Behavioral+Contract

Name: Victoria Agcaoili SPED 843  Dr. Aronin  Spring 2011

 Behavioral Contract

__Description of Intervention Method __ A Behavior contract is a written document between an instructor and student which specifies:

• Expected behaviors. • Positive and negative consequences. • Time frame of the contract with review dates.

The contract is then signed by the instructor, student, and others who participate in the contract. Behavior contracts are a practical and creative way for instructors to help students of all ages improve various problematic behaviors, such as:

• Classroom and social behavior • Substance abuse • School attendance

For Steps of Behavioral Contracting, click the link below : http://www.usu.edu/teachall/text/behavior/LRBIpdfs/Behavioral.pdf

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Types of Students Who Benefit from the Method __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Behavior contracts can be useful when the student has behavioral problems in school locations other than the classroom (e.g., art room, cafeteria). Once a behavior contract has proven effective in the classroom, the instructor can meet with the student to extend the terms of the contract across multiple settings. Adults in these other school locations would then be responsible for rating the student's behaviors during the time that the student is with them.

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Qualifications for Using the Method __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">There is no specific qualifications for individuals who use Behavioral Contract. Teachers and parents use Behavior Contracting as a strategy for behavior modification.

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Costs of Using the Method __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Behavior contracting has minimal cost. All one has to have are writing materials to make the contract. Bulk of the cost will be on the prizes or reinforcements the people involved will agree on. It can be tangible reinforcements like food and toys or it can be non-tangible like computer time or credit on tests or assignments.

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Potential Risks with Using the Method __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">1) Students may not be invested in abiding by the terms of the contract because they did not have a significant role in its creation. If this is the case, students should be consulted and their input should be incorporated into a revised contract.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">2) The rewards that can be earned through the contract may not sufficiently motivate students to cause them to change their behavior. In this case ,the teacher should review the list of rewards with students, note those rewards that students indicate they would find most appealing, and revise the reward list to include choices selected by the students.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">3) Some must have rewards delivered at a frequent rate in order for those rewards to have power sufficient to shape students' behavior.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Link: <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> []132-behavior-contracts

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Benefits of Using the Method __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Behavior contracts provide many benefits to those that use them:

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">1) They clearly define what is expected <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">2) They provide structure and consistency <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">3) They allow both parties to work together <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">4) They promote positive and appropriate behavior <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">5) They hold individuals accountable

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Link : <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">[]

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">A behavior contract allows your child to negotiate the “terms of contract”. This is particularly useful for older children. The contract spells it out in black-and-white what is expected and what will be awarded. It allows your child to feel more in control of their behavior choices. The behavior contract can help structure the behavior patterns of your child and gives them a great opportunity for self-management. As with any good reward plan, such as using reward charts for children, a behavior contract teaches delayed gratification. Because the contract clearly defines what is expected of your children, family tension and arguments over on-going behavioral problems tend to dissipate.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Link: <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">http://www.rewardingkids.com/tools-to-change-behavior/behavior-contract/

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Settings for Method Use __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">· school setting <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">· family setting <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">· behavior contract in addiction treatment

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">__Field’s Attitude Towards the Metho__d <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Behavior Contracts are widely use in the field of education because it can be a useful behavior modification tool when other methods aren’t working so well, and it can give student/child a sense of being involved in a serious, grown-up process. This can be flattering to many children as it shows them that the teachers/parents are prepared to enter into a negotiation with them, and sign off on the agreement.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; text-align: center;">Summary of Research Study

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Diáz, Dánica M. (2010). "Comparing the effectiveness of behavioral contracts that use function based reinforcers versus highly preferred items for attention maintained behaviors".Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1614. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1614

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Description of Subjects __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Robert was a 35 year old, Caucasian man diagnosed with mild mental retardation. He had a history of intense problem behaviors that included physical aggression, property destruction, exposing himself, incontinence, and making serious, false allegations that were unfounded (such as, saying that a staff member raped him or that a staff member stole his belongings). Although in the past he was able to progress from the main campus setting (see below for details on the setting) to the community group home, he was transferred back to the main campus due to his inability to tolerate the fading of staff attention that comes with being in a less restrictive setting; it was determined through direct observations and staff interviews that lack of constant attention was the antecedent for most of Robert’s maladaptive behaviors. Therefore, the author chose this behavior to be targeted for reduction.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Todd was a 64 year old, Caucasian man diagnosed with mild mental retardation. After spending almost two decades in institutions, he was transferred to this residential facility to receive treatment for his inappropriate sexual and self-injurious behaviors. At the time of this study, Todd was the only participant residing in a community group home. He was literate and able to communicate verbally; however, his socially inappropriate behaviors (for example, touching the belongings of others and asking the same repetitive questions when they had already provided him with an answer) often provoked his housemates and peers, resulting in retaliation from others and an escalation of his own problem behaviors. In addition, the stigmatizing nature of this problem behavior was hindering him from community integration.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Kevin was a 23 year old, Hispanic man diagnosed with moderate mental retardation. He had a history of intense problem behaviors that included physical aggression, property damage, elopement, and opportunistic inappropriate sexual behavior (for example, walking up to minors or vulnerable adults and touching them inappropriately, or any attempts to do so). Most of his problem behaviors occurred in a behavioral chain; first, he exhibited socially inappropriate behaviors (typically, cursing excessively and calling the person he was targeting offensive and profane names), before he escalated to verbal and physical aggression, property damage, and elopement. For the most part, the socially inappropriate behaviors were directed towards his peers. The author chose this behavior because it served as an antecedent to more serious problem behaviors.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">__Description of Research Design__ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">A multiple baseline across subjects with a series of reversals within the intervention phase was used in this study. Within the intervention phase, all participants were exposed to the functional and highly preferred conditions a minimum of three times each. Using this research design, the changes pre- and post-intervention were assessed. By continuing baseline assessment of behaviors in a step-wise fashion, experimental control was established, showing that the likely causal factor for the changes in the participants’ behaviors was the intervention.

