Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Preschool students are expelled from educational settings at higher rates than any other students, and this may serve to be problematic across their lifespan. One of the primary reasons reported is due to their display of social behavioral problems within the preschool classroom. A historical review of social behavioral interventions for preschool children in classroom settings was provided. Moreover, a meta-analysis of recent evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for children with and without disabilities in preschool classrooms was conducted. In addition, 10 research questions were addressed that included the identification of studies using the most rigorous designs. Results from 14 studies in 12 peer-reviewed journals (2007–2017) were provided that indicated variations in range and scientific rigor with two studies meeting the highest standards of rigor. Suggestions for future research were offered.

Keywords

special education education social sciences early childhood educational psychology and counseling educational research education theory and practice experimental psychology psychology

Preschools have the potential to affect all aspects of children’s lives across their lifespan by teaching them the skills required to thrive:

High quality prekindergarten improves school readiness. It provides children with cognitive, academic, social, and emotional skills they require to be successful in elementary school. The benefits of quality prekindergarten for children three- to four-years-old go beyond the first years of school. (Gilliam, 2005, p. 2)

However, preschool students are expelled at more than 3 times higher rates than students in any other grade and have been for years without resolve (Gilliam, 2005; Gilliam & Shahar, 2006; Malik, 2017; U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2016). According to the 2016 National Survey of Children’s Health, at least 50,000 preschool children in the United States of America were suspended at least once and 17,000 were expelled from school during the year of review (Mader, 2019). Approximately, 250 preschool children are estimated to be suspended or expelled each day (Malik, 2017; Strauss, 2017). In addition, most preschool children expelled are male, Black, (Mader, 2019), and/or taller than their peers (Gilliam & Shahar, 2006), which is a “fact experts attribute in part to implicit racial bias among educators (Mader, 2019, p. 4).”

Furthermore, preschool students are expelled at these rates for various reasons. One reason is because of their social behavior problems exhibited within the classroom (e.g., tantrums, aggression, noncompliance). Researchers have reported that preschool children from low socioeconomic status (SES) environments and lower quality schools tended to have higher rates of social behavior problems compared to their peers from middle and high SES backgrounds and higher quality schools (Qi & Kaiser, 2003; Vandell et al., 1988). These problems may serve to hinder an environment conducive to learning and socializing and promote one that may be unsafe.

In addition, these social behavior problems may serve as obstacles for preschool children for years. These problems may prevent these young children from being exposed to social engagement opportunities, receiving essential early childhood general or special education, and/or early childhood interventions, which may ultimately interfere with their ability to matriculate through elementary, secondary, and postsecondary programs. Preschool children exhibiting social behavior problems within the classroom such as deficiencies with on-task behaviors may not even be ready for kindergarten (De Haas-Warner, 1991).

Research has posited that the unaddressed social behavior problems of preschool children are predictive of poor literacy development and academic achievement (Hinshaw, 1992). This may lead to poor performance in kindergarten and ultimately school failure (Snyder, 2001; Tremblay et al., 1996). Consequently, the inability to obtain a preschool education may place these children at risk of being left behind their peers and impede upon their abilities to become productive citizens as adults.

Furthermore, the social behavior problems of preschool children with and without disabilities when left unmodified may place them on a positive trajectory for more serious social difficulties later in life. These may include social maladjustment problems (Morrison et al., 2002; Odom et al., 1990), aggression and antisocial behavior (Farrington, 1991), poor psychosocial adjustments (Mathur & Rutherford, 1991), conduct problems, juvenile delinquency (Zigler et al., 1992), and being infused with the “revolving door” of the criminal justice system including incarceration and recidivism as well as other behavioral, emotional, and mental health problems (Knight & Hughes, 1995). Moreover, these problems may make these children more susceptible to risk factors including but not limited to their experiencing early death, psychiatric illness, divorce, substance abuse, fatal accidents, and unemployment within their lifetime (Carter & Van Norman, 2010; Zero to Three, 2018).

On the contrary, children who receive preschool education and intervention services in schools with teachers who have high levels of job satisfaction experience lower rates of expulsion (Gilliam & Shahar, 2006). To best place young children with and without disabilities with social behavior problems on a trajectory for academic success, lifelong achievements, and positive contributions to society, it is optimal for teachers to be prepared to equip their students with positive social behavioral support, as needed, within the natural preschool classroom. However, a prodigious number of preschools are not prepared to meet the needs of these students possibly, in part, due to teachers’ unawareness of evidenced-based positive social behavioral interventions that may be implemented within the classroom environment (Stormont et al., 2011).

What is Positive Social Behavior?

Social behavior may be described as “the behavior of two or more people with respect to one another or in concert with respect to a common environment (Skinner, 1953, p. 297).” The social behavior of preschool children has been studied by researchers (Gesell, 1925) in preschool settings/environments (Lawrence, 2018), which are classrooms where children typically 3 to 5 years of age receive their formal education, for nearly a century (Berne & Van, 1930; Chandler et al., 1992a; Chittenden, 1942; Choi & Ohm, 2018 ; Grady et al., 2012; Jolstead et al., 2017; Lane et al., 2017; Marshall & McCandless, 1957; Parten, 1933 ; Parten & Newhall, 1943). Positive social behavior may be observed in preschool settings when the children function appropriately with others and their environment during designated class activities particularly when presented with social occasions including but not limited to free play. As mentioned previously, research indicates that children who persistently display positive social behavior generally develop advanced language, cognitive, and social behavioral proficiencies over time, whereas those who constantly experience social behavior problems without modifications may experience deficiencies in these areas of development (McEvoy et al., 1992).

Preschool children who exhibit positive social behavior generally possess three behavioral characteristics. First, they use a wide range of social skills on various occasions. “Social skills are behaviors that promote positive interaction with others and the environment” (Lynch & Simpson, 2010, p. 3). Moreover, these children demonstrate their repertoire of social skills (e.g., offering and responding to compliments, smiling, asking for assistance, negotiating play roles, sharing, cooperating, taking turns, making eye contact, solving problems, staying engaged with the lessons and materials, asking and replying to questions) without extraordinary levels of prompting and/or reinforcement by their teachers, peers, or environmental supports. Research suggests that both teachers and parents concur regarding the importance of preschool children possessing social skills and that their ability to cooperate and be responsible were the most essential (Frey et al., 2014; Lane et al., 2007).

Second, preschool children with positive social behavior have social interactions that are appropriate and engaging with their teachers and peers. They often play well with others and aptly use preschool objects, equipment, materials, toys, and lessons as they are intended. For example, these children remain actively involved with the art lesson assigned during the designated time while adequately sharing art materials with others (Kim et al., 2003).

Third, teachers of preschool children with positive social behavior rate them as possessing generally high levels of social competence. These trait behaviors are rated based on the teachers’ observations over time of the children’s social behaviors during activities scheduled inside (e.g., free play) and outside (e.g., on the playground and field trips) of the preschool classroom. Moreover, social competence is the capacity of children to establish long-lasting friendships, be accepted by peers, adequately participate in interpersonal relationships, and become members of social groups (Lobo & Winsler, 2006). Although social skills and social competence are often used interchangeably in the literature, some researchers argue that these terms are best used separately to better differentiate between specific social behaviors and the outcomes of social behavioral interventions (Hops & Greenwood, 1988).

What Are Social Behavior Problems of Preschool Children?

