The “pinpointing effect” vs. the “diffusion effect” of peer influence

Classroom teachers are learning to employ the peer group to “shape up” dissidents. However, singling out a child may produce undesirable side effects such as emotional behavior, resentment, etc. Can the same result be obtained by rewarding the class for ignoring the target behavior of everyone in the room? Twelve subjects were selected from six middle school classes, two from each class. Each entire class was rewarded for increased ignoring of the target behavior (whispering): in the three P (pinpointed) classes, for ignoring the whispering of Designated (target) subjects; in the three D (diffusion) classes, for ignoring whispering by all class members. The results indicate that a peer group can decrease reinforcement of a disruptive behavior and thereby decelerate it in a singled-out child (Pinpointing Effect) or a behavior emitted by any child in class (Diffusion Effect) with equal effectiveness. However, patterns in the data suggest that peers ignored P-Designated subjects most, D subjects next most, and P-Undesignated subjects the least and that this pattern of ignoring was mirrored in the pattern of deceleration of the target behaviors in the three groups. These patterns suggest that the Pinpointing Effect may be stronger than the Diffusion Effect, but further study is needed.     

“GAME” VERSUS “TEST” INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE WISC1

“Game” or “test” instructions on either verbal or nonverbal WISC scales were given to 160 third- and sixth-grade children. Ss in one condition were told they were going to take several tests, while Ss in the other condition were told they were going to play several games. Significant differences in performance due to task definition were found only on verbal tasks at the sixth-grade level with test instructions yielding superior performance. Results at the third-grade level failed to replicate previous results which suggested game instructions produce superior performance on nonverbal tasks.     

The Necessity of Being “Un-Disciplined” and “Out of Control”: Design Action and Systems Thinking

This paper introduces; design, integrated with systems thinking, as a necessary if not sufficient means for meeting the challenge of how to create or recreate organizations and institutions which better serve the needs and desires of clients, customers, and stakeholders in a rapidly changing world. As a way of moving conceptual thinking into concrete action, design is dramatically different from the scientific or artistic traditions, which primarily describe or explain the natural or phenomenal world. Three key points that will be explained are: (1) The limits of problem-solving strategies when applied to complex organizational change leave design the strategy of choice; (2) The designer's role is animated by other expression rather than self expression; and (3) From within this role, designers engage in the task of creating the un-natural world by being un-disciplined using systems thinking and by being out-of-control as part of the creative process of design.     

Keep the “H”

This commentary advocates “keeping the H” in “human performance technology” to help make it clear to nonpractitioners what human performance consultants do. There are different types of performance (e.g., financial performance) and different means of achieving performance (e.g., engineering) that are outside the average human performance technologist's repertoire. Though the human performance technologist should target business results and intervene at more than just the individual level, ultimately, their emphasis is improving human work.     

The concept of “model” and educational research

Models have played an important role in the development of the physical sciences. Perhaps their role in educational research will be even more important.