Rule-Governed vs Contingency-Shaped

Assessment Snapshot

Use this assessment to understand whether behavior is primarily driven by rules (pliance, tracking, augmenting) or by direct contact with environmental contingencies.

Reminder: This tool is educational and not a clinical or legal evaluation. Use it to structure observations and professional conversations.

Context

Assessment Items

Rate each statement from 0 (Never) to 4 (Almost always).

Pliance (socially mediated rule-following)

Rules followed primarily to gain approval or avoid disapproval from caregivers.

The child follows rules mainly to avoid getting in trouble with a parent or caregiver.

Compliance changes when different adults are watching.

Rules are obeyed even when they conflict with the child’s direct experience.

Tracking (rule-following with real-world contact)

Rules followed because they accurately describe what happens in real life.

When a rule stops working, the child adjusts behavior based on what happens.

The child can explain how a behavior leads to a real outcome (not just “because I was told”).

Rules are updated as new evidence is experienced.

Augmenting (emotionally loaded rules)

Rules are framed in terms of identity, loyalty, or emotionally intense consequences.

Rules are often framed around identity, loyalty, or being “a good kid.”

Rules are delivered with strong emotional weight (shame, fear, guilt, honor).

The child shows distress when rules are questioned, even in neutral settings.

Contingency sensitivity (shaped by consequences)

Behavior changes in response to immediate, real-world outcomes.

Behavior changes quickly when consequences change in real life.

The child’s behavior is sensitive to the immediate environment (tone, setting, timing).

Behavior adapts more to actual outcomes than to verbal instructions.

Rule conflict & competing narratives

Conflicting rules across caregivers or systems increase confusion and rigidity.

Different caregivers give conflicting rules about the same behavior.

The child feels pulled between “competing rules” from different adults.

Rules change dramatically across households or settings.

Score Summary

Rule-governed index

Low

0.00

Contingency sensitivity

Low

0.00

Tracking

Low

0.00

Pliance

Low

0.00

Augmenting

Low

0.00

Rule conflict

Low

0.00

Interpretive notes

  • Scores are mixed. Continue observing across settings and add context notes before interpreting patterns.

These notes are not diagnostic. Use them to guide further observation and professional consultation.

PDF Report: Rule-Governed vs Contingency-Shaped Assessment

Generate a beautifully designed PDF report with assessment results, charts, and recommendations.

Report Contents

1

Rule-Governed Index

Summary of pliance, tracking, and augmenting scores

2

Contingency Sensitivity

Evidence of adjustment to real-world consequences

3

Rule Conflict

Conflicting caregiver rules and consistency risks

4

Intervention Targets

Suggested coaching and observation focus areas

Report Features

Professional Design
Clean, professional layout suitable for clinical use
Customizable
Add client details, notes, and custom sections
Data Visualization
Charts and graphs to visualize assessment results

Professional Use Guidelines

  • Use reports within your scope of practice and training
  • Maintain client confidentiality when storing or sharing reports
  • Review and customize reports for individual client needs
  • Document report use in client records as appropriate