Research clearly indicates that demonstrating positive social behavior early in life is essential to preschool children’s future accomplishments within and outside of classrooms and may lead to positive emotional and social development (i.e., positive peer friendships and relationships, called on in class regularly, popular, and acceptance) in the future. However, preschool children with social behavior problems often lack social skills as well as other skills such as language skills (Qi et al., 2019) and interpersonal problem-solving skills (Hune & Nelson, 2002). Moreover, they may experience limited or unsuccessful positive social interactions (e.g., withdrawal, isolation, few initiations, off-task behaviors, inappropriate, and negative interactions) with their peers and teachers. Also, these children may be rated by their teachers as being students with low levels of social competence. For example, in a prevention study of 60 preschool children who were at risk for developing conduct disorders, Tankersley et al. (1996) used the following behavioral definitions to describe social behavior problems: negative verbal statements, destruction, noncompliance, grabbing, out-of-seat or out-of-area, and aggression.

The preschool years may be the most advantageous period for implementing social behavioral intervention programs. Teachers may serve as key interventionists in preschool settings for young children needing additional positive social behavioral support such as those with language delays, social delays, and developmental disabilities (Bovey & Strain, 2003). However, preschool teachers report that their greatest obstacle to instruction is the social behavior problems of their students’ particularly disruptive behaviors (Joseph & Strain, 2003). Moreover, Frey and his colleagues (2013) stated that this problem is increasing with teachers reporting the need to address this behavior in 10% to 15% of their students.

What Are Rigorous Evidenced-Based Social Behavioral Interventions for Preschool Children That May Be Useful to Teachers in the Classroom?

According to Dunst et al. (2002b), evidenced-based interventions are those that “create testable, dependable, and planned changes, [in which] the most meaningful causes are those which can be deliberately manipulated (p. 1).” Moreover, evidenced-based interventions do not necessarily have a common set of criteria across fields; they are determined by underscoring the best evidence that is known for improving a problem (Marchant, 1991). Evidenced-based practices are those that are effective, research-driven, and based on empirical data (Dunst et al., 2002a).

Based on these definitions, key criteria that characterize rigorous evidenced-based interventions extend beyond being experimental (a scientific approach that manipulates one set of variables as a constant and measures another set of variables), applied (of social importance to society; Baer et al., 1968), behavioral (physical aspects of behavior are modified; Baer et al., 1968), analytic (the researcher exercises control over the participant’s behavior during the implementation of an experiment), and technological (the behavioral application was described completely; Baer et al., 1968). These interventions also are effective (Baer et al., 1968), measure treatment fidelity (Detrich, 1999; Gable et al., 2001), assess social validity (Wolf, 1978), and demonstrate generality (Baer et al., 1968; Brown & Odom, 1994; Stokes & Baer, 1977; Stokes & Osnes, 1989).

Behavioral research scientists have concurred regarding the social importance of identifying and implementing social behavioral interventions for young children in preschool classroom environments for more than 50 years. More specifically, improving the functional positive social behavior of preschool children was of particular interest to these early founding research scientists (Baer & Sherman, 1964; Buell et al., 1968; Goetz et al., 1975; Hart et al., 1968; Pinkston et al., 1973; Strain et al., 1976) whose focus was often strongly established in the teachings of B. F. Skinner (1953). They generally used single-subject and experimental-group designs with preschool children (a) diagnosed with disabilities, (b) diagnosed with developmental delays, (c) at risk for developmental delays, and (d) typically developing. Moreover, their focus was often on the use of environment-mediated strategies that included manipulations of classroom arrangements to modify behavior (Foster & Ritchey, 1979; LeLaurin & Risley, 1972; Quiltich & Risley, 1973; Risley & Cataldo, 1973; Twardosz et al., 1974; Wallace et al., 1976).

Research examining children with and without disabilities in preschool classroom environments, which was particularly prolific in the 1990s, specifically sought to enhance their positive social behavior (Chandler et al., 1992a; De Haas-Warner, 1991; Filla et al., 1999; Hall, 2006; Miller et al., 1993; Raab, 2003; Zanolli et al., 1996) including their social interactions (Garfinkle, & Schwartz, 2002; Goldstein & Cisar, 1992; Goldstein et al., 1997; Gronna et al., 1999; Hendrickson et al., 1993; Hughes & Carter, 2002; Hundert & Hopkins, 1992; Hundert & Houghton, 1992; Keller & Honig, 1993; Krantz & McClannahan, 1998; Lindeman et al., 1993; McGee et al., 1992; Nordquist & McEvoy, 1983; Rettig et al., 1993; Sainato et al., 1992; Spohn et al., 1999; Strain et al., 1994, 1995), social skills (Ducharme & Holborn, 1997; Factor & Schilmoeller, 1983; Guglielmo & Tryon, 2001; LeBlanc & Matson, 1995; Storey et al., 1994), and social competency (Jenkins et al., 1989; McEvoy et al., 1992; Odom et al., 1999). Moreover, child-, teacher-, peer-, and environmental-mediated social behavioral interventions were of major interests to behavioral scientists (Goldstein et al., 1992; Guralnick, 1981; Malmskog & McDonnell, 1999; Odom et al., 1992; Robertson et al., 2003; Storey et al., 1993) particularly through the manipulation of toys (e.g., Hendrickson et al., 1981; Kallam & Rettig, 1991; Martin et al., 1991).

Since that time these researchers have continued lines of work that address the importance of using evidenced-based interventions to examine and manipulate the social behavior of preschool students, their peers and teachers, and various aspects of the classroom environment when intervening to enhance the social behavior of these children (Barnett, 2018). In summary, this historical work of early behavioral research scientists has contributed to informing the field of useful social behavioral interventions for preschool children with and without disabilities and that those who enter kindergarten with persistent social behavior problems are generally not ready to learn but are at an elevated risk for academic and school failure (Brigman et al., 1999).

The current research serves as a meta-analysis of evidenced-based positive social behavioral interventions for children with and without disabilities in preschool classrooms. In addition, it extends the work of early behavioral research scientists as well as prior review syntheses on evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for these children (Chandler et al., 1992b; Kim et al., 2003; Knight & Hughes, 1995; Vaughn et al., 2003). Thus, it was possible to address 10 research questions across studies to determine the most highly rigorous evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for preschool children in their classrooms.

Method

Searching the Literature

Research studies meeting the inclusionary criteria were identified in the general literature using focused searches to broadly locate and identify relevant works. Inclusionary criteria included experimental studies designed to improve the positive social behavior (viz., social skills, social interactions, and social competence) of young children in preschool classrooms. Exclusionary criteria included nonexperimental studies (e.g., correlational, observational, quasi-experimental, meta-analytic, descriptive, and review), treatment administered in settings within non-preschool classrooms (e.g., contrived preschool environments like research laboratories and rooms within the preschool school but not in the natural classroom, clinics, home settings), and studies focused on enhancing mental health, social emotions, social cognitions, or social communications of preschool children. Moreover, studies that were not primarily focused on promoting positive social or prosocial behavior but specifically on reducing aggressive or negative behavior were not selected for review in this study.

An electronic search of the PsycINFO and ERIC databases was conducted to identify recently published (2007–2017), experimental, social behavioral interventions for young children in preschool settings. The following key research topic terms were used to conduct the search: social behavior, preschool, and intervention. Only peer-reviewed academic journals and journal articles were selected. Reports, dissertations, books, or magazines were not selected for review. This search resulted in 668 records. The author then examined these records to ensure the inclusionary criteria (experimental, social behavioral interventions, and target participants received interventions within actual preschool classrooms) were met yielding a total of 14 studies.

