Abstract

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.

摘要

这项研究的目的是研究一种基于学校的普遍干预措施，即良好行为博弈（GBG）对儿童行为的影响，并探讨在不同累积风险（CR）暴露水平下儿童中任何亚组调节作用。在英格兰的77所小学中进行了为期2年的整群随机对照试验。干预学校的教师提供了GBG，而对照学校的教师则继续照常提供。行为（特别是破坏性行为，注意力集中问题和亲社会行为）通过“教师对课堂适应性观察”的清单进行评估。通过汇总每个孩子所面临的危险因素的数量来计算CR指数。多级模型表明没有主要或亚组的影响。尽管使用曲线趋势时发现对破坏行为的干预作用很小，但这些发现对CR的建模基本上不敏感。进一步的敏感性分析表明，程序差异程度没有明显影响。总而言之，我们的发现表明，在本英语学校样本中，GBG不能改善行为。