Effects of Token Manipulation on Responding within a Token Economy Implemented with Children with Autism

Token economies are an effective behavior-management tool used across multiple populations and settings. However, researchers have shown that several variables may impact its effectiveness (Hackenberg 2009 , 2018 ). One variable within a token economy that has not been thoroughly studied is token ma...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Education & treatment of children 2020-12, Vol.43 (4), p.323-333
Main Authors: Sleiman, Andressa A., Betz, Alison M., Rey, Catalina N., Blackman, Abigail L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Analysis
Autism
Behavior
Behavior Modification
Behavior Problems
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Caregivers
Child and School Psychology
Children
Children's furniture
Clinical Psychology
Consumption
Developmental Psychology
Economic aspects
Learning activities
Original Article
Pervasive Developmental Disorders
Preferences
Program Effectiveness
Psychology
Response rates
Responses
Social skills
Student Participation
Teachers
Token Economy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Token economies are an effective behavior-management tool used across multiple populations and settings. However, researchers have shown that several variables may impact its effectiveness (Hackenberg 2009 , 2018 ). One variable within a token economy that has not been thoroughly studied is token manipulation or the extent to which the learner physically manipulates a tangible token. Thus, the current study compared the effectiveness of a token economy when participants physically manipulated tokens (token manipulation) to when the experimenter manipulated the tokens (no manipulation). In addition, we evaluated participant preference between the two conditions (i.e., token manipulation and no manipulation). The results showed higher rates of the target response during the no token manipulation condition for one participant, while no differences were observed for the other two participants. Two participants preferred the token manipulation condition, whereas the other participant showed no preference.
ISSN:0748-8491
1934-8924
DOI:10.1007/s43494-020-00014-2