Analytic Method

This meta-analysis served to review and underscore the results of evidenced-based, positive social behavioral interventions for children with and without disabilities in preschool classrooms from 14 studies in 12 peer-reviewed journals (2007–2017). Ten research questions were addressed from these studies with four (questions 6–9 in the following) providing the evidence of the studies applying the most rigorous designs or those that had effective treatment results, measured treatment fidelity and social validity, and generalized. To address this study’s research questions, a simple cross tabulation of each of the 14 studies by 10 response categories was completed to yield the frequency and percentage of studies of interests. The research questions and respective response categories were as follows:

What was the range of target participants? The range across studies of target participants selected was identified.

What was the disability status of the target participants? Studies were assigned to one (or more) of the following four categories based on the study’s selected target participants’ disability status including (a) disability, (b) at-risk, (d) developmental delay, or (d) none/typically developing.

What was the target social behavior of the target participants? The selected target participants’ social behaviorial problems addressed were assigned to one of the three response categories: social skills, social interactions, and/or social competency.

What experimental research designs were used? The percentages of research designs commonly implemented were identified and categorized as a single-subject or group design study procedures.

What experimental intervention procedures were implemented? The intervention procedures were grouped into one of the five social behavior-change strategy categories. Only the social behavior and environments that were modified during the treatment phases of the studies were evaluated in this analysis. These categories included interventions that measured behavioral changes as a function of particular manipulations of (a) the behavior of target children (child-mediated), (b) the behavior of their peers (peer-mediated), (c) the behavior of their teachers or preschool personnel (teacher-mediated), (d) the target participants’ preschool environments (environment-mediated), or (e) various combinations of these four strategies (multiple component).

Were the experimental treatment interventions reported to be effective? Studies were reviewed to determine whether convincing data, which demonstrated positive treatment effects, were reported. Comparative studies were considered effective if the researchers reported evidence for one type of intervention being more effective than a second one or that there were substantial differences detected between groups.

Did the researchers implement treatment fidelity procedures? Studies were examined to identify those that systematically measured the extent to which the experimental treatment was implemented as planned. Also, the percentages of studies with treatment fidelity procedures across behavioral-change categories were determined.

Did the researchers assess the social validity of the intervention results? Studies were examined to determine the extent to which the perspective of the target preschool children and/or others (e.g., their parents, teachers and/or peers) were systematically assessed regarding the intervention as being worthwhile, acceptable, and beneficial. Also, the percentages of studies using social validity assessments across behavior-change categories were identified.

Did the interventions produce generalization of positive treatment effects? Studies were identified to determine whether positive effects of the interventions generalized to nontreatment variables (e.g., new behaviors, people, settings, times, and/or events). Moreover, the percentages of studies with generalization across behavior-change categories were identified.

Which studies implemented the most rigorous evidenced-based social behavioral interventions? Each of the 14 studies was considered evidenced-based as measured by the selection criteria. Yet the most rigorous, evidenced-based studies also met four criteria including (a) effective positive treatment effects, (b) a measurement of treatment fidelity, (c) an assessment of social validity, and (d) generalization of positive treatment effects. In addition, robust studies were those that met three of these four criteria. In summary, studies were also analyzed to identify the percentage of studies across behavior-change categories that included the most rigorous research results.

Results

This review paper synthesized the results concerning evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for preschool children with and without disabilities from 14 studies (2007–2017). Studies included in the meta-analysis were selected from 12 peer-reviewed journals for review most frequently from Topics in Early Childhood Special Education (n = 3; see Table 1). Most of these studies were published in 2007 with a decline thereafter. Ten research questions were addressed across the studies to identify evidenced-based social behaviorial intervention studies using the most rigorous designs. Results indicated variations in range and scientific rigor. Unless otherwise indicated, the following analyses are based on (n = 14) studies.

Table 1.

Authors and Journal Titles of Peer-Reviewed Social Behavioral Intervention Studies.

First author and publication year	Peer-reviewed journal title
Bellini et al. (2007)	School Psychology Review
Benitez et al. (2011)	School Psychology International
Celeste (2007)	Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness
Crozier and Tincani (2007)	Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Feil et al. (2014)	Journal of Early Intervention
Hughett et al. (2013)	Topics in Early Childhood Special Education
Hyatt and Filler (2007)	Journal of Research in Childhood Education
Kim et al. (2011)	Children and Youth Services Review
Kohler et al. (2007)	Topics in Early Childhood Special Education
Ledford and Wolery (2013)	Exceptional Children
Michael et al. (2009)	TEACHING Exceptional Children
Ocasio et al. (2015)	Journal of Child and Family Studies
Smith et al. (2009)	Journal of Applied School Psychology
Strain and Bovey (2011)	Topics in Early Childhood Special Education

What Was the Range of Target Participants Across Studies?

The range of target preschool children included were between one and 334 across studies. The range of target preschool teachers per study included between one and six across studies. The range of target peers included were between four and 20. Fifty-seven percent of the studies involved a small number of target children between one and six children. The most rigorous studies selected two to three target participants.

What Was the Disability Status of Target Participants?

Fifty percent of the social behavioral studies included children with disabilities diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD; 36%), Down syndrome (7%), or who were blind (7%). Sixty-eight percent of the studies represented different groups of target participants without disabilities. These studies included those who were at-risk for oppositional and conduct disorders (21%); with language, communication, motor, social, and cognitive developmental delays (21%); aggressive (14%); peer-rejected (7%); and/or typically developing peers (36%). Only one study (7%) intervened solely with target children who were typically developing and considered to be experiencing normal social behavioral development. The two most rigorous studies focused on children with ASD.

What Were the Target Social Behaviors of the Target Participants and Were the Experimental Treatment Interventions Effective?

Overall, 93% of the experimental social behaviorial intervention studies (n = 13) provided evidence that the treatments were effective at enhancing the social behavior of preschool children (Bellini et al., 2007; Benitez et al., 2011; Celeste, 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007; Feil et al., 2014; Hughett et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2011; Kohler et al., 2007; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Michael et al., 2009; Ocasio et al., 2015; Smith et al., 2009; Strain & Bovey, 2011). The target participants’ social behaviorial problems addressed by researchers were categorized into one or more of three response categories including social skills, social interactions, and/or level of social competency. In addition, the effectiveness of each of the three social behavioral interventions was analyzed.

Social skills

Forty-three percent of the studies reviewed (n = 6) focused on teaching preschool children social skills primarily through the implementation of a social skills training program (Celeste, 2007; Kim et al., 2011) including Preschool First Step to Success (Feil et al., 2014), the Learning Experiences and Alternative Program for Preschoolers and Their Parents (LEAP; Strain & Bovey, 2011), the Second Step curriculum (Ocasio et al., 2015), and a program based on Skillstreaming in Early Childhood (Hyatt & Filler, 2007). Children with disabilities, developmental delays, at risk for delays, and who had social behavior problems received the interventions. Teachers and typically developing children were generally taught to facilitate and promote the use of social skills by the target participants. The target children were primarily taught social skills via coaching, modeling, script training, and teacher-mediated and peer-mediated approaches to prompt them to initiate and maintain play experiences with their peers (Celeste, 2007) such as how to join in activities already underway, share, wait your turn, and invite someone to play (Hyatt & Filler, 2007). Studies addressed entire preschool classrooms and provided social skills training to all students enrolled (Ocasio et al., 2015; Strain & Bovey, 2011). Eighty-three percent of the social behavioral intervention studies that sought to improve the social skills of the target children were reported to be effective.

