An examination of the efficacy of conjoint behavioral consultation with diverse clients

被引:24
|
作者
Sheridan, Susan M.
Eagle, John W.
Doll, Beth
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska, Nebraska Ctr Res Children Youth Families & Sch, Lincoln, NE 68588 USA
[2] Univ Kansas, Sch Psychol Program, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1037/h0084130
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
This study explored the efficacy of conjoint behavioral consultation (CBC) by assessing objective outcomes and social validity with a sample of students with and without diversity. Diversity characteristics that were investigated included ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family composition, maternal education level, and language spoken in the home. Behavioral change, goal attainment, acceptability, satisfaction, and perceptions of efficacy of the CBC model were measured with 125 students representing varying levels of diversity, and 192 target behaviors. Data were collected across 8 years of a federally funded training program across two states. Findings indicated that CBC-medialed interventions yielded generally high effect sizes regardless of the presence of diversity or the number of diverse characteristics exhibited. Social validity measures also yielded very favorable results, suggesting that participants (teachers and family members, including those who experienced some form of diversity) found the procedures positive. Implications for research and practice are presented.
引用
收藏
页码:396 / 417
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Role of Target Behaviors in Enhancing the Efficacy of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation
    Schumacher, Rachel E.
    Bass, Henry P.
    Cheng, Katherine C.
    Wheeler, Lorey A.
    Sheridan, Susan M.
    Witte, Amanda L.
    [J]. SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2024, 53 (02) : 137 - 150
  • [2] Conjoint behavioral consultation: A procedural manual
    Nevin, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTATION, 1999, 10 (02) : 185 - 187
  • [3] RURAL TEACHER PRACTICES AND PARTNERSHIPS TO ADDRESS BEHAVIORAL CHALLENGES The Efficacy and Mechanisms of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation
    Sheridan, Susan M.
    Witte, Amanda L.
    Kunz, Gina M.
    Wheeler, Lorey A.
    Angell, Samantha R.
    Lester, Houston F.
    [J]. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL, 2018, 119 (01): : 99 - 121
  • [4] The efficacy of conjoint behavioral consultation in the home setting: Outcomes and mechanisms in rural communities
    Sheridan, Susan M.
    Witte, Amanda L.
    Holmes, Shannon R.
    Wu, ChaoRong
    Bhatia, Sonya A.
    Angell, Samantha R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 62 : 81 - 101
  • [5] Patterns of relational communication in conjoint behavioral consultation
    Erchul, WP
    Sheridan, SM
    Ryan, DA
    Grissom, PF
    Killough, CE
    Mettler, DW
    [J]. SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY, 1999, 14 (02) : 121 - 147
  • [6] Conceptual and empirical bases of conjoint behavioral consultation
    Sheridan, SM
    [J]. SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY, 1997, 12 (02) : 119 - 133
  • [7] Examining the Efficacy of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation for Middle School Students With Externalizing Behavior Problems
    Garbacz, S. Andrew
    Beattie, Tiffany
    Novotnak, Tanya
    Kurtz-Nelson, Eva
    Zahn, Miranda
    Yim-Dockery, Huna
    Cohenour, Jessica
    Jordan, Phoebe
    [J]. BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS, 2020, 46 (01) : 3 - 17
  • [8] Assessment of Consultation and Intervention Implementation: A Review of Conjoint Behavioral Consultation Studies
    Collier-Meek, Melissa A.
    Sanetti, Lisa M. H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSULTATION, 2014, 24 (01) : 55 - 73
  • [9] A comparison of parent and teacher acceptability ratings of behavioral and conjoint behavioral consultation
    Freer, P
    Watson, TS
    [J]. SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 1999, 28 (04) : 672 - 684
  • [10] The efficacy of conjoint behavioral consultation on parents and children in the home setting: Results of a randomized controlled trial
    Sheridan, Susan M.
    Ryoo, Ji Hoon
    Garbacz, S. Andrew
    Kunz, Gina M.
    Chumney, Frances L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 51 (06) : 717 - 733