CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Behavioral and Psychological StudiesEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Evaluating the Zones of Regulation® intervention to improve the self-control of elementary students

Open access
Ochocki, Stephanie, Frey, Andy J., Patterson, David A., Herron, Freida, Beck, Natalie, Dupper, David R.·2020·International Journal of School Social Work
DOI 10.4148/2161-4148.1046
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

School social workers provide social, emotional, and behavioral interventions for elementary-age students within multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) when disruptive behavior and deficits in self-control are observed. Secondary/Tier 2 cognitive- and behaviorally-oriented interventions that target self-control have been shown to impact positive outcomes in academic, social, emotional, and behavioral realms for elementary-age students. This study sought to evaluate the Zones of Regulation® intervention for elementary-age students identified with disruptive behavior via a small randomized controlled trial (N = 63). Students were identified for disruptive behavior concerns through a universal behavior screening process and were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. School social workers utilized twelve selected lessons from the cognitive-behaviorally oriented Zones of Regulation® curriculum sequence for a six-week Secondary/Tier 2 group intervention. Implementation of the Zones of Regulation® curriculum did not result in statistically significant decreases in students’ disruptive behavior or improve their self-control. More tailored efforts to explore the social validity and effectiveness of the Zones® within MTSS school structures is warranted given the widespread use of the curriculum by school social workers and other specialized instructional support personnel.

Verified 2026-11-06 · 3 references not checked yet

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This randomized controlled trial evaluated the Zones of Regulation® as a Tier 2 group intervention delivered by school social workers to elementary students identified by universal behavior screening. It found no statistically significant post-intervention differences in teacher-rated disruptive behavior or self-control, though the self-control effect size was small and the authors note low statistical power.

Key findings

  • After controlling for baseline scores, the intervention and control groups did not differ significantly on disruptive behavior or self-control at post-test.
  • Students in the Zones® group did not show statistically significant reductions in disruptive behavior (M[SD] = 7.85[3.61] vs. 6.18[3.84]) or improvements in self-control (M[SD] = 158.73[22.98] vs. 151.94[31.67]) based on teacher-reported measures.
  • Effect sizes were small: Hedge’s g = .04 for disruptive behavior and g = .26 for self-control.
  • Observed power was low: 0.139 for the SRSS and 0.08 for the SCRS, indicating risk of Type II error.

Methods

  • Randomized controlled trial conducted in five Midwestern elementary schools during the 2016/2017 school year; 63 second- and third-grade students who scored in the moderate or high range on the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 33) or control (n = 30).
  • The intervention used 12 of the 18 Zones of Regulation® lessons over six weeks, delivered by school social workers in approximately 30-minute sessions twice per week.
  • Outcomes were teacher-reported SRSS for disruptive behavior and Self-Control Rating Scale (SCRS) for self-control, collected pre- and post-intervention; analysis used baseline equivalence tests, general linear regression with baseline covariate and condition predictor, and Hedge’s g effect sizes.

Limitations

  • The authors state the sample was limited because school social workers at participating sites identified a grade-level teaching group to participate.
  • The study lacked a formative evaluation component, including assessment of social validity and implementation fidelity.
  • It did not include additional outcome measures such as attendance, office discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, or standardized assessment data.
  • The sample had limited diversity and was small, limiting generalization; teachers often had students in both intervention and control groups, raising possible diffusion, compensatory rivalry, or halo effects.
  • Findings are based on only 12 of 18 Zones® lessons, and low statistical power means the null findings must be tempered.
  • The text also makes evident that outcome measures were teacher-reported and teachers were knowledgeable about the study purpose, so they were not blind to condition.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4148/2161-4148.1046

Cites

22 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

1 of 27 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation

    Children may need full exposure to the Zones curriculum and more time for adequate practice of the skills learned in a Zones group before behavioral changes are observed.

