European Journal of Special Education Research
ISSN: 2501 - 2428
ISSN-L: 2501 - 2428
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.219585
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF
INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI) TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE
BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
Ossy Firstanti Wardanyi, Abdul Salim Choiri
Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia
Abstract:
This research aims to determine the effectiveness of Differential Reinforcement of
Incompatible Behaviour (DRI) to overcome the disruptive behaviour of intellectual
disability students in the classroom during lesson. The type of disruptive behaviour,
which becomes the target behaviour in this research, is physical aggression against
classmates. This research used quantitative approach with experimental research
design. The approach for this experimental research is Single Subject Research (SSR)
with A-B-A (Baseline-1-Intervention-Baseline-2) design. The subject of the research is
three students with intellectual disability in grade II C of SLBN Surakarta, Central Java,
Indonesia. The instruments for collecting the data in this research consist of interview,
observation, and anecdotal report. The data was analysed by using descriptive statistic
and presented in the form of tables and graph. Furthermore, the components were
analyzed by an analysis of the condition. The result showed that the frequency of
disruptive behaviour of the three students was decrease. There is an alteration occurred
in frequency of disruptive behaviour. Based on the fact, it can be concluded that DRI is
effective to overcome disruptive behaviour of intellectual disability students.
Keywords: intellectual disability, Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible Behaviour
(DRI), disruptive behaviour, physical aggression, behaviour modification, single subject
research
Correspondence: email ossyfirstan@student.uns.ac.id
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group
23
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
1. Introduction
Intellectual disability (intellectual developmental disorder) is a disorder with onset
during the developmental period that includes both intellectual and adaptive
functioning deficits in conceptual, social, and practical domains (APA, 2013). Gargiulo
(2012) said that in the social development, student with intellectual disability are
typically lacking in social competence; rejection by peer and classmates (poor
interpersonal skills); frequently exhibit socially inappropriate or immature behaviour;
and diminished self-esteem coupled with low self-concept. Gardner (2010) stated that in
general, intellectual disability have social behaviour deficits, affective behaviour deficit,
deficits in self-direction and self-control behaviours, excessive social reactions, and
excessive affective reactions. These characteristics then become a problem in social as
well as the causes of behavioural problem.
Based research, Totsika, et al (2012) stated that intellectual disability children
have high risk for emotional and behaviour problem. In 2007, Prakash, Sudarsanan &
Prabhu found that 66% of intellectual disability children had behaviour problem, and
70% of them tend to be impulsive. Koshali (2013) said that 20, 86 % intellectual
disability children had misbehaviour with other and 29, 56% for violent and destructive
behaviour. Those behavioural problems then become disruptive behaviour on the
classroom during the lesson.
Disruptive behaviour can be defined as behaviour that substantially or
repeatedly interferes with the instructor’s ability to conduct class or other students’
ability to learn (Baker, 2013), it is attributable to disciplinary problems in schools that
affect the fundamental rights of the learner to feel safe and be treated with respect in the
learning environment (Mabeba & Prinsloo, 2000). So that, disruptive behaviour can
defined as a pattern of repetitive behaviour and breaking the rules that occur in a
structured environment, such as on the school or classroom. The disruptive behaviour
significantly interfere with teacher manage classroom and disturb other student during
the lesson.
Levin and Nolan (1996) said that whether intended or not, is bound to disrupt
(e.g. wandering about, visiting other learners, passing notes, sitting on the desk, and
throwing objects around the classroom). Marais & Meier (2010) noted that fighting in
the classroom and on the playgrounds, apart from verbal aggression, mostly manifests
as pushing, slapping, kicking, and aggressive play-fight, all of which are part of
everyday school events. One kind of the disruptive behaviour is physical
assault/physical aggression against classmates (Yuan & Che, 2012; Baker, 2013). So that,
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
24
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
physical aggression against classmates is the form of disruptive behaviour, such as
throwing objects around the classroom or hitting classmates.
Daniel (2001) stated that some disruptive behaviour may be a result of the
student’s disability. Prayitno and “mti
argued that disruptive behaviour such as
fighting with playmates can be happened because of several things, for example the
lack of self-control, selfishness, hyperactive, the unstable condition at home or the
contrary incident, permissive for instance. Moreover, Slavin (2009: 78) investigated that
disruptive behaviour during the class may be the result due to the urge to get more
attention from the teachers and classmates. In addition, it is also performed as the
purpose to release the uncomfortable feeling. Based on the characteristics that
previously discussed about intellectual disability children, it can be concluded the
major cause of disruptive behaviour is from internal factor. Intellectual disability has
social, emotion problem and the behaviour that leads to the disruptive behaviour.