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Dependent Variable __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Once the function of each participant’s problem behavior was substantiated through the brief functional analysis, two behaviors were chosen to be targeted for intervention: the socially inappropriate (precursor) behavior that was currently high in frequency was targeted for decrease, and the functionally equivalent replacement behavior that was currently low in frequency was targeted for increase

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Problem behaviors

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Robert, requesting excessive/unnecessary attention was defined as making excessive statements (within twenty seconds of having received attention) in attempts to continue to hold staff’s attention after he has been redirected to other activities and/or tasks. Examples of these repetitive statements include: “I’m doing good, right?”, “I need help with this”, or telling staff what he was doing as he completed it (“I’m cleaning the floor”, “I’m making my lunch”, “I’m reading a book quietly”, etc.). Gaining staff’s attention appropriately after no social interaction for five consecutive minutes was not documented as this behavior; only consecutive, excessive attempts were documented.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Todd, inappropriate social behavior was defined as asking the same question repeatedly when an answer had already been provided, inappropriately interrupting the conversations of others (by standing in close proximity and blurting out words or questions in a loud manner specifically while two others were having a conversation), and raising his hand as he was speaking. Examples of repetitive questions included <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">mainly: “How’s your car running?”, “How’s work?”, “How are your folks?”, and “How’s the weather?”. Gaining attention in an appropriate manner, such as by saying “excuse me”, was not documented as this behavior.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Kevin, inappropriate social behavior was defined as violating the personal space of others (getting closer than 1 arm’s length), touching others, teasing/antagonizing peers (calling his peers profane names when they were engaging in alone activities or problem behaviors as well as taking the belongings of others and hiding them). Very often, the name-calling was accompanied by excessive cursing. However, the cursing alone was not documented unless it was accompanied by name-calling. Although this behavior was occasionally directed towards staff that work with Kevin, he typically targeted peers; mainly, his housemates during the residential time.

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Independent Variable __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">A behavior contract was given to all the three participants to reduce the socially inappropriate and stigmatizing behaviors of adult men diagnosed with an intellectual disability. A multiple baseline across subjects with a series of reversals within the intervention phase was used to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of two types of behavioral contracts: one based on the function of the behavior and the other based on highly preferred items. Brief functional analyses were conducted to determine the function of the participants’ problem behavior and multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments were conducted to establish a hierarchy of highly preferred items.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Robert, independent leisure activities was defined as him participating in an alone activity of his choice for fifteen consecutive minutes during which time he would not request staff’s attention.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Todd, appropriate conversations was defined as any conversation that involved appropriate topics lasting at least one minute; this included gaining attention appropriately (defined as using any appropriate formula, such as saying “excuse me” by maintaining a distance of two arm’s length to gain the attention of others) and refraining from asking repetitive questions.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">For Kevin, appropriate positive peer interactions was defined as having positive time with peers that lasted at least three minutes by playing sports with them, spending time doing something they both liked, and talking about good topics (such as, sports, weather, upcoming outings, and work).

__<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Summary of Results __ <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">1) The data fully supports the first hypothesis; both behavioral contracts were effective at significantly decreasing maladaptive behavior and increasing appropriate behavior in men with intellectual disabilities.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> 2) When the intervention was introduced, regardless of which behavioral contract was initially implemented, all of the participants’ problem behaviors decreased; similarly, but not as drastically, replacement behaviors increased.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">3) In addition, differentiation between the two treatment conditions was observed only in Robert’s data; a functional approach was more effective with keeping his inappropriate behavior at a lower frequency.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">4) By extending the treatment conditions for Robert, increasing trends were observed during the highly preferred conditions. This was replicated on several occasions and the change in his behavior was noted after having been exposed to the highly preferred behavioral contract for several days; it was then that Robert began to ask staff to switch to earn one-on-one time, or the functional behavioral contract.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">5) For Todd and Kevin, there was no clear differentiation regarding effectiveness between the functional versus highly preferred behavioral contracts; both behavioral contracts worked well.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">6) The most preferred form of treatment for Kevin was the functional approach, even though his problem behavior decreased under the highly preferred conditions as well.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> 7) Todd chose a highly preferred item as the consequence of his behavioral contract on 75% of the opportunities presented; although his behavior changed under both conditions, his choice of consequence for meeting the contract was a preferred item.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The percentage for change for both the problem and replacement behaviors was chosen on an individual basis by the author of this study (who worked with each participant on a daily basis); the frequency of the problem in the past as well as the ultimate outcomes for each participant was evaluated and taken into consideration when choosing the threshold criteria. Although they may have seemed as unrealistic decreases and increases at first, all participants remained below the threshold criteria for problem behaviors and above the threshold criteria for replacement behaviors for the majority of the study.