The overall effect size for token reinforcement interventions in middle schools is large (g ≈ 1.04) but not statistically significant¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across 31 studies, the aggregated effect size for token reinforcement was approximately g = 1.04 with no significant treatment effect (p = 0.156). → Kelly C. Dreger 2022

Evidence¶

Kelly C. Dreger 2022¶

Kelly C. Dreger, Ed.D. and Steve Downey, Ph.D. (2022). Reinforcement Practicality for Middle School Students: A Meta-Analysis. Valdosta State University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1355660

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analytic aggregation of 31 studies of token reinforcement in middle schools, computed in R using the MAd, metafor, and compute.es packages with Hedges' g. The heterogeneity test yielded "the effect size g was approximately 1.04" with no significant treatment effects (p = 0.156).

"From the heterogeneity test, the effect size g was approximately 1.04, but there were no significant treatment effects among the means calculated (p = 0.156)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Heterogeneity among token reinforcement studies exceeds 99% and is statistically significant — related
• Aggregated effect sizes differ by outcome type: behavior highest (g = 2.38), performance large (g = 0.91), motivation small and negative (g = -0.39), none statistically significant — related
• 61.29% of studies showed positive effects of token reinforcement, but only 6.45% had sample sizes sufficient for generalizable large effects — related
• Reporting and publication bias pervade the token reinforcement literature: 38.71% of studies reported large significant effects while 29.03% lacked statistical significance — related
• Five moderators of token reinforcement effect sizes: study type, outcome type, effect size direction, publication year, and variance — related