Mystery Motivator:

An Evidence-Based Intervention
Jackie Munroe, Kat Mrkva,
Shelina Hassanali & Amy Donovan

1) Mystery Motivator and School Psychology
2) Theoretical Basis
3) Description
4) Application
5) Tips for Implementation
6) Review of Research
7) Critical Thoughts
8) References


Overview
Mystery Motivator and School Psychology
Among greatest pd needs reported by
teachers?

-Additional assistance with classroom
management and behaviour problems
(highest % requested this as number 1 in
the K-5 levels) (APA Coalition for Psychology in
Schools and Education, 2006)






-77% reported they could be teaching more effectively
if behaviour problems decreased (Public Agenda, 2004)

-Disruptive behaviours are critical barriers to academic
success of students (Kraemer et al., 2012)

- Teachers feel inadequately trained to deal with
disruptive behaviour of students and to address
behaviour challenges of mainstreamed special ed
students ( Chandler, 2000; as cited in Kowalewicz, 2012 )

-Classroom teachers often do not employ interventions
aimed at disruptive behaviour reduction, and feel
unable to appropriate implement them (Mottram et al.,
2002)



Therefore...
-Need for evidence based (classroom target
group, or target student level) interventions
1. Relatively simple to implement yet
effective
2. Proactively address student behaviours
3. Cost and time effective
4. Flexible, in terms of application to
different challenges
5. Target as needed: individual students,
groups, or classes


Kowalewicz, 2012




Mystery Motivator Description
-Positive Behaviour Support (PBS) in which appropriate
behaviour social/academic is defined, supported,
rewarded

-MM intervention uses positive reinforcement (mystery
rewards) and mystery reinforcement schedules
(variable schedule) to decrease pre determined and
defined behavioural/academic problems and motivate
appropriate replacement behaviors




Kraemer, 2012; Rathvon, 2008
















Kowalewicz, 2012


Mystery Motivator Description
-MM intervention is designed like a game that allows students to
potentially (intermittent) have immediate access to a mystery
reinforcer
To access the mystery reinforcer students must first
1) meet the specified criteria to engage in (homework
completion/homework accuracy) or refrain from (call outs, out of
seat) predetermined academic/social behaviours
2) colour in the current day on a MM calendar to reveal an
invisible M which may or may not be present on that day
(variable schedule)
3) M appears: students have ? access


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r5EhiHJQFE
Good video
describing MM
Theoretical Basis: Motivation
Students willingness, need, desire
and compulsion to participate in,
and be successful in the learning
process







(Bomia et al., 1997, p. 1 as cited in Brewster & Fager, 2000)
Motivation
Extrinsic Motivation:

Engagement in a task/activity
to attain a reward or avoid
punishment

Examples: stickers, candy,
prizes, taking away privilege
(recess)


Intrinsic Motivation:

Engagement in a task/activity
for its inherent satisfaction or
enjoyment of the task itself.

Example: play, reading


(Brewster & Fager, 2000; Dembo & Seli, 2012)
Motivation
Strive to increase intrinsic motivation to boost
students satisfaction, engagement and
persistence in school
Use extrinsic rewards sparingly
Give rewards when deserved
Outline clear expectation for behaviour/tasks
Verbal praise for work well done
Evaluate work and provide feedback soon
after work is completed
Focus on mastery learning

(Brewster & Fager, 2000; Dembo & Seli, 2012)

Theoretical Basis: Behavioural Factors

Group contingency (Litow & Pumroy, 1975; Gresham & Greshman 1982)
Dependent: group receives reinforcement based on performance
on one or select individuals
Independent: reinforce and individual for their performance
Interdependent: reinforce entire group for the groups performance
effective in decreasing disruptive behaviour
easy to manage, cost effective, efficient, avoids peer conflicts,
enhances cooperation in classroom
Variable schedule of reinforcement
Students are unaware of when reinforcement will be earned
because this varies by day
Builds reinforcement uncertainty- increasing anticipation of reward
Reduces satiation effects
Rathvon, 2008

Behavioural Factors
Immediate performance feedback
Increases desirable and decreases
undesirable behaviours

