Say something nice: A meta-analytic review of peer reporting interventions

Abstract

Peer reporting interventions (i.e., Positive Peer Reporting and tootling) are commonly used peer-mediated interventions in schools. These interventions involve training students to make reports about peers' prosocial behaviors, whether in oral or written form. Although peer reporting interventions have been included in meta-analyses of group contingencies, this study is the first meta-analytic review of single-case research focusing exclusively on peer reporting interventions. The literature search and application of inclusion criteria yielded 21 studies examining the impact of a peer reporting intervention on student behavior compared to baseline conditions. All studies used single-case experimental designs including at least three demonstrations of an effect and at least three data points per phase. Several aspects of studies, participants, and interventions were coded. Log response ratios and Tau were calculated as effect size estimates. Effect size estimates were synthesized in a multi-level meta-analysis with random effects for (a) studies and (b) cases within studies. Overall results indicated peer reporting interventions had a non-zero and positive impact on student outcomes. This was also true when data were subset by outcome (i.e., disruptive behavior, academically engaged behavior, and social behavior). Results were suggestive of more between- than within-study variability. Moderator analyses were conducted to identify aspects of studies, participants, or peer reporting interventions associated with differential effectiveness. Moderator analyses suggested published studies were associated with higher effect sizes than unpublished studies (i.e., theses/dissertations). This meta-analysis suggests peer reporting interventions are effective in improving student behavior compared to baseline conditions. Implications and directions for future investigation are discussed.