Social interaction behaviors

Thirty-six percent of the studies (n = 5) reviewed were designed to facilitate the positive social interactions of target participants with and without disabilities. All of these studies reported obtaining effective treatment results. In these studies, the social behavioral interventions were primarily geared toward increasing the social engagement of children with ASD using a video self-modeling technique (Bellini et al., 2007) using a Social Stories (TM) intervention to increase their positive social interactions (e.g., sitting appropriately during circle time, interacting with peers during snack time) and lowering their inappropriate social interactions (e.g., not cooperating or sharing during block time; Crozier & Tincani, 2007). Furthermore, improving the play behavior (viz., stay, play, and talk) of children with developmental delays (Hughett et al., 2013) and ASD (Kohler et al., 2007) together with their typically developing peers was the focus of intervention using a buddy skills treatment package. Moreover, the use of sociodramatic play using Bob Bear, a stuffed animal, was implemented to role-play, model, and reinforce appropriate social interactions of the children (Michael et al., 2009). The two most rigorous studies aimed to improve the social interactions of children.

Social competence

Only 21% of the studies (n = 3) were specifically designed to improve the social competence of the preschool children. Compared to the prior interventions that primarily used direct observational measures of behaviors and skills, these interventions focused on social competence as indicated by teacher ratings of the target children including those peer-rejected and typically developing peers. For example, researchers implemented the Aprender a Convivir prevention program, which focused on teaching children about following rules, cooperating and helping skills (Benitez et al., 2011). Theses researchers had teachers to rate child behavior change by using the Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales (PKBS) and the Child Behavior Checklist-Teacher Report Form (CBCL-TRF). Each of the social behavioral interventions that sought to improve the social competence of the target children were reported to be effective.

What Experimental Research Designs Were Used?

Single-subject design studies

The most commonly used experimental research designs of the reviewed social behavioral studies were identified. Sixty-four percent of studies (n = 9) used single-subject research designs. Of these studies, 56% (n = 5) used a multiple baseline design, 33% (n = 3) utilized a multiple probe design, and 11% (n = 1) used a single-case design. Each of the most rigorous studies used single-subject designs.

Group design studies

Thirty-six percent of studies (n = 5) employed experimental group design studies. Most of these studies (60%; n = 3) utilized experimental pre-post comparison designs. Other group deign studies used randomized control trials (20%; n = 1) and clustered randomized comparison designs (20%; n = 1). These studies compared the effects of receiving interventions versus not receiving the intervention on groups of preschoolers. None of the most rigorous studies used a group subject design.

What Experimental Intervention Procedures Were Implemented?

Teacher-mediated strategies

Twenty-nine percent of the social behavioral intervention studies (n = 4) used teacher-mediated strategies (Crozier & Tincani, 2007; Kim et al., 2011; Ocasio et al., 2015; Strain & Bovey, 2011). The teachers’ or preschool personnel’s behaviors were manipulated by equipping them with supportive instructive techniques designed to facilitate the positive social behaviors of their students. One of the two most rigorous studies used a teacher-mediated strategy (Crozier & Tincani, 2007).

Peer-mediated strategies

The sole use of peer-mediated strategies was not employed in any of the reviewed social behavioral intervention studies reviewed. Typically, these intervention strategies are used to teach typically developing peers of preschool children who are disabled, at-risk, or developmentally delayed ways to promote their positive social behavior. More specifically, interventions using these strategies are often used by peers to trigger reciprocal responses and social interactions of these children. Social behavioral interventions implementing peer-mediated procedures also enlists typically developing preschool children to advance these children’s social skills. After the social skills training, the target children are provided with opportunities to practice with their peers and are prompted and reinforced, at various degrees, by the teacher or researcher when they interact with others using positive social skills.

Environment-mediated strategies

The sole use of environment-mediated strategies was not employed in any of the reviewed social behavioral intervention studies. Environment-mediated strategies manipulate various physical aspects (e.g., toys) of the children’s natural preschool settings to promote the positive social engagement and interactions of the target children. Children may be prompted and reinforced for using designated aspects of their physical classroom environments appropriately.

Multiple component strategies

Most of the studies (71%; n = 10) utilized multiple component strategies to promote the positive social behavior of preschool children (Bellini et al., 2007; Benitez et al., 2011; Celeste, 2007; Feil et al., 2014; Hughett et al., 2013; Hyatt & Filler, 2007; Kohler et al., 2007; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Michael et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2009). Researchers examined the effects of up to a total of three behavior-change strategies in a single study on social behavioral outcomes. The most (50%; n = 7) widely utilized combination of strategies was teacher-mediated, peer-mediated, and environment-mediated (Bellini et al., 2007; Benitez et al., 2011; Celeste, 2007; Hughett et al., 2013; Hyatt & Filler, 2007; Kohler et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2009). Teacher-mediated plus peer-mediated (14%; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Michael et al., 2009) and teacher-mediated plus environment-mediated strategies (7%; Feil et al., 2014) were also used in the reviewed studies. One of the two most rigorous studies used a combination of teacher-mediated, peer-mediated, and environment-mediated strategies.

Did the Researchers Implement Treatment Fidelity Procedures, Assess Social Validity of the Intervention Results, and Did the Interventions Produce Generalization of Positive Treatment Effects?

Forty-three percent of the studies (n = 6) systematically measured the administration of the intervention procedures (Bellini et al., 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007; Feil et al., 2014; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Smith et al., 2009; Strain & Bovey, 2011). Most of these studies assessing treatment fidelity enlisted teachers or researchers to complete a checklist during the treatment phase to determine whether the intervention was implemented correctly as planned. In addition, 21% of the studies assessed (n = 3) the social validity of the intervention results (Bellini et al., 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007; Feil et al., 2014). The social validity of the interventions was measured in several ways. One common measure, for example, was a questionnaire in the form of a Likert-type scale, which was administered to gauge consumers’ beliefs regarding the appropriateness and suitability of the intervention found to be an effective treatment for improving children’s social behaviors. Moreover, 29% of the studies (n = 4; Bellini et al., 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Strain & Bovey, 2011) reported treatment results that were effective and generalized to nontreatment variables. These findings support previous research that state that social behavioral interventions are effective, but the actual generalization of these positive results are elusive.

What Were the Most Rigorous, Evidenced-Based Social Behavioral Studies?

For the purposes of this review, the most rigorous evidenced-based social behavioral intervention studies met all four standards that included effective treatment outcomes that enhanced the positive social behavior of target participants, the implementation of treatment fidelity measurements, social validity assessments, and treatment effects that generalized to other variables. Results indicated that 14% of the evidenced-based social behaviorial studies (n = 2; Bellini et al., 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007) examined met the highest standards of rigor. These studies also selected only two (Bellini et al., 2007) to three (Crozier & Tincani, 2007) target participants at a time, implemented single-subject designs, and used teacher-mediated (Crozier & Tincani, 2007) as well as a combination of teacher-mediated, peer-mediated, and environment-mediated strategies (Bellini et al., 2007).