The problem of disruptive that practiced by intellectual disability children
happens at the school which is being observed, SLB Negeri Surakarta, at the class of II
C. It is found the children with the characteristic of intellectual disability who have
disruptive behaviour during the class. The behaviour is performed by attacking the
classmates/physical aggression. The example of disruptive behaviours that found are
hitting each other, kicking and tweaking, throwing the slippers, stationery, and other
stuffs around to the classmates. The disruptive behaviour leads to the rejection of the
classmates, the disruption of teaching and learning process, the decrease of class
productivity and the reduction of learning process time. So, the control effort is needed
in order to resolve behaviour problem with the behaviour modification.
Alberto and Troutman as cited in Santrock (2013) recommended the first step of
solution that can be conducted by the teacher to reduce unexpected behaviour is using
differential reinforcement. Supported by Allday (2011) that in order to increase the
expected behaviour and decrease the unexpected ones, such as disruptive behaviour,
praising and appreciating good behaviour may help to reduce the unexpected
behaviour. That statement can be assumed following the action of increasing positive
behaviour responses that is opposite. As the result, the negative behaviour that may
probably be practiced will decrease because the subject habitually conducts the positive
action. The theory is in line with the principle of DRI.
DRI (Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible behaviour) is one kind of
Differential Reinforcement (Sundel & Sundel, 2005; Vismara, Bogin, & Sullivan, 2010).
Differential reinforcement is past and present rewards or punishments for the
behaviour and the rewards and punishment attached to alternative behaviour (Reid,
2000: 156). If we decided to lower the target's response to detain the brace (with the
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
25
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
assumption that we the source and obstacle) and to strengthen the incompatible
responses, the schedule is called Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible behaviour,
abbreviated DRI (Martin & Pear, 2015, p.316)
Alberto & Troutman (1990, p.257) said that DRI is a procedure that involves
reinforcing a topographically incompatible behaviour with the behaviour targeted for
reduction. Then, the focus is on replacing negative behaviours with positive behaviour
(The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements, 2005, p. 8).
Vismara, Bogin & Sullivan (2010: 3) argued the basic idea of the DRI is the
replacement behaviour target that cannot be done simultaneously or performed at the
same time with the behaviour problem. Supported by Sundel & Sundel (2005, P. 68) the
DRI requires the behaviour which is specifically incompatible. Incompatible, defined as
behaviour that cannot be performed at one time with the revealed target behaviour. So
we can say, DRI is a program to provide reinforcement to the incompatible behaviour
(cannot be done at same time with the omitted behaviour). Furthermore, the behaviour
problem will be eliminated or decreased.
Martin & Pear (2015: 317) gave the example through biting fingernails as the
behaviour that will decrease and keep the hands to stay below the shoulder as the
incompatible behaviour to be improved. Another example by Ormrod (2008) in the
usage of contrast reinforcement (DRI) with give reinforcement to hyperactive children
when they are in quiet sitting, when sitting quietly cannot be at the same time with
leaving the seat or walking around.
Sundel & Sundel (2005) also exemplifies the use of DRI through a case study. A
mother named Juanita used DRI to reduce screaming/shouting at her child, Carla.
Juanita will provide positive reinforcement for each behaviour as opposed to shouting,
such as reading, playing quietly, asking politely for help, or bringing a toy with no
noisy.
A research conducted by Sigafoos, et al (2009) using DRI to reduce repetitive
behaviours of autistic children by scheduling leisure time (entertainment activities)
through reading a picture book or playing a puzzle if the subject can sit quietly and not
arranging stuffs (books, food, or toys) on his desk. Research by Wheatley, et al (2009)
also used DRI to reduce inappropriate behaviour during lunch at the elementary school,
such as litter left, leaving the seat, and running around. Praise note will be given to
students who maintain the cleanliness of the lunch room, sat quietly during meals, and
walk quietly in the lunch room. Another investigation by Zaghlawan, Ostrosky, and Al
Khateeb (2007) combined the DRI and response cost in order to increase attention
toward the teachers on the subject of ADHD. The uses of DRI implemented through
giving a smile of if give attention to the teachers. Iqbal
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
in a study of autism
26
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
with low mental ability and obsessive compulsive, applied the DRI to design a program
to minimize the isolation behaviour and ritualistic with the additional activities and
leisure time. Those relevant studies applied the DRI by giving the reinforcement over
positive behaviour that is incompatible the behaviour problem, have been practiced. So,
it can be concluded to minimize disruptive behaviour with the use of DRI strategy can
determine through conducting improved appropriate activities.
