Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of the Explicit Timing and Interspersal Interventions: Analysis of Problem Completion Rates, Student Preference, and Teacher Acceptability

  • Published:
Journal of Behavioral Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Explicit timing and interspersal interventions were investigated using a within-subjects design with 45 third-grade students. A control assignment consisted of subtraction of a two digit number from a two digit number (i.e., target problem) and served as a baseline. An explicit timing assignment consisted of similar problems as those for the control assignment. The interspersal assignment consisted of similar problems as those for the control and explicit timing assignments with the addition of subtraction of a one digit number from a one digit number interspersed following every third target problem. Total problem completion rates, target problem completion rates, accuracy on target problems and students' rating regarding difficulty, time, effort, and preference between assignments for class work were collected. Student preference choices were analyzed for fit with the discrete task completion hypothesis. Three trials were administered. Results indicated that: (a) students completed more total problems during interspersal, (b) target problem completion rates were higher during explicit timing, (c) accuracy rates remained constant, (d) students rated the explicit timing assignment as requiring more time and being more difficult for all trials and as requiring more effort for trial 2 and 3, (e) students selected the interspersal assignment to do in class as compared to the explicit timing assignment for all trials, and (f) the data fit the discrete task completion hypothesis relatively well for all trials. Discussion focuses on comparing academic interventions based on problem completion rates, student preference, and acceptability data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Billington, E. J., & Skinner, C. H. (2002). Getting students to choose to do more work: Evidence of the effectiveness of the interspersal procedure. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 105–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cates, G. L., & Skinner, C. H. (2000). Getting remedial mathematics students to prefer homework with 20% and 40% more problems: An investigation of the strength of the interspersing procedure. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 339–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cates, G. L., Skinner, C. H., Watkins, C. E., Rhymer, K. N., McNeill, S. L., & McCurdy, M. (1999). Effects of interspersing additional brief math problems on student performance and perception of math assignments: Getting students to prefer to do more work. Journal of Behavioral Education, 9, 177–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Clark, S. L., & Rhymer, K. N. (2003). Student preference for explicit timing and interspersal procedures as a function of math problem completion rates: Testing the discrete task completion hypothesis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 12, 275–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Elliott, S. N., Witt, J. C., Galvin, G., & Moe, G. L. (1986). Children's involvement in intervention selection: Acceptability of interventions for misbehaving peers. Professional Psychology, 17, 235–241.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Herrnstein, R. J. (1961). Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267–272.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Logan, P., & Skinner, C. H. (1998). Improving students' perceptions of a mathematics assignment by increasing problem completion rates: Is problem completion a reinforcing event? School Psychology Quarterly, 13, 322–331.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mace, F., McCurdy, B., & Quigley, E. A. (1990). A collateral effect of reward predicted by matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 197–205.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Martens, B. K., Lochner, D. G., & Kelly, S. Q. (1992). The effects of variable-interval reinforcement on academic engagement: A demonstration of matching theory. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 143–151.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martens, B. K., & Witt, J. C. (1982). The Intervention Rating Profile. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Copyrighted scale.

  11. Rhymer, K. N., Henington, C., Skinner, C. H., & Looby, E. J. (1999). The effects of explicit timing on mathematics performance in second-grade Caucasian and African American students. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 397–407.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rhymer, K. N., Skinner, C. H., Henington, C., D'Reaux, R. A., & Sims, S. (1998). Effects of explicit timing on mathematics problem completion rates in African-American third-grade elementary students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 673–677.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rhymer, K. N., Skinner, C. H., Jackson, S., McNeill, S., Smith, T., & Jackson, B. (2002). The 1-minute explicit timing intervention: The influence of mathematics problem difficulty. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29, 305–311.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Skinner, C. H. (2002). An empirical analysis of interspersal research: Evidence, implications, and applications of the discrete task completion hypothesis. Journal of School Psychology, 4, 347–368.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Skinner, C. H., Hall-Johnson, K., Skinner, A. L., Cates, G., Weber, J., & Johns, G. A. (1999). Enhancing perceptions of mathematics assignments by increasing relative problem completion rates through the interspersal technique. Journal of Experimental Education, 68, 43–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Skinner, C. H., Robinson, S. L., Johns, G. A., Logan, P., & Belfiore, P. J. (1996). Applying Hernstein's matching law to influence students' choice to complete difficult academic tasks. Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Van Houten, R., Morrison, E., Jarvis, R., & McDonald, M. (1974). The effects of explicit timing and feedback on compositional response rate in elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 547–555.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Van Houten, R., & Thompson, C. (1976). The effects of explicit timing on math performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 227–230.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Witt, J. C., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Acceptability of classroom intervention strategies. In T. R. Kratochwill (Ed.), Advances in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 251–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrina N. Rhymer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rhymer, K.N., Morgan, S.K. Comparison of the Explicit Timing and Interspersal Interventions: Analysis of Problem Completion Rates, Student Preference, and Teacher Acceptability. J Behav Educ 14, 283–303 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-005-8651-9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-005-8651-9

Keywords

Navigation