Moreover, in these studies, the social behavioral interventions were geared toward increasing the social engagement of children with ASD. For example, Bellini and his colleagues (2007) used a video self-modeling technique where the target child was shown a video recording of the target child, peers, or teacher demonstrating the appropriate social behavior then was asked to replicate the behavior exhibited by the model. In another example, Crozier and Tincani (2007) used a Social Stories (TM) intervention to increase their positive social interactions (e.g., sitting appropriately during circle time, interacting with peers during snack time) and lowering their inappropriate social interactions (e.g., not cooperating or sharing during block time). This intervention includes a short story which is written for the target child to outline a particular activity the appropriate social behaviors required for that activity. Both interventions may be easily implemented within the preschool classroom. In addition, research findings also revealed that 21% of the evidenced-based social behaviorial studies (n = 3; Feil et al., 2014; Ledford & Wolery, 2013; Strain & Bovey, 2011) met robust standards that adhered to three of the four standards.

Discussion

The purpose of this article was to review evidenced-based intervention studies designed to bolster the positive social behavior of preschool children with and without disabilities in preschool classroom environments, thus identifying the most rigorous of these studies. To this end, the studies were examined to distinguish those that (a) reported positive treatment effects, (b) measured treatment fidelity, (c) assessed social validity, and (d) produced generalization of treatment effects to nontreatment variables (e.g., new teachers, peers, and classrooms). Results from this review revealed the most rigorous evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for children with disabilities in preschool settings (Bellini et al., 2007; Crozier & Tincani, 2007).

Relevance of the Review

This review of the literature is particularly relevant for the following reasons. First, high-quality preschool classroom environments, especially those where teachers are aware of and feel confident, equipped, and supported to implement appropriate interventions when needed, are beneficial for promoting the positive social behavior of preschool children with and without disabilities (Kohler et al., 2001). Second, teaching preschool children who may have or be at risk for social behavioral problems as well as those typically developing techniques to self-manage their social behavior is beneficial for them in the classroom as well as in other settings, which places them on a positive trajectory for life. Third, preschool teachers and typically developing peers who are adequately prepared to intervene with children experiencing social behaviorial problems may add to the quality of that environment, which serves to promote the overall development, academic success, and positive social behavior of all of the children in the class. Fourth, preschool children with social behavior problems especially those with disabilities who receive evidenced-based social behavioral interventions at school, where they spend most of their day, may be more capable of reaching their optimal levels of development across their lifespan than those who do not receive help. Fifth, if this issue is trivialized and the preschool children do not receive the help that they need to modify their social behavioral problems in preschool (e.g., families joke that this is just how he is and is not he cute when he acts out, he is just bossy and likes to be a leader, she is just too smart for this classroom, or he is just bored) especially in inclusive preschools, they may be inadequately prepared to display positive social behavior in any social environment, unable to learn and behave in kindergarten and other academic settings, and at a greater risk of dropping out of school or being suspended and expelled, which may eventually lead to juvenile delinquency and subsequently incarceration as well as a host of other problems.

Limitations

Seven limitations of this review are underscored, which warrants additional investigations. First, only 14 studies were found on the two selected databases and only two were considered highly rigorous studies that met the established inclusion criteria, which is inarguably a small sample size. Moreover, the number of studies using each behavior-change strategy was variable in size and conclusions and interpretations made were on even smaller numbers of studies. Thus, conclusions should be made with caution. Additional research is needed that will identifies additional evidenced-based strategies for promoting the positive social behaviors of preschool children with and without disabilities. Second, only 7% of the interventions focused solely on typically developing children. All children may benefit from social behavioral interventions in the preschool classroom. Additional studies are needed that focus on typically developing preschool children and children who do not have ASD. Interventions designed to teach these children to be more aware of their peer’s disabilities and ways to serve a peer models are needed to enhance the social behavior of both groups of children particularly when interacting with one another in inclusive preschool classrooms. Third, although one of the two most rigorous studies used a multiple component intervention strategy, none of the solely child-mediated strategies were determined to possess the highest levels of rigor. Fourth, while the majority (93%) of the studies reported effective treatment results, less than half (43%) measured treatment fidelity, 21% assessed social validity, and 29% obtained generalization of the positive treatment effects. Fifth, inter-rater reliability measures were not conducted. Sixth, none of the interventions specifically and solely evaluated the effects of modifying only the preschool environmental aspects of the target participants on their social behavior. Seventh, only 14% of the interventions were the most rigorous, evidenced-based studies. Consequently, additional evidenced-based social behavioral intervention research that is conducted in preschool classrooms is needed that will address these issues and produce more rigorous, evidenced-based results.

Conclusion

Rigorous, evidenced-based social behavioral interventions for children with and without disabilities must continue to be conducted in preschool classrooms, if more children in the population are to be prepared to learn and socialize in kindergarten and remain on a positive lifetime trajectory. Rigorous intervention studies that examine the effects of change in the preschool classroom on the positive social behavior of the children are exceedingly important especially if the cycle of American children being suspended, expelled, and placed on the pathway to negative life experiences such as the pipeline to prison is to be resolved. Nevertheless, unlike the proliferation of this type of research in the 1960s to the early 2000s, in the past few years, a limited number of researchers have not opted to conduct studies of the highest rigor as defined in this article in preschool classrooms. According to Baer and Pinkston (1997), however, “Behavior and environment go together, as do bread and butter, law and order, and peaches and cream. Mere pairing does not communicate much, however; as usual, the meaning is in the details” (pp. xiii). Supplemental research with less stringent inclusion criteria is needed to focus on teasing out how these interventions effect the functional positive social behavior of children in preschool environments.

In conclusion, additional research is needed that will help to close the gap between research and evidenced-based social behavioral intervention practices by teachers of children with and without disabilities in preschool classrooms. Preschool teachers should be instructed to implement these practices with fidelity (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2016). Albeit, empirically validated interventions are not frequently applied in preschool settings (McConnell et al., 1992). Therefore, while this review identified evidenced-based intervention studies with high rigor as well as sound designs, it is highly improbable that these strategies will be implemented, sustained, and taken to scale across preschool classrooms. The suggestion of Odom and McConnell (1992) provided nearly three decades ago holds true today, “A final direction for future research relates less to the development of methodologies and more to support for the use of these procedures by teachers, clinical psychologist, behavior therapists, and other consumers” (p. 243). Thus, it will be possible for preschool children to learn both academic and positive social behavior in the classroom, be ready to be successful in school, and subsequently be best prepared for life and not to be left behind in the shadows of their peers.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Tonya Hall

Author Biography

Tonya Hall is a behavioral research scientist,an associate professor and staff psychologist of Counseling,and an adjunct professor of Psychology at Chicago State University. She aspires to faciliate the positive social behavioral development of individuals across the lifespan.

References

Baer

D. M.

Pinkston

E. M.

(1997). Environment and behavior. Routledge.

Baer

D. M.

Sherman

(1964). Reinforcement control of generalized imitation in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1, 37–49.

Baer

D. M.

Wolf

M. M.

Risley

T. R.

(1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.

Barnett

J. H.

(2018). Three evidence-based strategies that support social skills and play among young children with autism spectrum disorders. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46, 665–672.

*Bellini

Akullian

Hopf

(2007). Increasing social engagement in young children with autism spectrum disorders using video self-modeling. School Psychology Review, 36, 80–90.