Martin & Pear (2011: 95) explained there are 5 steps of DRI application. These
points should be done in a coherent, following:
1. Choose an appropriate behaviour to strengthen that is incompatible with the
behaviour to be eliminated
2. Take baseline data of the appropriate behaviour over several sessions or more to
determine how frequently the appropriate behaviour should be reinforced to
raise it to a level at which it will replace the inappropriate behaviour
3. Select a suitable schedule of reinforcement for increasing the appropriate
behaviour
4. While strengthening the incompatible behaviour, apply the guidelines for the
extinction of the problem behaviour
5. Gradually increase the schedule requirement for the appropriate behaviour in
such a manner that it continues to replace the inappropriate behaviour as the
reinforcement frequency decreases
The relevant theories and researches related to the DRI emphasized that DRI is
able to resolve problematic behaviour. But, it has not applied in dealing with disruptive
behaviour, especially in the subject of intellectual disability. The disruptive behaviour
of intellectual disability students in the class of II C in Surakarta SLBN should be given
treatment. Thus, this study aims to investigate the effectiveness of Differential
Reinforcement of Incompatible Behaviour (DRI) in overcoming the disruptive
behaviour of intellectual disability students.
2. Material and Methods
2.1 Subject and settings
The subject of this research is 3 intellectual students in the class of II C, SLBN Surakarta.
The initials subject is MFA, FUS, and GAAP, whom show disruptive behaviour in the
classroom in form of physical aggression against classmates during lesson based on
initial observations. The research was conducted in the classroom when the teaching
and learning session is going on with 60 minutes for each session
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
27
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
2.2 Collecting data and instrument
A.
Observation
During the research, the primary data was collected through observation. Naturalistic
observation used in Baseline-1 and Baseline-2 phase, and participant observation in
intervention phase. The instruments conducted in observation were the instrument of
A-B-C (Antecedent-Behaviour-Consequence), which is used to determine the
antecedent stimuli, specific responses, and consequent stimuli (Alberto & Troutman,
2008). Moreover, the additional technique to conduct this research is called the
instrument of recording frequency behaviour which helps to count the total of a
behaviour being performed or the total of different feelings within a specific period
(Engel & Schutt, 2008). The instrument was validated by two ortopedagoog and the
teachers. As the impact, it was used in each phase of observation
B.
Interview
Interview was conducted before the baseline-1 observation with the sources from the
teacher of class II C SLB N Surakarta. The classroom teacher was selected as the speaker
because she knew deeply the behavioural problems of the subjects in this research. It
was also expected to help giving the input for the successful of DRI implementation as
an intervention.
C.
Anecdotal report
The anecdotal report/note focuses on the disruptive behaviour of a subject such as
physical aggression against classmates during the lesson at baseline-1, interventions,
and baseline-2. The anecdotal report contains the narration that is written briefly that
happen in the research, which can be additional information besides the observation
instruments.
2.3 Procedures
This research used quantitative approach with experimental research design. The
approach for this experimental research is Single Subject Research (SSR) with A-B-A
(Baseline-1-Intervention-Baseline-2) design.
A.
Baseline-1 phase
The Baseline-1 is a naturalistic observation, the researchers were outside the classroom
while making observations and investigating the disruptive behaviour (physical
assault). The subjects studied in the classroom with the teacher without the intervention
in order to collect natural behaviour data. Baseline-1 conducted over 5 sessions until the
obtained data being stable
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
28
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
B.
Intervention phase
Interventions conducted through 10 sessions or until the data became stable by
applying the DRI. It was conducted by the researchers assisted with the class teacher.
On the intervention phase, the researchers conducted participant observation to
provide interventions and still use the instruments to collect data.
The DRI as the intervention was started by making a behavioural contract. The
statement of the contracts is "A good student is the student that completes the task, sit quietly,
and not be naughty like hitting friend or throwing pencil case while studying. If you can sit
quietly during 30 minutes, you can get cute sticker 'I can sit quietly' on the end of learning
time, and if you complete your task, you can get sticker 'Hurray, My task is done!’ You cannot
get this sticker if you misbehaviour with your classmates or you uncompleted your
task. The stickers are shown below:
Picture 1: The stickers that used in the DRI treatment
Social reinforcement was given in the form of verbal and non-verbal to the subjects
during the learning process that demonstrated the appropriate behaviour (sit quietly,
doing the task). If the disruptive behaviour appeared, extinction would be do and given
cueing or prompting to raise sit quietly or completing tasks. If the behaviour leads to
fighting, the researcher will separate them and ask to return following study quietly.
