The Good Behaviour Game intervention to improve behavioural and other outcomes for children aged 7–8 years: a cluster RCT

Author:

Humphrey Neil1ORCID,Hennessey Alexandra1ORCID,Troncoso Patricio12ORCID,Panayiotou Margarita1ORCID,Black Louise1ORCID,Petersen Kimberly1ORCID,Wo Lawrence1ORCID,Mason Carla1ORCID,Ashworth Emma3ORCID,Frearson Kirsty1ORCID,Boehnke Jan R4ORCID,Pockett Rhys D5ORCID,Lowin Julia5ORCID,Foxcroft David6ORCID,Wigelsworth Michael1ORCID,Lendrum Ann1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Manchester Institute of Education, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

2. Institute for Social Policy, Housing, Equalities Research, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK

3. School of Psychology, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK

4. School of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK

5. Swansea Centre for Health Economics, University of Swansea, Swansea, UK

6. Department of Psychology, Health and Professional Development, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK

Abstract

BackgroundUniversal, school-based behaviour management interventions can produce meaningful improvements in children’s behaviour and other outcomes. However, the UK evidence base for these remains limited.ObjectiveThe objective of this trial was to investigate the impact, value for money and longer-term outcomes of the Good Behaviour Game. Study hypotheses centred on immediate impact (hypothesis 1); subgroup effects (at-risk boys, hypothesis 2); implementation effects (dosage, hypothesis 3); maintenance/sleeper effects (12- and 24-month post-intervention follow-ups, hypothesis 4); the temporal association between mental health and academic attainment (hypothesis 5); and the health economic impact of the Good Behaviour Game (hypothesis 6).DesignThis was a two-group, parallel, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Primary schools (n = 77) were randomly assigned to implement the Good Behaviour Game for 2 years or continue their usual practice, after which there was a 2-year follow-up period.SettingThe trial was set in primary schools across 23 local authorities in England.ParticipantsParticipants were children (n = 3084) aged 7–8 years attending participating schools.InterventionThe Good Behaviour Game is a universal behaviour management intervention. Its core components are classroom rules, team membership, monitoring behaviour and positive reinforcement. It is played alongside a normal classroom activity for a set time, during which children work in teams to win the game to access the agreed rewards. The Good Behaviour Game is a manualised intervention delivered by teachers who receive initial training and ongoing coaching.Main outcome measuresThe measures were conduct problems (primary outcome; teacher-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores); emotional symptoms (teacher-rated Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire scores); psychological well-being, peer and social support, bullying (i.e. social acceptance) and school environment (self-report Kidscreen survey results); and school absence and exclusion from school (measured using National Pupil Database records). Measures of academic attainment (reading, standardised tests), disruptive behaviour, concentration problems and prosocial behaviour (Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation Checklist scores) were also collected during the 2-year follow-up period.ResultsThere was no evidence that the Good Behaviour Game improved any outcomes (hypothesis 1). The only significant subgroup moderator effect identified was contrary to expectations: at-risk boys in Good Behaviour Game schools reported higher rates of bullying (hypothesis 2). The moderating effect of the amount of time spent playing the Good Behaviour Game was unclear; in the context of both moderate (≥ 1030 minutes over 2 years) and high (≥ 1348 minutes over 2 years) intervention compliance, there were significant reductions in children’s psychological well-being, but also significant reductions in their school absence (hypothesis 3). The only medium-term intervention effect was for peer and social support at 24 months, but this was in a negative direction (hypothesis 4). After disaggregating within- and between-individual effects, we found no temporal within-individual associations between children’s mental health and their academic attainment (hypothesis 5). Last, our cost–consequences analysis indicated that the Good Behaviour Game does not provide value for money (hypothesis 6).LimitationsLimitations included the post-test-only design for several secondary outcomes; suboptimal implementation dosage (mitigated by complier-average causal effect estimation); and moderate child-level attrition (18.5% for the primary outcome analysis), particularly in the post-trial follow-up period (mitigated by the use of full information maximum likelihood procedures).Future workQuestions remain regarding programme differentiation (e.g. how distinct is the Good Behaviour Game from existing behaviour management practices, and does this makes a difference in terms of its impact?) and if the Good Behaviour Game is impactful when combined with a complementary preventative intervention (as has been the case in several earlier trials).ConclusionThe Good Behaviour Game cannot be recommended based on the findings reported here.Trial registrationThis trial is registered as ISRCTN64152096.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full inPublic Health Research; Vol. 10, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Public Health Research programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health and Care Research

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Complementary and alternative medicine,Pharmaceutical Science

Reference131 articles.

1. Humphrey N, Hennessey A, Ashworth E, Frearson K, Black L, Petersen K, et al. Good Behaviour Game: Evaluation Report and Executive Summary. London: Education Endowment Foundation; 2018.

2. Department for Education. Pupil Behaviour in Schools in England. London: Department for Education; 2012.

3. Office for Standards in Education. Below the Radar: Low-Level Disruption in the Country’s Classrooms. London: Office for Standards in Education; 2014.

4. NHS Digital. Mental Health of Children and Young People in England, 2017. London: NHS Digital; 2018.

5. Mental health difficulties and academic attainment: evidence for gender-specific developmental cascades in middle childhood;Panayiotou;Dev Psychopathol,2018

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3