*Benitez

J. L.

Fernandez

Justicia

Fernandez

Justicia

(2011). Results of the Aprender a Convivir program for development of social competence and prevention of antisocial behavior in four-year-old children. School Psychology International, 32, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034310396804

Berne

Van

(1930). An experimental investigation of social behavior patterns in young children. University of Iowa Studies: Child Welfare, 4, 93.

Bovey

Strain

(2003). Promoting positive peer social interactions [Issue Brief No. 8]. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED481996.pdf

Brigman

Lane

Switzer

Lane

Lawrence

(1999). Teaching children school success skills. The Journal of Educational Research, 92, 323–329.

10.

Brown

W. H.

Odom

S. L.

(1994). Strategies and tactics for promoting generalization and maintenance of young children’s social behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 15, 99–118.

11.

Buell

Stoddard

Harris

F. R.

Baer

D. M.

(1968). Collateral social development accompanying reinforcement of outdoor play in a preschool child. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 167–173.

12.

Carter

D. R.

Van Norman

R. K.

(2010). Class-wide positive behavior support in preschool: Improving teacher implementation through consultation. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38, 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0409-x

13.

*Celeste

(2007). Social skills intervention for a child who is blind. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101, 521–533.

14.

Chandler

L. K.

Fowler

S. A.

Lubeck

R. C.

(1992a). An analysis of the effects of multiple setting events on the social behavior of preschool children with special needs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 249–263.

15.

Chandler

L. K.

Lubeck

R. C.

Fowler

S. A.

(1992b). Generalization and maintenance of preschool children’s social skills: A critical review and analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 415–428.

16.

Chittenden

G. E.

(1942). An experimental study in measuring and modifying assertive behavior in young children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 7, 1–87.

17.

Choi

Ohm

(2018). Pretend play and social competence in peer play groups of five-year-old boys and girls. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46, 1255–1270.

18.

*Crozier

Tincani

(2007). Effects of Social Stories on prosocial behavior of preschool children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(9), 1803–1814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0315-7

19.

De Haas-Warner

S. J

. (1991). Effects of self-monitoring on preschoolers’ on-task behavior: A pilot study. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11, 59–73.

20.

Detrich

(1999). Increasing treatment fidelity by matching interventions to contextual variables within the educational setting. School Psychology Review, 28, 608–620.

21.

Ducharme

D. E.

Holborn

S. W.

(1997). Programming generalization of social skills in preschool children with hearing impairments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 639–651.

22.

Dunst

C. J.

Trivette

C. M.

Cutspec

P. A.

(2002a). An evidence-based approach to documenting the characteristics and consequences of early intervention practices. Centerscope, 1, 1–6.

23.

Dunst

C. J.

Trivette

C. M.

Cutspec

P. A.

(2002b). Toward an operational definition of evidence-based practices. Centerscope, 1, 1–10.

24.

Factor

D. C.

Schilmoeller

G. L.

(1983). Social skill training of preschool children. Child Study Journal, 13, 41–56.

25.

Farrington

D. P.

(1991). Childhood aggression and adult violence: Early precursors and later-life outcomes. In Pepler

D. J.

Rubin

K. H.

(Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 5–30). Lawrence Erlbaum.

26.

*Feil

E. G.

Frey

Walker

H. M.

Small

J. W.

Seeley

J. R.

Golly

Forness

S. R.

(2014). The efficacy of a home-school intervention for preschoolers with challenging behaviors: A randomized controlled trial of Preschool First Step to Success. Journal of Early Intervention, 36, 151–170. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815114566090

27.

Filla

Wolery

Anthony

(1999). Promoting children’s conversations during play with adult prompts. Journal of Early Intervention, 22, 93–108.

28.

Foster

S. L.

Ritchey

W. L.

(1979). Issues in the assessment of social competence in children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 625–638.

29.

Frey

A. J.

Small

Feil

Seeley

Walker

Golly

(2013). The feasibility of first step to success with preschoolers. Children & Schools, 35, 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdt014

30.

Frey

J. R.

Elliott

S. N.

Kaiser

A. P.

(2014). Social skills intervention planning for preschoolers: Using the SSiS-Rating Scales to identify target behaviors valued by parents and teachers. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 39, 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508413488415

31.

Gable

R. A.

Hendrickson

J. M.

Van Acker

(2001). Maintaining the integrity of FBA-based interventions in schools. Education and Treatment of Children, 24, 248–260.

32.

Garfinkle

A. N.

Schwartz

I. S.

(2002). Peer imitation: Increasing social interactions in children with autism and other developmental disabilities in inclusive preschool classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 26–38.

33.

Gesell

(1925). Pre-school development and education. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 121, 148–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271622512100122

34.

Gilliam

W. S.

(2005, May). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten programs. Foundation for Children Development. https://medicine.yale.edu/childstudy/zigler/publications/National%20Prek%20Study_expulsion%20brief_34775_5379_v1.pdf

35.

Gilliam

W. S.

Shahar

(2006). Preschool and child care expulsion and suspension rates and predictors in one state. Infants & Young Children, 19, 228–245.

36.

Goetz

E. M.

Thomson

C. L.

Etzel

B. C.

(1975). An analysis of direct and indirect teacher attention and primes in the modification of child social behavior: A case study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 21, 55–65.

37.

Goldstein

Cisar

C. L.

(1992). Promoting interaction during sociodramatic play: Teaching scripts to typical preschoolers and classmates with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 265–280.

38.

Goldstein

English

Shafer

Kaczmarek

(1997). Interaction among preschoolers with and without disabilities: Effects of across-the-day peer intervention. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 33–48.

39.

Goldstein

Kaczmarek

Pennington

Shafer

(1992). Peer-mediated intervention: Attending to, commenting on, and acknowledging the behavior of preschoolers with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 289–305.

40.

Grady

Ale

Morris

(2012). A naturalistic observation of social behaviours during preschool drop-off. Early Child Development and Care, 182, 1683–1694. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2011.649266

41.

Gronna

S. S.

Serna

L. A.

Kennedy

C. H.

Prater

M. A.

(1999). Promoting generalized social interactions using puppets and script training in an integrated preschool. Behavior Modification, 23, 419–440.

42.

Guglielmo

H. M.

Tryon

G. S.

(2001). Social skill training in an integrated preschool program. School Psychology Quarterly, 16, 158–175.

43.

Guralnick

M. J.

(1981). The social behavior of preschool children at different developmental levels: Effects of group composition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 115–130.

44.

Hall

T. P.

(2006). Determining the effects of two environmental arrangement strategies on child social behavior and program quality (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.

45.

Hart

B. M.

Reynolds

N. J.

Baer

D. M.

Brawley

E. R.

Harris

F. R.

(1968). Effect of contingent and non-contingent social reinforcement on the cooperative play of a preschool child. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 73–76.

46.

Hendrickson

J. M.

Gardner

Kaiser

Riley

(1993). Evaluation of a social interaction coaching program in an integrated day-care setting. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 213–225.

47.

Hendrickson

J. M.

Tremblay

Strain

P. S.

Shores

P. E.

(1981). Relationship between toy and material use and the occurrence of social interactive behaviours by normally developing preschool children. Psychology in the Schools, 18, 500–504.

48.

Hinshaw

S. P.

(1992). Externalizing behavior problems and academic underachievement in childhood and adolescence: Causal relationships and underlying mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 127–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.127

49.