    “Children may need full exposure to the curriculum and more time for adequate practice of the skills they learn in a Zones® group with the school social worker before behavioral changes are observed (Wyman et al., 2010).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wyman et al., 2010 source

      The Discussion (page not available) says practice in challenging settings helps children apply new skills and proposes studying how much practice is needed. But the paper studies the Rochester Resilience Project, not a Zones® group, and does not say children need full curriculum exposure or more time before behavioral changes appear. Its Results report behavioral improvements during the four-month intervention. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • Rests on an assumption: The 12 lessons selected for the study are a valid representation of the full Zones curriculum.
  • Interpretationown data

    There is a risk of Type II error in suggesting there were no pre-post differences between the two groups on the disruptive behavior and self-control measures.

    “As such, there is the risk of a Type II error in suggesting there was no differences pre and post between the two group on these two measures.”
    • Also stated in: § Limitations and Implications · hedged
      “Finally as reported in the Results section, the findings of no differences pre and post between the two group on these two measures must be tempered by the low statistical power to detect differences pre and post on the two measures.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.
  • Premisecitation

    Behaviorally oriented interventions that target self-control have been found to produce positive outcomes.

    “Additional studies report that behaviorally oriented interventions that target self-control have been found to produce positive outcomes (Piquero et al., 2010;Stoltz, Londen, Deković, Castro, & Prinzie, 2012;Waschbusch, Pelham, & Massetti, 2005;Wilson & Lipsey, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Piquero et al., 2010 source
    • cites Stoltz, Londen, Deković, Castro, & Prinzie, 2012 source
    • cites Waschbusch, Pelham, & Massetti, 2005 source
  • Premisecitation

    A meta-analysis by Wilson and Lipsey indicated positive reductions in aggressive and disruptive behavior of students participating in Secondary/Tier 2 social information processing interventions.

    “For example, a meta-analysis by Wilson and Lipsey (2006) indicated positive reductions in aggressive and disruptive behavior of students participating in Secondary/Tier 2 social information processing interventions that included general cognitive-behavioral, anger management, social problem solving, perspective taking, and behavior modification modalities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilson and Lipsey (2006)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Interpretationown data

    The effect size suggests the impact of the Zones intervention on disruptive behavior was negligible.

    “Further, the effect size suggests the impact on disruptive behavior was negligible while the effect size for self-control, while still in the small range, demonstrates this application of the Zones® intervention may well have resulted in clinically significant changes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.
  • May combine two claims. 21
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 12

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The effect sizes for disruptive behavior (g = .04) and self-control (g = .26) fall within the small range.

    “The effect sizes for disruptive behavior (g = .04)and self-control (g = .26)fall with the small range.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    After controlling for baseline scores, the Zones intervention group did not differ significantly from the control group at post-test on either disruptive behavior or self-control.

    “After controlling for baseline scores, the treatment group and control group did not differ significantly on either the disruptive behavior measure nor the selfcontrol measure at post-test.”
    • Also stated in: § Results · plain
      “Students randomized to the Zones® intervention group did not evidence statistically significant reductions in disruptive behavior (M[SD] = 7.85[3.61]vs. 6.18[3.84])nor significant improvements in self-control (M[SD] = 158.73[22.98] vs. 151.94[31.67])based on outcome measures solicited from teachers.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · hedged
      “Overall, results of this study indicated that student participation in the Zones® Secondary/Tier 2 group did not have a statistically significant impact on student's measured level of disruptive behavior or level of self-control.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The intervention group received the intended Zones lessons as planned.
    • Rests on an assumption: The control group did not receive the Zones intervention or a similar intervention during the study period.
    • Rests on an assumption: The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    An ex post facto power analysis found observed power of 0.139 for the SRSS and 0.08 for the SCRS.

    “We conducted an ex post facto power analysis and found that for the SRSS there was an observed power of 0.139 and for the SCRS the observed power was 0.08.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    At baseline, the intervention and control groups did not differ significantly on disruptive behavior or demographic variables.

