Game Over? No Main or Subgroup Effects of the Good Behavior Game in a Randomized Trial in English Primary Schools

This study aimed to examine the impact of a universal, school-based intervention, the Good Behavior Game (GBG), on children's behavior, and to explore any subgroup moderator effects among children at varying levels of cumulative risk (CR) exposure. A 2-year cluster-randomized controlled trial w...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of research on educational effectiveness 2020-04, Vol.13 (2), p.298-321
Main Authors: Ashworth, Emma, Humphrey, Neil, Hennessey, Alexandra
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
At Risk Students
Attention Control
Behavior Problems
Check Lists
Classroom Observation Techniques
Classroom Techniques
Comparative Analysis
cumulative risk
differential effects
Elementary Education
Elementary School Students
Elementary Schools
externalizing behavior
Foreign Countries
Game Based Learning
Good Behavior Game
Individualized Instruction
Intervention
Observation
Outcomes of Education
Prosocial Behavior
Randomized Controlled Trials
Schools
Social Behavior
Student Behavior
Teaching Methods
universal intervention
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study aimed to examine the impact of a universal, school-based intervention, the Good Behavior Game (GBG), on children's behavior, and to explore any subgroup moderator effects among children at varying levels of cumulative risk (CR) exposure. A 2-year cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted comprising 77 primary schools in England. Teachers in intervention schools delivered the GBG, whereas their counterparts in control schools continued their usual provision. Behavior (specifically disruptive behavior, concentration problems, and pro-social behavior) was assessed via the checklist version of the Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation. A CR index was calculated by summing the number of risk factors to which each child was exposed. Multilevel models indicated that no main or subgroup effects were evident. These findings were largely insensitive to the modeling of CR although a small intervention effect on disruptive behavior was found when the curvilinear trend was used. Further sensitivity analyses revealed no apparent influence of the level of program differentiation. In sum, our findings indicate that the GBG does not improve behavior when implemented in this sample of English schools.
ISSN:1934-5747
1934-5739
DOI:10.1080/19345747.2019.1689592