The researcher will repeat the contract as a reminder in the middle of the lesson session.
At the end of the session do review the behaviour before the subjects were given a
sticker "Hurray, my task is done!" when the subject completed the task and "I can sit
quietly" if the subject can sit quietly at every 30 minutes interval. Given an explanation
of why the subject got / did not get as understanding.
C.
Baseline-2 phase
Baseline-2 is a repetition of the baseline-1. On this stage, researchers observed and
recorded the student's behaviour during the process of learning with the teacher
without any intervention by DRI.
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
29
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
2.4 Analysis data
In the SSR, data analysis using descriptive statistics, show by using tables and graphs.
Visual analysis performed by observing the graph changes in disruptive behaviour.
Analysis of data using analysis in conditions with component (1) length condition, (2)
estimate the tendency direction, (3) the tendency of stability, (4) trace data, (5) the level
of stability and range, and (6) the levels of change (Sunanto, et al, 2006). The analysis
starts from collecting data obtained from interviews, observations, and anecdotal
report. Then, data is organized into units. The frequency of disruptive behaviour that
appears on the A1-A2-B will be compared. Hypothesis testing is done descriptively
refer to the data obtained. The hypothesis could be accepted if the disruptive behaviour
of students with intellectual disability shows a tendency toward decreased, so that it
can be said disruptive behaviour can be overcome.
3. Results and Discussion
A.
Baseline-1
Baseline-1 (A1) session consisted of 5 sessions which is each session was conducted
within 60 minutes. A1 is data collection and disruptive behaviour to the subject without
intervention. The Baseline-1 data is presented below:
Table 1: The frequency of disruptive behaviours on baseline-1
The frequency of disruptive behaviours (times)
Subject
Session 1
Session 2
Session 3
Session 4
Session 5
MFA
7
7
9
9
9
GAAP
7
8
6
7
8
FUS
6
7
6
6
7
Based on the observations in phase A1 and interviews found that the subjects of MFA
performed disruptive behaviour (physical aggression) to seek attention in the form of
an angry reaction and as an activity utilizing free time when the work was completed
and their friends were not yet. GAAP subject behaved in order to seek attention,
especially to the FUS subject so that the disruptive behaviour of the FUS is a form of
self-defence on disruptive behaviour of GAAP.
B.
Intervention
Interventions were conducted 10 sessions with 60 minutes per session. The result data
of intervention frequency is presented in Table 2 below:
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
30
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
Table 2: Frequency of Disruptive Behaviour on Intervention Phase
Subject
The frequency of disruptive behaviours (times)
session
session
session
session
session
session
session
session
session
session
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
MFA
5
4
5
3
2
2
1
1
0
1
GAAP
3
4
2
3
3
2
3
3
2
2
FUS
3
3
2
3
2
1
2
2
1
1
Referring to Table.2 2 found that the frequency of disruptive behaviour of MFA, GAAP,
and FUS subject gradually decreased. The decrease was due to the behaviour of the
subject began to be able to manage themselves and try sitting quietly and complete the
task during the learning. From baseline-1 knew that the FUS behaviour related with
GAAP, so when frequency of disruptive behaviour GAAP decreases, FUS also
decreased
C.
Baseline-2
The Baseline-2 (A2) is repetition of Baseline-1 (A1) phase. Data was collected through 5
sessions. On A2 phase naturalistic observation was conducted again to examine the
effectiveness of DRI. The frequency of disruptive behaviour on the Baseline-2 sessions,
presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Frequency of disruptive behaviours on baseline-2 (A2)
The frequency of disruptive behaviours (times)
Subject
Session 16
Session 17
Session 18
Session 19
Session 20
MFA
2
1
1
1
1
GAAP
3
2
1
2
1
FUS
2
2
1
1
1
Table 3 shows the subject of the MFA, GAAP, and FUS have a tendency to have
decreased disruptive behaviour. Then, the three subjects can manage their selves for not
behaving disruptive after DRI being given. It is presented on graph of frequency of
behavioural disorders on MFA subject, GAAP, and FUS in A1-B-A2 phase.