Hops

Greenwood

C. R.

(1988). Social skill deficits. In Mash

E. J.

Terdal

L. G.

(Eds.), Guilford behavioral assessment series: Behavioral assessment of childhood disorders (pp. 263–314). Guilford Press.

50.

*Hughett

Kohler

F. W.

Raschke

(2013). The effects of a buddy skills package on preschool children’s social interactions and play. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 32, 246–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121411424927

51.

Hughes

C. A.

Carter

(2002). Toys and materials as setting events for the social interaction of preschool children with special needs. Educational Psychology, 22, 429–444.

52.

Hundert

Hopkins

(1992). Training supervisors in a collaborative team approach to promote peer interaction of children with disabilities in integrated preschools. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 385–400.

53.

Hundert

Houghton

(1992). Promoting social interaction of children with disabilities in integrated preschools: A failure to generalize. Exceptional Children, 58, 311–320.

54.

Hune

J. B.

Nelson

C. M.

(2002). Effects of teaching a problem-solving strategy on preschool children with problem behavior. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 185–207.

55.

*Hyatt

K. J.

Filler

J. W.

(2007). A comparison of the effects of two social skill training approaches on teacher and child behavior. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22, 85–96.

56.

Jenkins

J. R.

Odom

S. L.

Speltz

M. L.

(1989). Effects of social integration on preschool children with handicaps. Exceptional Children, 55, 420–428.

57.

Jolstead

K. A.

Caldarella

Hansen

Korth

B. B.

Williams

Kamps

(2017). Implementing positive behavior support in preschools: An exploratory study of CW-FIT Tier 1. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19, 48–60.

58.

Joseph

G. E.

Strain

(2003). Comprehensive evidence-based social emotional curricula for young children: An analysis of efficacious adoption potential. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23, 65–76.

59.

Kallam

Rettig

(1991). Methodological issues in studying the toy play of young children with mental retardation. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15, 459–487.

60.

Keller

Honig

A. S.

(1993). Curriculum to promote positive interactions of preschoolers with a disabled peer introduced into the classroom. Early Child Development and Care, 96, 27–34.

61.

Kim

A. H.

Vaughn

Elbaum

Hughes

M. T.

Sloan

C. V. M.

Sridhar

(2003). Effects of toys or group composition for children with disabilities: A synthesis. Journal of Early Intervention, 25, 189–205.

62.

*Kim

Doh

Hong

J. S.

Choi

(2011). Social skills training and parent education programs for aggressive preschoolers and their parents in South Korea. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 838–845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.12.001

63.

Knight

B. A.

Hughes

(1995). Developing social competence in the preschool years. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 20, 13–19.

64.

Kohler

F. W.

Anthony

L. J.

Steighner

S. A.

Hoyson

(2001). Teaching social interaction skills in the integrated preschool: An examination of naturalistic tactics. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 21, 93–103.

65.

*Kohler

F. W.

Greteman

Raschke

Highnam

(2007). Using a buddy skills package to increase the social interactions between a preschooler with autism and her peers. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 155–163.

66.

Krantz

P. J.

McClannahan

L. E.

(1998). Social interaction skills for children with autism: A script-fading procedure for beginning readers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 191–202.

67.

Lane

J. D.

Gast

D. L.

Ledford

J. R.

Shepley

(2017). Increasing social behaviors in young children with social-communication delays in a group arrangement in preschool. Education and Treatment of Children, 40, 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2017.0007

68.

Lane

K. L.

Stanton-Chapman

Jamison

K. R.

Phillips

(2007). Teacher and parent expectations of preschoolers’ behavior: Social skills necessary for success. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 86–97.

69.

Lawrence

S. M.

(2018). Preschool children and iPads: Observations of social interactions during digital play. Early Education and Development, 29, 207–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2017.1379303

70.

LeBlanc

L. A.

Matson

J. L.

(1995). A social skills training program for preschoolers with developmental delays. Behavior Modification, 19, 234–246.

71.

*Ledford

J. R.

Wolery

(2013). Peer modeling of academic and social behaviors during small-group direct instruction. Exceptional Children, 79, 439–458.

72.

LeLaurin

Risley

T. R.

(1972). The organization of day-care environments: “Zone” versus “man-to-man” staff assignments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 225–232.

73.

Lindeman

D. P.

Fox

J. J.

Redelheim

P. S.

(1993). Increasing and maintaining withdrawn preschoolers’ peer interactions: Effects of double prompting and booster session procedures. Behavioral Disorders, 19, 54–66.

74.

Lobo

Y. B.

Winsler

(2006). The effects of a creative dance and movement program on the social competence of head start preschoolers. Social Development, 15, 501–519.

75.

Lynch

S. A.

Simpson

C. G.

(2010). Social skills: Laying the foundation for success. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 38, 3–12.

76.

Mader

(2019, January 26). 50,000 preschoolers are suspended each year: Can mental health training for teachers make a difference? NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/50-000-preschoolers-are-suspended-each-year-can-mental-health-n962691

77.

Malik

(2017, November 6). New data reveal 250 preschoolers are suspended or expelled every day. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/early-childhood/news/2017/11/06/442280/new-data-reveal-250-preschoolers-suspended-expelled-every-day/

78.

Malmskog

McDonnell

A. P.

(1999). Teacher-mediated facilitation of engagement by children with developmental delays in inclusive preschools. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 203–216.

79.

Marchant

G. J.

Newman

(1991). The Ralph Nader of educating: An interview with Robert Slavin. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 4(2), 19–22, 27.

80.

Marshall

H. R.

McCandless

B. R.

(1957). A study in prediction of social behavior of preschool children. Child Development, 28, 149–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/1125877

81.

Martin

S. S.

Brady

M. P.

Williams

R. E.

(1991). Effects of toys on the social behavior of preschool children in integrated and nonintegrated groups: Investigation of a setting event. Journal of Early Intervention, 15, 153–161.

82.

Mathur

S. R.

Rutherford

R. B.

(1991). Peer-mediated interventions promoting social skills of children and youth with behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 14, 227–242.

83.

McConnell

S. R.

McEvoy

M. A.

Odom

S. L.

(1992). Implementation of social competence interventions in early childhood special education classes: Current practices and future directions. In Odom

McConnell

McEvoy

(Eds.), Social competence of young children with disabilities: Issues and strategies for intervention (pp. 3–36). Paul H. Brookes.

84.

McEvoy

M. A.

Odom

S. L.

McConnell

S. R.

(1992). Peer social competence intervention for young children with disabilities. In Odom

McConnell

S. M.

McEvoy

(Eds.), Social competence of young children with disabilities: Issues and strategies for intervention (pp. 113–124). Paul H. Brookes.

85.

McGee

G. G.

Almeida

Sulzer-Azaroff

Feldman

R. S.

(1992). Promoting reciprocal interactions via peer incidental teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 117–126.

86.

*Michael

Meese

R. L.

Keith

Mathews

(2009). Bob bear: A strategy for improving behaviors of preschoolers identified as at risk or developmentally delays. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 41, 54–59.

87.

Miller

L. J.

Strain

P. S.

Boyd

Jarzynka

McFetridge

(1993). The effects of classwide self-assessment on preschool children’s engagement in transition, free play and small group. Early Education and Development, 4, 162–181.

88.

