Betsy is an elementary-aged student who often shouts out in class (e.g., "Teacher! Teacher!"). This behavior typically occurs during independent seatwork while her teacher, Mr. Wah, is helping other students. Although Betsy is not the only student who shouts out in class, she does so the most frequently and is easily the most disruptive. A new teacher, Mr. Wah is a little insecure and doesn't like it when students call out in class so he typically responds to Betsy's shouting by reprimanding her (e.g., "Stop that shouting Betsy!" or "Be quiet!"). The immediate effect is that Betsy stops shouting but, after a few minutes, she starts again. Although Mr. Wah would like Betsy to raise her hand and wait for him to come to her desk, the few times she has done this, he has ignored her.
Let's apply B-mod to the solution of Betsy's behavior problem. Mr. Wah, or, more likely, a behavioral specialist assigned to Mr. Wah's building, would visit his classroom and conduct a functional behavioral assessment (FBA)(O'Neill, Horner, Albin, Storey, & Sprague, 1990; Repp & Horner, 1999; Sugai & Colvin, 1989). Behaviorists believe that all behavior serves a function or purpose for the behavER, and that this function is typically either (a) to get the behavER something she wants or (b) to help the behavER escape from or avoid something she does not want. In Betsy's case, the FBA helps the behavioral specialist identify the function of Betsy's shouting behavior and the environmental events that maintain it. Through direct observation in the classroom, data are recorded on everything that happens during the independent seatwork session (see Figure 1.1). After analyzing the data, a hypothesis is generated regarding the function of Betsy's shouting and the environmental event(s) that maintain it.
Student Betsy Teacher Mr. Wah Date 09/24____
Behavior shouting w/o waiting to be called on
Setting Events independent seat work, AM math lesson; assignment on blackboard
Time |
Antecedents |
Behavior |
Consequences |
10:15 |
Mr. W works w/peers |
B yells, “Teacher, Teacher!” |
Mr. W looks at B and says, “Stop shouting.” |
10:16 |
same as above |
B quiet; stares at blackboard |
Mr. W works w/peers |
10:19 |
same as above |
B yells, “Teacher, Teacher!” |
Mr. W looks at B and says, “I told you not to shout!” |
10:19 |
same as above |
B quiet; stares at paper on her desk |
Mr. W works w/peers |
10:21 |
same as above |
B yells, “Teacher, I need you teacher!” |
Mr. W looks at B and says, “You’ll have to wait your turn Betsy!” |
10:22 |
same as above |
B quiet; puts head on her desk |
Mr. W works w/peers |
Figure 1.1 Data sheet showing interaction between Betsy’s behavior and environmental events
Based on an analysis of these data, the behavioral specialist hypothesizes that the function of Betsy's shouting is to get Mr. Wah's attention, and that he, obligingly, gives it to her when she shouts. Mr. Wah may think he is punishing Betsy's disruptive behavior by reprimanding her, but this is the only time he pays any attention to her, and to Betsy, negative attention is better than no attention at all. Therefore, she continues to shout out in order to get it. Instead of punishing or weakening Betsy's shouting as he thinks he is, Mr. Wah is inadvertently reinforcing or maintaining it. In other words, Mr. Wah has taught Betsy to shout out to get his attention.
Figure 1.2 diagrams this hypothesis. Betsy's shouting out (B) causes Mr. Wah's scolding (E), which, in turn, causes her shouting out (B) to increase or, at the very least, maintain in frequency. Keep in mind, that not only is Betsy's shouting out maintained by Mr. Wah's attention, but her expectation or belief that shouting out will get her the teacher's attention is also maintained. This is a classic example of how undesirable behavior can be learned.
| "B <--------------------------------------------------->E | ||
| shouts out in class |
teacher attends (e.g., "Be quiet") |
|
Figure 1.2
Operating on the above hypothesis, the behavioral specialist instructs Mr. Wah to change the way he consequates Betsy's shouting. Instead of attending to it, he is told to ignore it whenever it occurs. If the specialist's hypothesis based on the findings of the FBA is valid, withholding the known reinforcer of Betsy's shouting should result in its reduction or elimination. The problem with simply ignoring Betsy's shouting is that because it has been reinforced so often in the past, ignoring it now may actually cause it to increase (i.e., get worse) before there is any sign of it weakening. This phenomenon is referred to as an extinction burst and Mr. Wah is told to expect it and is encouraged to keep ignoring Betsy's calling out even when it increases.
Since the ultimate goal is to provide Betsy with a non-disruptive behavior that serves the same function as her shouting, Mr. Wah is also instructed to attend to Betsy only when she raises her hand and waits to be called on. The hope is that once Betsy learns that her disruptive behavior won't get her the attention she wants, and raising her hand and waiting will, her behavior will change. Again, because "bad" behavior is learned, it can be unlearned.
Let's assume that Mr. Wah reminds Betsy, at the beginning of each independent seatwork activity, to raise her hand and wait to be called on. Let's also assume that when she does shout out, Mr. Wah tries his best to ignore Betsy's behavior. Further, let's say that after a brief worsening of her shouting out, the intervention begins to work, and Betsy's shouting is eventually replaced by hand raising and waiting, and everybody lives happily ever after.