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
31
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
Graphic 1: The frequency of disruptive behaviour (physical aggression) during the lesson of
MFA, GAAP and FUS in all session
The result of this study showed that Differential Reinforcement of Incompatible Behaviour
(DRI) effective to overcome disruptive behaviour of the three subjects. DRI proven to
decreased disruptive behaviour (physical aggression) of them. The effectiveness of DRI
can seen from the frequency of disruptive behaviour of MFA, GAAP, and FUS that
gradually decrease on the intervention phase and continue downhill towards the
stabilized on baseline-2 (A2) phase. The mean of A1 phase was 8 times, decreased to 2
times on B phase, and 1 time on A2 phase. In GAAP, the mean of disruptive behaviour
on A1 was 7 times, 3 times on phase B, and 2 times on phase A2. Moreover, FUS, the
mean of A1-B-A2 phase was 6 times, dropped to 2 times and 1 time.
Based the interview with the teacher and the result of baseline 1, then complete
the task and sit quietly chosen as incompatible behaviour, because the assumption that,
both of the behaviours cannot do in one time with physical aggression. It can say that
when we try to increase sit quietly and complete the task, we hoped the subjects could
focus on the task, try to sit quietly, so that their disruptive behaviour can decrease.
The effectiveness of DRI caused by the following:
1. Provide reinforcement for the incompatible behaviour to decrease disruptive
behaviour is the reason why DRI can overcome the disruptive behaviour in the
classroom.
2. Behaviour contract before the learning, when teacher/researcher give the rules in
the classroom are clear and simple, and done repeatedly.
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
32
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
3. The reinforcement is adjusted with fondness the subject obtained from the
interview with the classroom teacher.
4. Immediately of social reinforcement when the expected behaviour is displayed.
5. Reinforcement activity in the form of colouring activity when the subject has
completed a task give effect, because when student colouring their colouring
pages, they enjoy colouring and forget to do disruptive behaviour.
6. Giving the sticker in the end of session. By giving a sticker at the end of the
session, the subject trying to sit quietly and complete the task until the end of the
study. So that the subjects tried hold disruptive behaviour during learning.
Stickers with a cute picture also made the subject try to finish the task and sit
quietly. The effect of giving a sticker just for the subject who sit quietly in
intervals of 30 minutes and complete tasks, contributed to a decrease in
disruptive behaviour.
The things that have been disclosed affirm what DRI procedures effective in
overcome disruptive behaviour in the form of a physical aggression on three intellectual
disability students in class II C SLBN Surakarta.
The results showed that DRI could overcome the disruptive behaviour. Then,
DRI can become one of the solutions for teacher to overcome problem behaviour, either
intellectual disability or other student in the school. When use DRI, we must concern to
appropriate behaviour that incompatible with the problem behaviour. This research
was limited to intellectual disability with physical aggression as behaviour target, and
only measurements the frequency, so that further research needs to be done in
developing the application of DRI to solve a variety of behavioural problem with
different characteristics of the students.
4. Conclusion
The result showed that the frequency of disruptive behaviour of the three students was
decrease. As a result of the research, it can be concluded that DRI is effective to
overcome disruptive behaviour of intellectual disability students.
References
1. Alberto, Paul A & Troutman, Anne C. (1990). Applied Behavior Analysis for
Teacher Third Edition. Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
33
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
2. Alberto, Paul A & Troutman, Anne C. (2008). Applied Behavior Analysis for
Teachers 8th edition. New Jersey: Pearson.
3. Allday, R. Allan. (2011). Responsive Management: Practical Strategies for
Avoiding Overreaction to Minor Misbehavior. Intervention in School and Clinic,
46(5), 292– 298. DOI: 10.1177/1053451210395383
4. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorder. 5th edition (DSM-V). Arlington, Virginia: American Psychiatric
Publishing.
5. Baker, Jimmie (2013). Guidelines for Dealing With Disruptive Behavior.
https://www.tcc.fl.edu/ accessed 12 Desember 2015
6. Daniels, Vera. I. (2001). How to Manage Disruptive Behavior in Inclusive
Classrooms.
https://www/teachervison.com/classroom-discipline/resource/2943.html
accessed 10 December 2015
7. Engel, Rafael J. & Schutt, Russel K. (2008). Practice of Research in Social Work. 2nd
Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
8. Gardner, William. I. (2010). Behavior Modification in Mental Retardation. New
Jersey : Aldine Transaction
9. Gargiulo, Richard M. (2012). Special Education in Contemporary Society 4 A
Introduction to Exceptionally. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, Inc
10. Iqbal, Z. (2002). Ethical Issues Involved in the Implementation of a Differential
Reinforcement of Inappropriate Behavior Programme for The Treatment of
Social Isolation and Ritualistic Behaviour in an Individual with Intellectual
Disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 46 (1), 82-93. DOI:
10.1046/j.1365-2788.2002.00357.