    “As referenced in Table 1, the chi-square and independent samples t-test used to establish baseline equivalence indicated no statistically significant differences between students in the intervention or control condition with regard to baseline levels of disruptive behavior or demographic variables.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    To date, only two studies have been conducted on the Zones implemented as a Universal/Tier 1 intervention.

    “To date, only two studies have been conducted on the Zones® implemented as a Universal/Tier 1 intervention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The SRSS has been found to be reliable and valid for students in kindergarten through sixth grade, with strong internal consistency and test-retest stability.

    “The SRSS has been found to be reliable and valid for students in kindergarten through sixth grade (Oakes, Lane, Cox, & Messenger, 2014), with strong internal consistency (α > .85)and test-retest stability (r = .69-.79, p < .0001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Oakes, Lane, Cox, & Messenger, 2014 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The spectrum of related hardships in schools includes disruptive behaviors that detract from instructional time, have the capacity to diminish academic outcomes, and tarnish student-teacher relationships.

    “While Gottfredson and Hirschi place emphasis on potential criminal outcomes due to lack of self-control, the spectrum of related hardships in schools includes disruptive behaviors that detract from instructional time, have the capacity to diminish academic outcomes, and tarnish student-teacher relationships (Lane, Givner, & Pierson, 2004;Oakes et al., 2012).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lane, Givner, & Pierson, 2004 source
    • cites Oakes et al., 2012 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Scores on the SCRS can range from 33 to 231, and higher summative scores indicate increased difficulties with self-control.

    “Scores on the SCRS can range from 33 to 231; students are presumed to have increased difficulties with self-control the higher their summative score on the SCRS (Kendall & Wilcox, 1979).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kendall & Wilcox, 1979 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The study did not include a formative evaluation component, including assessment of social validity and implementation fidelity.

    “Second, this study did not include a formative evaluation component, which is important given the lack of empirical support for Zones®.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The randomized controlled trial addresses an identified need in the school social work literature and begins to fill the void between extensive implementation of the Zones intervention and the empirical evidence needed to justify its use as an evidence-based practice.

    “The rigorous randomized controlled trial utilized in this study addresses an identified need in the school social work literature (Franklin, Kim, & Tripodi, 2009) and begins to fill the void between extensive implementation of the Zones® intervention and the empirical evidence needed to justify its use as an evidence-based practice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Franklin, Kim, & Tripodi, 2009 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Concepts taught in the Zones curriculum include helping students identify their feelings, understand that their behavior impacts others, and improve coping strategies to manage their feelings and behavioral responses.

    “Concepts taught in the Zones® curriculum encompass helping students identify their feelings, understand that their behavior impacts others around them, and improve coping strategies to manage their feelings and behavioral responses (Kuypers, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kuypers, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    Academic and social/emotional challenges can result when students lack the critical SEL skill of self-control.

    “Academic and social/emotional challenges can result when students lack the critical SEL skill of self-control.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The limited diversity of the student sample does not adequately reflect the overall diversity of students in public educational settings, and the small sample confines outcome generalizations.

    “While the intervention and control group were demographically balanced, the limited diversity of the student sample does not adequately reflect the overall diversity of students in public educational settings and the small sample utilized in this study confines outcome generalizations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Despite a lack of rigorous studies and empirical evidence of effectiveness, the Zones curriculum has gained popularity in Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 educational settings across North America and around the world.

    “Despite this lack of rigorous studies and empirical evidence of effectiveness, the Zones® curriculum was launched by Kuypers (2011) and has gained popularity in Tier 1, Tier, 2, and Tier 3 educational settings across North America and around the world (Garcia Winner & Kuypers, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Garcia Winner & Kuypers, 2017

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Rush University and the School Association of Special Education in DuPage County found no statistically significant improvements on measures of self-control or ability to identify emotions for preschool children receiving the Zones intervention in their quasi-experimental, longitudinal, correlational and predictive single group study.