Positive Reinforcement
Desirable object or activity
Must have value
These reinforcers may be very
individual and can be difficult for
teachers to choose
May provide choice

Rathvon, 2008

Steps Prior to MM Intervention
1.Interview with teacher to identify area/students needing to be targeted

2. Operationally define target/desired behaviour


3. Collect baseline data to record target behaviour frequency

4. Determine criteria for M success (example 50% of the current target
behaviour)

5. Create protocol to ensure appropriate intervention implementation
Kowalewicz, 2012


Description of Mystery Motivator Tools
Mystery Motivator Calendar
- Posterboard
chart displayed in class
divided
days of the
week boxes
Or...
-Rocket ship or
caterpillar
divided into sections
for days of week


Rathvon, 2008





-Using invisible ink record an M in 3-5 boxes at
random for each week (making the reward
available on those days only)
-Motivators should appear frequently at the onset
of intervention, and be gradually spread out
Added
Incentive:Bonus
square: record a
number in the
bonus square each
week. If goals were
met for that
number of days in
that week,
distribute extra
reward!
Visual Display of Desired Behaviour


Behaviour stated and posted in
positive terms and represented
visually near MM calendar as
reminders












Mystery Motivator
Calendar
Mystery
Motivator
Calendar
Mystery Motivator Envelope
- Large manilla envelope with

- Index cards with descriptions of
different mystery prizes

- Displayed prominently in the class

- Concealing reinforcer increases
student anticipation

Mottrom et al., 2002





Tangible
Candy
Fruit Snacks
Pencil (fun)
Eraser (fun)
Stickers
Gum chewing day
Prize box access
Playdough time






Intangible
Pajama Day
Wacky Hair Day
Extra recess (15
minutes)
Movie with lunch
Free computer time
Free class time
Early release from
school (15 min to play
on playground)
Inside recess

-Students may
mark their reward
preference (or add
new rewards) on
reward menu

-Post classwide
menu when
intervention begins
(Rathvon, 2008)

-If student engages in opposite of desired
behaviour, a tally is recorded on the
portable tally counter



-At end of intervention
period choose student to colour
in the day of the week to reveal a (possible)
invisible M

-If M is revealed and students met pre
established criteria deliver reward from ?
MM envelope as soon as possible for
immediate reinforcement

(Kowalewicz, 2012)

Hand up to speak 20 per day

March 1-5, 2014 Ms. Ds class





Candy
Fruit Snacks
Pencil (fun)
Eraser (fun)
Stickers
Gum chewing
day
Prize box
access






Pajama Day
Wacky Hair Day
Extra recess (15
minutes)
Movie with lunch
Free computer
time
Free class time

Application
Steps to application:

1. Introduce Mystery Motivator program to students (chance to earn rewards)

2. Review target behaviours
a. Demonstrate and model positive behaviours; also discuss behaviours to be avoided

3. Introduce the chart to students
a. Based on behaviour, students will have the chance to fill a blank on the chart to
uncover a
possible reward (If they see the letter M appear, they get the mystery reward)

4. Review possible rewards (post a rewards menu)

5. Start the intervention

6. Monitor effectiveness by tracking any change in student behaviour
Application (contd)
What to do if no X appears?

Congratulate students on a job well done, clearly praising the exact behaviour(s) which were
demonstrated
Remind them that the next day may be a reward day
On days where the class does not meet the goal, review expectations and coach them toward
success the next day
Anticipation of a possible X the next day is often enough motivation to demonstrate the
desired behaviour
Application (contd)
Variations of Mystery Motivator

Mystery Motivator Bonus Square: At beginning of week, a number between 1-5 is written in invisible
ink on a bonus square. At end of week, students colour in bonus square. If they meet target behaviour
for number of days indicated on square, they get a bonus reward.

Team Mystery Motivator: Instead of the whole classroom, use the intervention with teams of students.
Each team gets their own calendar. If all students in the team demonstrate desired behaviour, they get
to colour in the square. If an X appears, each team member gets the reward.

