Professional Documents
Culture Documents
of Psychology
http://top.sagepub.com/
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Additional services and information for Teaching of Psychology can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://top.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://top.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Note
Address requests for reprints to Judith S. Blanton, Dean for Academic and Professional Affairs, California School of Professional
Psychology, 1900 Addison St., Berkeley, CA 94704.
also increased when students used self-reinforcement techniques (e.g., money and special privileges) contingent upon
a predetermined amount of studying (Richards, McReynolds,
Holt, & Sexton, 1976; Greiner & Karoly, 1976).
In many of these experiments, process (i.e., study behavior) measures have been taken, but outcome (i.e., quiz
score) measures have not been taken, or if taken, have
shown no effects. The present study includes two experiments: The first experiment involves a combination of selfmanagement procedures, Including self-monitoring and
self-recording, for students having academic difficulty; the
second experiment evaluates three self-management pro-cedures, and provides an extension of the literature to
include student-constructed rule statements and environmental management as additional self-management techniques. The effectiveness of this program is evaluated on the
basis of outcome measures of the students' q u ~ zperformance.
Experiment 1
Method. Nine students elected to participate in the first
experiment after an announcement was made in their classroom explaining that, by participating, students could earn
five bonus points (out of at least 450 total course points) and
could learn useful self-management skills. The subjects
were undergraduate students enrolled in one of two psychology courses at Western Michigan University.
Quiz scores served as the dependent variable for all
subjects. The eight students enrolled in an intermediate level
psychology course took two quizzes per week, with the
remaining student enrolled in an introductory psychology
course taking three quizzes each week.
Intervention involved six independent variables in the
form of self-management procedures taught to students.
The experimental sessions followed an "AB" design replicated across subjects. Baseline quiz scores were recorded
for each student for an average of seven weeks before
self-management training began, with training sessions
scheduled across a two-week period.
The students used a notebook, called the SelfManagement Calendar (Sundberg, 1979), for all self-
management activities. A weekly schedule form and standard graph paper were attached to the front and back
covers of the notebook for additional self-management
purposes. Training occurred during each of six one-to-one
meetings with the r e ~ e a r c h e r . ~
Meeting I . This meeting served as an opportunity for the
students to identify the most important variables that might
exert control over their studying. The students developed a
list of the following: (a) personal and career goals related to
their school work, (b) additional positive outcomes, or reinforcers, that might result if they achieved outstanding grades
in school, and (c) punishers, or undesirable outcomes, that
could result from poor academic performance. To establish
a permanent record of these variables, the students listed
them as "rule statements" using an "If-then" format, such as
"If I do this behavior, then I can expect this consequence to
follow," entering the list onto a blank page of their selfmanaqement notebook.
Meeting 2. The students received instruction in selfmonitoring and recording, performance graphing, and
schedule planning. First, for purposes of self-evaluation, the
students were instructed to begin self-monitoring on an
hourly basis, recording general activities that they engaged
in from waking to retiring each day in the appropriate hour
block of their self-management notebook. As part of this
self-recording procedure, the students totaled the number of
hours they studied each day and the number of hours they
subjectively evaluated as "wasted" (i.e., behaviors involving
neither academics nor important non-academic activities),
and listed these amounts at the bottom of each daily column.
Second, the students began to graph the number of hours
that thev studied each dav, and also began to graph the
socres that they received i n their weeklfquizzei. iinally,
they began to use a schedule form for planning hourly, daily,
and weekly activities, with special emphasis on establishing
regular and reliable study periods. Both the graph pages
and the schedule form were attached to the covers of their
self-management notebook.
Meeting 3. In order to establish stimulus surroundings
most favorable to studying, the students received instruction
in environmental management which involved the manipulation of study room conditions. During this meeting, the
students engaged in the following activities: They developed
a list of those behaviors and events that interfered with
studying, and based on this analysis, developed a list of
changes to be made in their study environment, including
both the addition of stimuli that might prompt studying and
the removal of stimuli that might set the occasion for
behaviors incompatible with studying,
Suggested additions to the study room included the
strategic posting of the students' rule statements (developed during Meeting I),weekly schedule form, and quiz or
study graphs near their desk, in such a location as to make it
most likely that they would be read when studying. Suggested items to remove included magazines, pictures, certain foods or alcohol, televison sets or stereos, and whatever
else that the students themselves had identified as discriminative stimuli for their non-studying.
Meeting 4. For general time-organization purposes, the
students received training in the self-management technique of constructing and then prioritizing a list of academic
78
Teaching of Psychology
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by Cristina Corina on November 1, 2012
BASELINE
TRAINING
BASELINE
TRAINING
BASELINE
TRAINING
WEEKS
Figure 1. Percentage of quiz points earned for each quiz of the semester across weeks. The horizontal solid lines indicate the median
percentage points earned by an individual student in each phase. Experiment 1.
79
BASELINE
HOURLY RECORDING
BASELINE
HOURLY RECORDING
E NVT
MNGT
RULES
'\u4!+=h~~l
I
I
I
I
I
1
5-4
I
WEEKS
Figure 2. Percentage of quiz points earned for each quiz of the semester across weeks. The horizontal solid lines indicate the median
percentage points earned by an individual student in each phase. Experiment 2 .