    “whereas Rush University and the School Association of Special Education in DuPage County (Kuypers, 2018) found no statistically significant improvements on measures of self-control or ability to identify emotions for preschool children receiving the Zones® intervention in their quasiexperimental, longitudinal, correlational and predictive single group study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kuypers, 2018

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The Zones of Regulation curriculum uses a systematic cognitive-behavioral approach and targets self-regulation or self-control.

    “Utilizing a systematic cognitive-behavioral approach, the Zones of Regulation® (Kuypers, 2011) curriculum targets selfregulation or self-control.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kuypers, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Taken in combination, cognitive-and behaviorally-oriented Secondary/Tier 2 interventions have been found to improve self-control and reduce the disruptive behavior of elementary-aged students.

    “Taken in combination, cognitive-and behaviorally-oriented Secondary/Tier 2 interventions have been found to improve self-control and reduce the disruptive behavior of elementary-aged students.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Characteristics of low self-control can present as delinquent, antisocial, and problematic behaviors, which can negatively impact a child's functioning across academic and social/emotional domains.

    “Whether exhibited together or in isolation, characteristics of low selfcontrol can present as delinquent, antisocial, and problematic behaviors, which can negatively impact a child's functioning across academic and social/emotional domains (Piquero, Jennings, & Farrington, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Piquero, Jennings, & Farrington, 2010 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Participating students were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group.

    “Participating students (N = 63) were randomly assigned to participate in either the intervention group (n = 33) receiving the Secondary/Tier 2 Zones® curriculum or to the control group (n = 30).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Because classroom teachers reporting on student measures often had students in both the intervention and control groups, diffusion of the intervention, compensatory rivalry, or a halo effect may have impacted observed student outcomes.

    “Additionally, the classroom teachers reporting on student measures in the study often had students participating in both the intervention and control group.Therefore, it is possible that diffusion of the intervention, compensatory rivalry, or a halo effect impacted observed student outcomes (Rubin & Babbie, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rubin & Babbie, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Boys have typically scored significantly higher than girls on the SCRS, and persons scoring at or above 160 to 165 are said to be candidates for treatment for difficulties with self-control.

    “Boys have typically scored significantly higher than girls, and persons scoring at or above 160 to 165 are said to be candidates for treatment for difficulties with self-control (Fischer & Corcoran, 2007;Kendall & Wilcox, 1979).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fischer & Corcoran, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Kendall & Wilcox, 1979 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Student baseline data on self-control using the SCRS was collected from classroom teachers after randomization, so the teachers were knowledgeable about the purpose of the study.

    “Student baseline data on level of self-control using the SCRS was collected from classroom teachers after randomization, thus the teachers were knowledgeable about the purpose of the study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The SCRS has demonstrated excellent internal consistency and good stability with test-retest correlation in samples of elementary-school-age children.

    “The SCRS has been studied with several samples of elementary-school-age children and has demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = .98)and good stability with test-retest correlation (r = .84,p < .05)(Fischer & Corcoran, 2007;Kendall & Wilcox, 1979).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fischer & Corcoran, 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Kendall & Wilcox, 1979 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The findings are based on implementation of only 12 of the 18 lessons in the Zones curriculum sequence, which may have influenced outcomes on measures of disruptive behavior and self-control.

    “Fifth, it is important to note these findings are based on the implementation of only 12 of the 18 lessons in the Zones® curriculum sequence, which may have influenced outcomes on measures of disruptive behavior and self-control.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The 12 lessons selected for the study are a valid representation of the full Zones curriculum.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    While the orientation and goals of the Zones align with evidence supporting cognitive-and behaviorally-oriented Secondary/Tier 2 interventions that improve self-control, a dearth of evidence remains for classifying the Zones as an empirically supported Secondary/Tier 2 intervention.