Minimum Number of Xs: Assign a minimum number of Xs required to open the mystery motivator
envelope each month. This modification can be used as the intervention becomes effective, because
the monthly reward would (hopefully) be larger than any weekly reward and students would be
required to maintain behaviour over a longer period of time.
Implementation Tips


-Students accidentally colour in next days box:
establish clear expectations for what will happen if this occurs

-Students complain when the do not like M reward: clear expectations for what will
happen if this occurs

- Students intentionally throw the intervention: this student can become a team of 1

-Students begin to learn that after earning a reward one day, they will not earn a
reward the next day: always differ reward placements (sometimes back to back) so
that students cannot anticipate when rewards days will be, ensuring motivation
remains high



https://www.sites.google.com/site/teachingnecessities/mystery-motivators
tips from teaching necessities





Review of the Research
Use of Mystery Motivator has been shown to be effective in improving a wide
range of behaviors:

Academic Performance (work completion/accuracy)

Disruptive/Off-task Behavior

Selective Mutism
Review of the Research
Disruptive Behavior


Murphy et al. examined the effects
of using Mystery Motivators to
decrease disruptive behavior
among preschoolers (Murphy et al.,
2007)

They found that its use did reduce
disruptive behavior and therefore
increased learning time

Teachers rated it 4.5/5 on Teacher
Acceptability Questionnaire




Review of the Research
Disruptive Behavior
Kraemer et al. 2012 found the use
of Mystery Motivators decreased
off-task behavior in 5th grade
students.

They suggest that Mystery Motivator can
be part of a Positive Behavior Support
System that can improve school culture
and strengthen pro-social behavior and
learning outcomes



Review of the Research
Disruptive Behavior



Schandling et al. hypothesized that use of Mystery Motivator would decrease
problem behavior for individual high school students (ages 14-17) as well as
the behavior of the class overall (Schandling et al., 2010)

Use of Mystery Motivator decreased problem behavior in teacher-identified students by 40%;
percentage of problem behavior exhibited by random peers decreased by 50%
Review of the Research
Work Completion
Madaus et al. utilized Mystery Motivators to improve homework completion in
grade 5 students (Madaus et al., 2003)
4 out of 5 participants demonstrated substantial improvement in homework completion.

Research by Theodore et al. supports the use of randomized interdependent
group contingency and reinforcers to improve homework completion and
accuracy in grade 4 students (Theodore et al., 2009)

Review of the Research
Selective Mutism
Studies by Kehle et al., (1998); & Kehle et al., (2012) looked at the use of
self-modeling in conjunction with mystery motivators in children with
selective mutism.

In the 6 year old, the child could converse freely following the second day of intervention; a 7
month follow-up showed the same results

In the 9 year old, the child could converse normally following 5 viewings of the video

Inside this envelope is the picture of a present that Jenny will receive when she asks for it in a tone of voice loud
enough for you to hear her ask for it (Kehle et al., 2012)




Mystery Motivator interventions account for the fact that attempting to establish interventions within
the classroom which are time consuming, rigid (follow strict guidelines for success), complicated
in data gathering, and administration, may not result in long term implementation
Mystery Motivator is efficient and easy to implement; readily adapted for use with
individuals or groups
Emerging data demonstrates efficacy in children with and without disabilities
(although further research is needed)
It can be used on its own or as part of an elaborate behavior support plan





Mystery Motivator has been deemed to be acceptable or satisfactory intervention by both teachers
and students
It increases childrens anticipation and interest




Critical Thoughts
Critical Thoughts
Social validity has been supported, in that teachers deem this intervention to be fair, appropriate
and effective within their classrooms (Moore et al, 1994; as cited in Kowalewicz, 2012)

Randomizing a reinforcer decreases the probability of reinforcer satiation, a common disadvantage
of many interdependent group contingencies (Little et al., 2010)
Random reinforcers decrease the possibility that students would deliberately ruin their
contingency program because they dislike the selected reinforcer.

Students are less likely to become disappointed and frustrated for not having earned a desirable
reinforcer

Mystery Motivator, like other group contingencies, can have the potential disadvantage of
difficulties that arise from the unequal contribution of group members toward the group goal (Little
et al., 2010).

