecological validity into the GBG, and how stakeholders perceive the social validity of the intervention. Results suggest that the social validity of the goals of the GBG was primarily assessed via informal conversation prior to the study, while procedures and outcomes were primarily measured via implementer and student survey after the intervention, with few examples of alternative methods. Survey results suggest high social validity for implementers and mixed results for students. Suggestions for improved social and ecological validity in research practices are discussed. These include clearly reporting collaboration efforts, including direct and ongoing measures of social validity, and evaluating generalization and maintenance.</p>","PeriodicalId":47391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social and Ecological Validity of the Good Behavior Game: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Dylan M. Zimmerman, Milad Najafichaghabouri, P. Raymond Joslyn, Sarah E. Pinkelman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10864-024-09562-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom management intervention that utilizes group contingencies to address an array of student behavior. Despite numerous reviews and a substantial literature base, there has not yet been a thorough examination of the social and ecological validity of the GBG. Thus, the purpose of this literature review is to examine the social and ecological validity of this intervention and identify how researchers can better integrate these concepts into GBG research. Our search identified 51 articles meeting final inclusion criteria. These were individually coded to identify how researchers incorporate social and ecological validity into the GBG, and how stakeholders perceive the social validity of the intervention. Results suggest that the social validity of the goals of the GBG was primarily assessed via informal conversation prior to the study, while procedures and outcomes were primarily measured via implementer and student survey after the intervention, with few examples of alternative methods. Survey results suggest high social validity for implementers and mixed results for students. Suggestions for improved social and ecological validity in research practices are discussed. These include clearly reporting collaboration efforts, including direct and ongoing measures of social validity, and evaluating generalization and maintenance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-024-09562-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-024-09562-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

良好行为游戏(GBG)是一种课堂管理干预措施,它利用群体应急措施来解决一系列学生行为问题。尽管有许多评论和大量文献,但尚未对 GBG 的社会和生态有效性进行彻底研究。因此,本文献综述的目的是研究这一干预措施的社会和生态有效性,并确定研究人员如何将这些概念更好地融入 GBG 研究中。我们的搜索发现了 51 篇符合最终纳入标准的文章。我们对这些文章进行了单独编码,以确定研究人员如何将社会和生态有效性纳入 GBG,以及利益相关者如何看待干预措施的社会有效性。结果表明,GBG 目标的社会有效性主要是通过研究前的非正式谈话来评估的,而程序和结果主要是通过干预后的实施者和学生调查来衡量的,很少有其他方法的例子。调查结果显示,实施者的社会有效性较高,而学生的社会有效性参差不齐。我们讨论了在研究实践中提高社会和生态有效性的建议。这些建议包括明确报告合作努力,包括对社会有效性的直接和持续测量,以及评估推广和维护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Social and Ecological Validity of the Good Behavior Game: A Systematic Review

Social and Ecological Validity of the Good Behavior Game: A Systematic Review

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a classroom management intervention that utilizes group contingencies to address an array of student behavior. Despite numerous reviews and a substantial literature base, there has not yet been a thorough examination of the social and ecological validity of the GBG. Thus, the purpose of this literature review is to examine the social and ecological validity of this intervention and identify how researchers can better integrate these concepts into GBG research. Our search identified 51 articles meeting final inclusion criteria. These were individually coded to identify how researchers incorporate social and ecological validity into the GBG, and how stakeholders perceive the social validity of the intervention. Results suggest that the social validity of the goals of the GBG was primarily assessed via informal conversation prior to the study, while procedures and outcomes were primarily measured via implementer and student survey after the intervention, with few examples of alternative methods. Survey results suggest high social validity for implementers and mixed results for students. Suggestions for improved social and ecological validity in research practices are discussed. These include clearly reporting collaboration efforts, including direct and ongoing measures of social validity, and evaluating generalization and maintenance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Behavioral Education
Journal of Behavioral Education EDUCATION, SPECIAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Education is an international forum dedicated to publishing original research papers on the application of behavioral principles and technology to education. Education is defined broadly and the journal places no restriction on the types of participants involved in the reported studies--including by age, ability, or setting. Each quarterly issue presents empirical research investigating best-practices and innovative methods to address a wide range of educational targets and issues pertaining to the needs of diverse learners and to implementation. The Journal of Behavioral Education is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal whose target audience is educational researchers and practitioners including general and special education teachers, school psychologists, and other school personnel.  Rigorous experimental designs, including single-subject with replication and group designs are considered for publication. An emphasis is placed on direct observation measures of the primary dependent variable in studies of educational issues, problems, and practices.  Discussion articles and critical reviews also are published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信