Jowett

Efficacy of Reinforcement and Response Cost in Token Economies

Overview

  • Researchers have found differential reinforcement and response cost to be equally effective in modifying behaviors within token economies.

  • This study aims to evaluate the individual effects of these procedures in both group contexts and absence of peers.

Key Findings

  • Procedures effectively increased on-task behavior during both group and individualized instruction.

  • Preference for procedures varied among participants.

  • Consistency was observed in participant responses across different settings.

Token Economies

  • Token economies are behavioral interventions effective for altering behavior across various contexts.

  • Tokens (e.g., points, stars) serve as conditioned reinforcers that can be exchanged for backup reinforcers (prizes, treats).

  • Differential Reinforcement Types:

    • Differential Reinforcement of Alternative behavior (DRA): Tokens given for appropriate behavior.

    • Differential Reinforcement of Other behavior (DRO): Tokens given for not engaging in inappropriate behavior.

    • Response Cost (RC): Tokens are removed for inappropriate behavior.

  • Advantages include applicability in group settings as a general behavior management strategy.

Implementation Challenges

  • General behavior management strategies may not be effective alone for individuals with severe behavioral issues.

  • Token economies create motivation for behavior change, enhancing classroom management.

Comparison of Reinforcement and Response Cost

  • Research shows that differential reinforcement and response cost are similarly effective; however, existing studies often used group averages, which may mask individual variability.

  • Peer behavior can influence individual responses during these procedures, suggesting the need for evaluation in individual contexts.

Preference in Token Economies

  • Only a few studies evaluated the preference between differential reinforcement and response cost.

  • Results suggest preference varies: Iwata and Bailey (1974) found mixed preferences among children; Donaldson et al. (2014) reported different preferences as well.

  • Isolation from peers is crucial for accurately assessing individual preference.

Study 1: Group Evaluation of DR vs. RC

  • Method: Participants included three groups of preschool-aged children able to follow instructions. Sessions measured on-task behavior with materials present.

  • On-task behavior was monitored in group settings using structured reinforcement.

Study 2: Individual Comparison of DRA vs. RC

  • Method: Expanding on Study 1, involved evaluating effectiveness and preference for DRA and RC in solitary tasks.

  • Participation included both typically developing children and one with cerebral palsy. Behavior was also evaluated in terms of token trading and preferences.

Results of Studies

  • On-task behavior levels were generally high across participants.

  • Group activity showed similarly high on-task behavior and varying preferences between procedures.

General Discussion

  • Overall, both DR and RC effectively enhance on-task behavior, though certain individuals may react differently.

  • Presence of peers did not seem to influence effectivity substantially.

  • Future research should explore the influence of various factors on effectiveness and preference, including behavioral outcomes linked to different reinforcement strategies.

Conclusion

  • DR and RC are equally effective behavior management procedures. Educators should choose approaches based on individual preferences and effectiveness in context.

Recommendations

  • Investigate individual vs. group contingencies further to refine behavioral intervention strategies.

  • Examine conditions under which preferences shift between DRA and RC to establish robust conclusions regarding behavioral management in educational settings.