{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027618551328817093, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01928087545596665, 'mean_word_length': 4.835866261398176, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The effect of behavioral contracting on the acquisition of guitar performance skills in a college-level beginning guitar class.

Behavioral contracting has been used as a tool to modify behavior in a variety of settings, and the purpose of this study was to determine the impact of behavioral contracting on the acquisition of guitar performance skills in a college-level beginning guitar class. Music and nonmusic majors enrolled in 4 college-level beginning guitar classes participated in this study. Participants (N = 27) were divided into four groups, with Groups 1 and 2 serving as control (n = 5, n = 6) and Groups 3 and 4 serving as experimental (n = 7, n = 9). A Multiple baseline format was implemented that involved 3 testing conditions (T1, T2, T3). Participants played the same I-IV-V7-1 chord progression for all 3 testing conditions. Experimental Group 3 received a behavioral contract between T1 and T2, while experimental Group 4 received a contract between T2 and T3. Participants in the contracting groups were allowed to make structured choices about evaluation procedures and reward outcomes. Data on speed increase and accuracy were collected via videotaping and analyzed by an independent reviewer blind to condition. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs were used to analyze differences in tempo and errors. A significant interaction was found for tempo and group and a significant difference in errors was found across treatment conditions. However, no significance was found between the groups for errors. Graphic analysis of tempo changes indicated that Group 1 improved tempo by a total of 41%, Group 2 by a total of 38%, Group 3 (contract) by a total of 76% and Group 4 (contract) by a total of 67%. Both contracting groups showed the biggest decrease in errors during the contracting condition, although errors actually increased slightly for Group 3 once the contracting condition was removed.