11. Koshali, Afsaneh Khajevand. (2013). The Study of Behavior Problem in
Children with Mental Disabilities. European Journal of Experimental Biology. Vol
3(3), 542-547
12. Levin, J. and Nolan, J. (1996). Principles of classroom management. Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
13. Mabeba MZ & Prinsloo E. (2000). Perceptions of discipline and ensuing
discipline problems in secondary education. South African Journal of Education,
20:34-41.
14. Marais, Petro. & Meier, Corinne. (2010). Disruptive behaviour in the
Foundation Phase of Schooling. South African Journal of Education, 30, 41-57.
15. Martin, G., Pear, J. (2011). Behavior Modification: What Is It and How To Do It.
Ninth Edition. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
34
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
16. Martin, G., Pear, J. (2015). Modifikasi Perilaku Makna dan Penerapannya. Edisi
Kesepuluh. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
17. Prakash, Jyoti. Sudarsanan, S. & Prabhu, H.R.A. (2007). Study of Behavioural
Problems in Mentally Retarded Children. Delhi Psychiatry Journal 10(1).
18. Prayitno. & Amti, Erman. (2013). Dasar-dasar Bimbingan dan Konseling. Jakarta:
Rineka Cipta
19. Reid, Sue Titus. (2000). Crime and Criminology Ninth Edition. New York : Mc
Graw-Hill Higher Education
20. Santrock, John.W. (2013). Psikologi Pendidikan. Jakarta : Fajar Interpratama
Mandiri
21. Sigafoos, Jeff, Green, Vanessa “., Payne, Donna. O’Reilly, Mark F. & Lancioni,
Giulio F. (2009). A Classroom-Based Antecedent Intervention Reduces
Obsessive-Repetitive Behavior in an Adolescent With Autism. Clinical Case
Studies 8(1), 3-13.
22. Slavin, Robert.E. (2009). Psikologi Pendidikan Teori dan Praktik. Jakarta : Indeks
23. Sunanto, Juang, Takeuchi, Koji. & Nakata, Hideo. (2005). Pengantar Penelitian
Subjek Tunggal. Bandung : UPI Press
24. Sundel, M., Sundel, M. S. (2005). Behavior Change in The Human Services:
Behavior and Cognitive Principles and Application. California: SAGE Publications
Inc
25. The IRIS Center for Training Enhancements. (2005). Addressing disruptive and
noncompliant
behaviors
(part
2):
Behavioral
interventions.
\
http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/bi2 accessed 18 December 2015
26. Totsika, Vasiliki, Hastings, Richard P., Emerson,Eric., Berridge, Damon M., &
Lancaster, Gillian A. (2011). A population-based investigation of behavioural
and emotional problems and maternal mental health: associations with autism
spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 52(1), 91–99. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02295.x
27. Vismara, L., Bogin, J., Sullivan, L. (2010). Differential reinforcement: Online
training module. Autism Internet Modules, www.autisminternetmodules.org
Accessed 18 December 2015
28. Wheatley, R. K., West, R. P., Charlton, C. T., Sanders, R. B., Smith, T. G., &
Taylor, M.J. (2009). Improving behaviour through differential reinforcement: A
praise note system for elementary school students. Education & Treatment of
Children, 32(4), 551-571
29. Yuan, Xinrui & Che, Ling. (2012). How to Deal with Student Misbehaviour in
the Classroom? Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 2(1), 143-150
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
35
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
30. Zaghlawan, H. Y., Ostrosky, M. M., & Al-Khateeb, J. (2007). Decreasing the
inattentive behaviour of Jordanian children: A group experiment. Education &
Treatment of Children, 30(3), 49-64
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
36
Ossy Firstanti Wardany, Abdul Salim Choiri
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT OF INCOMPATIBLE BEHAVIOUR (DRI)
TO OVERCOME DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOUR OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY STUDENTS
Creative Commons licensing terms
Authors will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Special Education
Research shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflict of interests, copyright
violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated on the research work. All the published works are meeting the
Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and noncommercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Special Education Research - Volume 2 │ Issue 1 │ 2017
37
Open Access Publishing Group