Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2011 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Leite, Flávia Vieira de Souza
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Pereira, Maria Eliza Mazzilli |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Psicologia Experimental: Análise do Comportamento
|
| Departamento: |
Psicologia
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/16621
|
Resumo: |
Contingency analysis has been considered fundamental for the identification of variables of certain behaviors so that such behaviors can be changed. The purpose of this work was to determine the effect of a training course designed to teach teachers a part of contingency analysis: assessment of the probable function of inadequate student behavior in the classroom. Three elementary school teachers participated in the study. Every one of them indicated a student whose in-class behavior they considered inadequate. The study consisted of eight stages: Previous observations; Baseline (BL); Training; Test 1; generalization Test 1; application Test 1; generalization Test 2; and application Test 2. AT BL, teachers were presented eight scenarios: four showing behaviors maintained by positive reinforcement by teacher s attention, and the other four showing behaviors maintained by negative reinforcements by task escape, each one followed by a question about the probable function of student s behavior. The scenarios presented described: inadequate student behavior, antecedent events preceding the behavior, behavior consequence, the resultant frequency of that behavior. During this stage, the highest number of right answers was three. During training, the removal information procedure was used. It consisted of six steps. Thus, 36 scenarios were used, six for each step (three where behavior was maintained by the teacher s attention, and three by student s task escape from academic tasks. Each scenario was accompanied by questions intended to identify the behavior, preceding event, consequence, frequency and probable behavior function. At step 1, all scenario-related questions had been answered. From step 2 onward, answers were withdrawn one by one until no answer was provided to all questions. On Test 1, identical to BL, all three participants had all eight questions right. Next, on generalization Test 1, teachers were asked to describe the probable function of behavior in the student they indicated. Two teachers gave the right answer on this test. On application Test 1, participants were asked to suggest a potential intervention, and two of them proposed adequate interventions to change the inadequate behavior of the student indicated. On generalization Test 2 (taken by only one participant), a description of the interaction sequence between participant and student was provided, and the question about the probable function of the student s behavior was made. On this test, the participant gave a right answer. Finally, application Test 2, identical to application Test 1, was administered, and no adequate intervention was proposed. The results obtained suggest that training was effective in teaching teachers to determine the probable function of student behavior in a relatively short time |