Mystery Motivator may seem too extensive if applied only to small groups or individual students, in
which case teacher preference must be taken into account (Shanding & Sterling, 2010)
References
Brewster, C. & Fager, J. (2000). Increasing student engagement and motivation: From time-on-task to homework. Northwest Regional Educational
Laboratory. Retrieved from http://educationnorthwest.org/webfm_send/452

Brief, E.B. I. Mystery Motivator (Avademic Intervention).

Coalition for Psychology in Schools and Education. (2006, August). Report on the Teacher Needs Survey. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association, Center for Psychology in Schools and Education.

Dembo, M.H., & Seli, H. (2012). Motivation and learning strategies for college success: A focus on self-regulated learning. Routledge: Independence, KY.

Gresham, F. N., & Gresham, G. N. (1982). Interdependent, Dependent, and Independent Group Contingencies for Controlling Disruptive Behavior.
Journal of Special Education, 16(1), 101-110. doi: 10.1177/002246698201600110

Kowalewicz, E. A. (2012). Mystery Motivator Calendar: An Interdependent Group Contingency, Variable Ratio, Classroom Intervention.

Kehle, T. J., Bray, M. A., Byeralcorace, G. F., Theodore, L. A., & Kovac, L. M. (2012). Augmented selfmodeling as an intervention for selective
mutism.Psychology in the Schools, 49(1), 93-103.

Kehle, T. J., Madaus, M. R., Baratta, V. S., & Bray, M. A. (1998). Augmented self-modeling as a treatment for children with selective mutism. Journal
of School Psychology, 36(3), 247-260.

Kraemer, E. E., Davies, S. C., Arndt, K. J., & Hunley, S. (2012). A comparison of the mystery motivator and the Get'Em On Task interventions for
offtask behaviors. Psychology in the Schools, 49(2), 163-175.

Litow, L., & Pumroy, D.K. (1975). A brief review of classroom group-oriented contingencies. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 8 (3), 341347.
doi: 10.1901/jaba.1975.8-341

LIttle, S. G., Akin-Little, A., & Newman-Eig, L..M. (2010). Effects on homework completeion and accuracy of varied and constant reinforcement within
interdependent group contingency system. Journal of Applied Psychology, 26(2), 115-131.




References
Madaus, M. M., Kehle, T. J., Madaus, J., & Bray, M. A. (2003). Mystery motivator as an intervention to promote homework completion and
accuracy.School Psychology International, 24(4), 369-377.


Mottram, A. M., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., Broudy, M., & Jenson, W. R. (2002). A classroom-based intervention to reduce disruptive behaviors.
Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19(1), 65-74.

Murphy, K. A., Theodore, L. A., Aloiso, D., AlricEdwards, J. M., & Hughes, T. L. (2007). Interdependent group contingency and mystery motivators
to reduce preschool disruptive behavior. Psychology in the Schools, 44(1), 53-63.

Musser, E. H., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., & Jenson, W. R. (2001). Reducing Disruptive Behaviors in Students with Serious Emotional Disturbance.
School Psychology Review, 30(2).

Mystery Motivator. (n.d.) Retrieved from Teaching Necessities:https://www.sites.google.com/site/teachingnecessities/mystery-
motivators

Popkin, J., & Skinner, C. H. (2003). Enhancing academic performance in a classroom serving students with serious emotional disturbance:
Interdependent group contingencies with randomly selected components. School Psychology Review, 32(2), 282-295. Retrieved from:
http://psycnet.apa.org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/psycinfo/2003-99697-012
Public Agenda. (2004). Teaching interrupted: Do discipline policies in todays public
schools foster the common good? New York: Public Agenda.

Rathvon, N. (2008). Effective school interventions: Evidence-based strategies for improving student outcomes. Guilford Press.

Schanding Jr, G. T., & Sterling-Turner, H. E. (2010). Use of the mystery motivator for a high school class. Journal of Applied School Psychology,
26(1), 38-53.

Skinner, C. H., Cashwell, C. S., & Dunn, M. S. (1996). Independent and interdependent group contingencies: Smoothing the rough waters. Special
Services in the Schools, 12(1-2), 61-78.
Wong, P. (2010). Selective mutism: a review of etiology, comorbidities, and treatment. Psychiatry (Edgmont), 7(3), 23.