    “While the orientation and identified goals of the Zones® aligns with the evidence supporting cognitive-and behaviorally-oriented Secondary/Tier 2 interventions that improve self-control, a dearth of evidence for classifying the Zones® as an empirically supported Secondary/Tier 2 intervention remains.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Ratings on the SRSS have construct validity in that they are associated with teacher ratings of students' self-control skills.

    “Ratings on the SRSS have construct validity in that they are associated with teacher ratings of students' self-control skills (Menzies & Lane, 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Menzies & Lane, 2012

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

26 of 26

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The intervention group received the intended Zones lessons as planned.

    “Each of the 12 Zones® sessions, conducted by a school social worker, was approximately 30 minutes in duration.The Zones® intervention groups were scheduled at intervals of two group sessions per week and held in the school social worker's office to maintain student confidentiality.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The control group did not receive the Zones intervention or a similar intervention during the study period.

    “Participating students (N = 63) were randomly assigned to participate in either the intervention group (n = 33) receiving the Secondary/Tier 2 Zones® curriculum or to the control group (n = 30).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 12 lessons selected for the study are a valid representation of the full Zones curriculum.

    “Relying upon previous experience implementing the Zones® (Kuypers, 2011), the researcher and building-level school social workers identified the 12 specific lessons that would be utilized in the study's six-week intervention period (a full listing of the Zones® curriculum and the specific lessons used in the study is available in Appendix A.)”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The SRSS and SCRS are sensitive to change over the six-week intervention period.

    “The classroom teacher's rating of each student participant's level of disruptive behavior (SRSS) and level of self-control (SCRS) was collected pre-and postintervention.Post-intervention scores were obtained within two weeks of the intervention's conclusion.”
4 of 4

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Screening measure is identified by two different acronyms

    Minor

    The procedures say teachers completed the SSRS, but the paper identifies the SRSS as the screening measure used to select students. The same procedures sentence then refers to students' SRSS scores, leaving the measure teachers completed inconsistent.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. International Journal of School Social Work, Vol. 5 [2020], Iss. 2, Art. 2 https://newprairiepress.org/ijssw/vol5/iss2/2 DOI: 10.4148/2161-4148.1046 References · DOI
  2. Fischer, J., & Corcoran, K. (2007). Measures for clinical practice and research: A sourcebook volume 1 couples, families, and children. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  3. Garcia Winner, M., & Kuypers, L. (2017). Social Thinking® and The Zones of Regulation®: The Journey Continues! Retrieved from https://www.socialthinking.com/Articles?name=SocialThin kingandTheZonesofRegulationTheJourneyContinues&utm 12 International Journal of School Social Work, Vol. 5 [2020], Iss. 2, Art. 2 https://newprairiepress.org/ijssw/vol5/iss2/2 DOI: 10.4148/2161-4148.1046
  4. Walker, H. M., Ramsey, E., & Gresham, F. M. (Ed.) (2004). Antisocial Behavior in Schools: Evidence-Based Practices (2nd Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
  5. Wilson, S. J., & Lipsey, M. (2006). The effects of school-based social information processing interventions on aggressive behavior: Part II: Selected/indicated pull-out programs: A systematic review. Cambell Systematic Reviews, 2006(6), 1-37. doi:10.4073/csr.2006. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ochocki, S., Frey, A. J., Patterson, D. A., Herron, F., Beck, N., & Dupper, D. R.
Affiliations
University of Louisville (US)
Corresponding author
Ochocki, Stephanie
ORCID
Frey, Andy J.
Venue
International Journal of School Social Work
Publisher
Kansas State University
Published
2020-10-01
Volume
5
Issue
2
ISSN
2161-4148 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.4148/2161-4148.1046
OpenAlex
W3089563648
Cited by
7
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of School Social Work (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • New Prairie Press (Kansas State University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
Zones of Regulation, self-control, disruptive behavior, elementary school students, school social workers, multi-tiered systems of support, Tier 2 intervention, group intervention, cognitive-behavioral intervention, social-emotional learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-06.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review