80
Teaching of Psychology
Downloaded from top.sagepub.com by Cristina Corina on November 1, 2012
ronmental management procedures. Often, prevailing stimulus conditions do not support the behavior we would like to
engage in. Exercising, dieting, and studying are three
examples; the controlling variables for these activities are
often outnumbered by incentives for behaviors incompatible
with them. Thus, during the environmental-management
training, the students acquired the self-management skill of
manipulating the physical conditions of their room for studying purposes. After they identified the variables controlling
both their studying and non-studying, appropriate physical
changes were planned. Though reliability on such changes
was not determined, unsolicited self-reports from the students indicated that many such changes did take place.
Developing a list of rule statements for studying did not,
by itself, produce lasting academic improvement, though
the three students receiving this intervention did show
higher quiz scores initially. This may have been caused by a
loss of contact with the rules after they had been entered into
their notebooks. Posting these rules in proximity to their
study desk as part of the environmental management procedure (Phase 3 of Experiment 2) may have influenced
studying if the students evaluated their behavior with respect to the rule. Again, comments by the students supported the value of this procedure as they reported that a
given rule statement (e.g., one identifying parental rewards-such
as increased monetary support-contingent
upon satisfactory academic performance, or one identifying
parental punishment-such
as loss of car privilegescontingent upon unacceptable academic performance) did
indeed "make them study more." Rule statements, in general, may serve a mediating function, controlling behavior
when the usual consequences are certain and powerful but
temporarily deferred, when the individual states the rule as a
"reminder."
The present research provides further support for the
effectiveness of self-monitoring and self-recording as a
method to increase the frequency of a selected behavior,
and in addition, suggests that extensive environmental management, possibly including student-determined rule statements, could serve a useful function in self-management
programs.
Several cautionary statements should b e made however.
These procedures may not work equally well with all populations, or with all students within a given setting, as was found
in the present study. For instance, self-recording was maintained by the college students in this study with external
weekly monitoring and the use of a bonus point system.
Younger students or students with more serious academic or
behavioral problems may not respond as readily to such a
procedure. Further research could address these issues by
replicating these procedures with different populations, while
continuing to experimentally isolate the specific selfmanagement procedures that are the most effective.
The self-management procedures described here seem
practical, and the cost of implementing the training is low.
Though done on an individual basis for experimental purposes, the entire package could be taught to a group in two
to three hours. The procedures appear to have academic
References
Champlin, S. M., & Karoly, P. Role of contract negotiation in
self-management of study time: A preliminary investigation.
Psychological Reports, 1975, 37, 724-726.
Greiner, J . M., & Karoly, P. Effects of self-controltraining on study
activity and academic performance: An analysis of selfmonitoring, self-reward, and systematic-planning components.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1976, 23, 495-502.
Holland, J. G., Solomon, C., Doran, J., & Frezza, D. A. The analysis
of behavior in planning instruction. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley, 1976.
Jones, R. T., Nelson, R. E., & Kazdin, A. E. The role of external
variables in self-reinforcement: A review. Behavior Modification,
1977, I , 147-148.
Keller, F. S. "Goodbye teacher . . ." Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 1968, 1, 78-89.
Malott, R. W., Tillema, M., & Glenn, S. Behavior analysis and
behavior modification: An introduction. Kalamazoo, MI: Behavioradelia, Inc., 1978.
Michael, J. The essential components of effective instruction and
why most college teaching is not. In F. Keller and E. Ribes (Eds.),
Behavior modification. Boston, MA: Academic Press, 1974.
Miller, A,, & Gimpl, M. P. Operant verbal self-control of studying.
Psychological Reports, 1972, 30, 495-498.
O'Leary, S. G., & Dubey, D. R. Applications of self-control procedures by children: A review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 449-465.
Reese, E. P. Human operant behavior. Dubuque, IA: Brown, 1978.
Richards, C. S., McReynolds, W. T., Holt, S., & Sexton, T. The
effects of information feedback and self-administered consequences on self-monitoring study behavior. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1976, 23, 316-321.
Rosenbaum, M. S., & Drabman, R. S. Self-control training in the
classroom: A review and critique. Journal of Applied Behavior
Analysis, 1979, 12, 467-485.
Skinner, B. F. Contingencies of reinforcement. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1969.
Sundberg, M. L. Self-management calendar. Grand Rapids, MI:
Behavior Associates, Inc., 1979.
Tichenor, J. L. Self-monitoring and self-reinforcement of studying
by college students. Psychological Reports, 1977, 40, 103-108.
Notes
1. Grant, L., & Deenan, J. B. Studying in college: A review.
Manuscript submitted for publication, 1981. (Available from L.
Grant, Department of Educational Psychology, West Virginia
University.)
2. Malott, R. W. Rule-governed behavior and the achievement of
evasive goals: A theoretical analysis. Unpublished manuscript,
1980. (Available from R. W. Malott, Department of Psychology,
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008.)
3. This study is based on a thesis submitted to the Department of
Psychology, Western Michigan University, by the first author in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the MA degree. It contains all self-management forms and a copy of the standardized
instructions administered to students, and is available from
University Microfilms International, P.O. Box 1764, Ann Arbor,
MI 48106.
4. Address requests for reprints to R. W. Malott, Department of
Psychology, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008.
81