Morrison

R. S.

Sainato

D. M.

Benchaaban

Endo

(2002). Increasing play skills of children with autism using activity schedules and correspondence training. Journal of Early Intervention, 25, 58–72.

89.

Nordquist

V. M.

McEvoy

M. A.

(1983). Punishment as a factor in early childhood imitation. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 3, 339–357.

90.

*Ocasio

Van Alst

Koivunen

Huang

C.-C.

Allegra

(2015). Promoting preschool mental health: Results of a 3 year primary prevention strategy. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 24, 1800–1808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-9983-7

91.

Odom

Chandler

L. K.

Ostrosky

McConnell

S. R.

Reaney

(1992). Fading teacher prompts from peer-initiation interventions for young children with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 307–317.

92.

Odom

S. L.

McConnell

S. R.

(1992). Improving social competence: An applied behavior analysis perspective. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 239–244.

93.

Odom

S. L.

McConnell

S. R.

McEvoy

M. A.

Peterson

Ostrosky

Chandler

. . .Favazza

(1999). Relative effects of interventions supporting the social competence of young children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 75–91.

94.

Odom

S. L.

Peterson

McConnell

Ostrosky

(1990). Ecobehavioral analysis of early education/specialized classroom settings and peer social interaction. Education and Treatment of Children, 13, 316–330.

95.

Parten

Newhall

S. M.

(1943). Social behavior of preschool children. In Barker

R. G.

Kounin

J. S.

Wright

H. F.

(Eds.), Child behavior and development: A course of representative studies (pp. 509–523). McGraw-Hill.

96.

Parten

M. B.

(1933). Social play among preschool children. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28, 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073939

97.

Pinkston

E. M.

Reese

N. M.

LeBlanc

J. M.

Baer

D. M.

(1973). Independent control of a preschool child’s aggression and peer interaction by contingent teacher attention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 115–124.

98.

C. H.

Kaiser

A. P.

(2003). Behavior problems of preschool children from low-income families: Review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 23, 188–216.

99.

C. H.

Zieher

Van Horn

M. L.

Bulotsky-Shearer

Carta

(2019). Language skills, behaviour problems, and classroom emotional support among preschool children from low-income families. Early Child Development & Care. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2019.1570504

100.

Quiltich

H. R.

Risley

T. R.

(1973). The effect of play materials on social play. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 573–578.

101.

Raab

(2003). Relationship between types of toys and young children’s social behavior. Bridges, 1, 1–13.

102.

Rettig

Kallam

McCarthy-Salm

(1993). The effects of social and isolate toys on social interactions of preschool-aged children. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 252–256.

103.

Risley

T. R.

Cataldo

M. F.

(1973). Planned activity check: Materials for training observers. Center for Applied Behavior Analysis.

104.

Robertson

Green

Alper

Schloss

P. J.

Kohler

(2003). Using a peer-mediated intervention to facilitate children’s participation in inclusive childcare activities. Education and Treatment of Children, 26, 182–197.

105.

Sainato

D. M.

Golstein

Strain

P. S.

(1992). Effects of self-evaluation on preschool children’s use of social interaction strategies with their classmates with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 127–141.

106.

Skinner

B. F.

(1953). Science and human behavior. The Free Press.

107.

*Smith

S. M.

Simon

Bramlett

R. K.

(2009). Effects of positive peer reporting (PPR) on social acceptance and negative behaviors among peer-rejected preschool children. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25, 323–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377900802595359

108.

Snyder

(2001). Child delinquents. In Loeber

Farrington

D. P.

(Eds.), Risk factors and successful interventions. Sage.

109.

Spohn

J. R.

Timko

T. C.

Sainato

D. M.

(1999). Increasing the social interactions of preschool children with disabilities during mealtimes: The effects of an interactive placemat game. Education and Treatment of Children, 22, 1–18.

110.

Stokes

T. F.

Baer

D. M.

(1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.

111.

Stokes

T. F.

Osnes

P. G.

(1989). An operant pursuit of generalization. Behavior Therapy, 20, 337–355.

112.

Storey

Danko

C. D.

Ashworth

Strain

P. S.

(1994). Generalization of social skills intervention for preschoolers with social delays. Education and Treatment of Children, 17, 29–51.

113.

Storey

Smith

D. J.

Strain

P. S.

(1993). Use of classroom assistants and peer-mediated intervention to increase integration in preschool settings. Exceptionality, 4, 1–16.

114.

Stormont

Reinke

Herman

(2011). Teachers’ knowledge of evidence-based interventions and available school resources for children with emotional and behavioral problems. Journal of Behavioral Education, 20, 138–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10864-011-9122-0

115.

*Strain

P. S.

Bovey

E. H.

(2011). Randomized, controlled trial of the LEAP model of early intervention for young children with autism spectrum disorders. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 31, 133–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121411408740

116.

Strain

P. S.

Danko

C. D.

Kohler

(1995). Activity engagement and social interaction development in young children with autism: An examination of “free” intervention effects. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 3, 108–123.

117.

Strain

P. S.

Kohler

F. W.

Storey

Danko

C. D.

(1994). Teaching preschoolers with autism to self-monitor their social interactions: An analysis of results in home and school settings. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2, 78–88.

118.

Strain

P. S.

Shores

Kerr

M. M.

(1976). An experimental analysis of spillover effects on the social interaction of behaviorally handicapped preschool children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 31–40.

119.

Strauss

(2017, November 7). 250 preschoolers suspended or expelled every school day, according to new analysis. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2017/11/07/250-preschoolers-suspended-or-expelled-every-school-day-new-analysis/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e398869db54e

120.

Tankersley

Kamps

Mancina

Weidinger

(1996). Social interventions for Head Start children with behavioral risks: Implementation and outcomes. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 4, 171–181.

121.

Tremblay

R. E.

Mass

L. C.

Pagina

Vitaro

(1996). From childhood physical aggression to adolescent maladjustment: The Montreal prevention experiment. In Peters

R. D. .

MacMahon

R. J.

(Eds.), Preventing childhood disorders, substance abuse and delinquency (pp. 268–298). SAGE.

122.

Twardosz

Cataldo

M. F.

Risley

T. R.

(1974). Open environment design for infant and toddler day care. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7, 529–546.

123.

U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2014, March). Data snapshot: Early childhood education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdc-early-learning-snapshot.pdf

124.

Vandell

D. L.

Henderson

V. K.

Wilson

K. S.

(1988). A longitudinal study of children with daycare experiences of varying quality. Child Development, 59, 1286–1292.

125.

Vaughn

Kim

Sloan

C. V. M.

Hughes

M. T.

Elbaum

Sridhar

(2003). Social skills interventions for young children with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 2–15.

126.

Wallace

M. A.

Hatfield

V. L.

Goetz

E. M.

Etzel

B. C.

(1976). Caring efficiently for young children: Control versus freedom. School Applications of Learning Theory, 8, 20–31.

127.

Wolf

M. M.

(1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.

128.

Zanolli

Dagget

Adams

(1996). Teaching preschool age autistic children to make spontaneous initiations to peers using priming. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 26, 407–422.

129.

Zero to Three. (2018). Preventing expulsion from preschool and child care. https://www.zerotothree.org/resources/series/preventing-expulsion-from-preschool-and-child-care

130.

Zigler

Taussig

Black

(1992). Early childhood intervention: A promising preventative for juvenile delinquency. American Psychologist, 47, 997–1006.