Paired-associate learning by normal children and retardates with relevant redundant compound stimuli

During daily sessions four first-grade boys each played a two-choice marble dropping game. When one colored light was presented a plain token was dispensed as soon as S dropped a marble, and when another light was on a token with a hole in its center was delivered. During choice trials that were interspersed among single-color trials S had to choose one of the two different colored holes. At the end of each session S traded tokens with holes for pennies and then turned in the remaining plain tokens which were not exchanged for money. After S had developed a preference for the response that earned the tokens with holes (tokens that were backed up with pennies) E instructed S to try to get as many plain tokens (unexchangeable tokens) as he could. All Ss immediately switched to the response that earned unexchangeable tokens but as soon as E left they returned to choosing the backed up response. When the adult reentered, Ss again chose to work for unexchangeable tokens. Two different Es (male and female) served and the instructions of each were effective in controlling responding as long as the adult was present, except for one S who did not respond to one E, but did respond as described for the other.     

Stock optimizing in choice when a token deposit is the operant.

Each of 2 monkeys typically earned their daily food ration by depositing tokens in one of two slots. Tokens deposited in one slot dropped into a bin where they were kept (token kept). Deposits to a second slot dropped into a bin where they could be obtained again (token returned). In Experiment 1, a fixed-ratio (FR) 5 schedule that provided two food pellets was associated with each slot. Both monkeys preferred the token-returned slot. In Experiment 2, both subjects chose between unequal FR schedules with the token-returned slot always associated with the leaner schedule. When the FRs were 2 versus 3 and 2 versus 6, preferences were maintained for the token-returned slot; however, when the ratios were 2 versus 12, preference shifted to the token-kept slot. In Experiment 3, both monkeys chose between equal-valued concurrent variable-interval variable-interval schedules. Both monkeys preferred the slot that returned tokens. In Experiment 4, both monkeys chose between FRs that typically differed in size by a factor of 10. Both monkeys preferred the FR schedule that provided more food per trial. These data show that monkeys will choose so as to increase the number of reinforcers earned (stock optimizing) even when this preference reduces the rate of reinforcement (all reinforcers divided by session time).     

Preferences for token exchange‐production schedules: Effects of task difficulty and token‐production schedules

Previous research suggests that accumulated exchange‐production schedules promote increased work completion and are more preferred than distributed exchange‐production schedules. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the response effort or token‐production schedules associated with token delivery influenced preferences for exchange‐production schedules. Tokens exchanged under accumulated schedules were more preferred, relative to distributed schedules, when tokens were earned for completing easy tasks. When participants earned tokens for completing difficult tasks, two of three participants preferred accumulated exchange‐production schedules (Experiment 1). Under dense token‐production schedules, accumulated exchange‐production schedules were preferred, but participant's preferences switched to distributed schedules under increasing token‐production (i.e., leaner) schedules (Experiment 2).     

Using token reinforcement to increase walking for adults with intellectual disabilities

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of token reinforcement, using an ABAB reversal design, for increasing distance walked for adults with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities at an adult day‐training center. Five participants earned tokens for walking 50‐m laps and exchanged tokens for back‐up reinforcers that had been identified through preference assessments. Token reinforcement resulted in a substantial increase from baseline in laps walked for 4 participants.     

Behavioral similarity as a reinforcer for preschool children

Three experiments evaluated whether behavioral similarity provided by an adult could serve as a reinforcer for the modelling behavior of four preschoolers. In each experiment, sessions consisted of two kinds of trials: (1) experimenter-modelled trials, when the child's imitation of modelled motor responses was reinforced with praise and tokens, and (2) child-modelled trials when experimenter imitation of child-modelled responses was contingent upon the child's modelling one of three alternative responses: operation of a ball, horn, or clicker. Experiment I showed that the children consistently modelled whichever responses the experimenter imitated. Experiment II determined whether that performance was due to differences in the amount of experimenter behavior following imitated versus nonimitated child models or to experimenter imitation. Neither reducing nor increasing the amount of experimenter behavior following the children's nonimitated models altered their modelling of imitated responses. Experiment III evaluated whether experimenter imitation of child models was a reinforcer because the child's imitative responses were reinforced on experimenter-modelled trials. In Experiment III, the children's nonimitation of experimenter-models was reinforced with praise and tokens on a schedule of differential reinforcement of other behavior, yet they continued to model experimenter-imitated responses on child-modelled trials. These results indicate behavioral similarity was reinforcing, though no conditioning history through which it acquired that function was demonstrated.     

Substitution effects in a generalized token economy with pigeons

Pigeons made repeated choices between earning and exchanging reinforcer‐specific tokens (green tokens exchangeable for food, red tokens exchangeable for water) and reinforcer‐general tokens (white tokens exchangeable for food or water) in a closed token economy. Food and green food tokens could be earned on one panel; water and red water tokens could be earned on a second panel; white generalized tokens could be earned on either panel. Responses on one key produced tokens according to a fixed‐ratio schedule, whereas responses on a second key produced exchange periods, during which all previously earned tokens could be exchanged for the appropriate commodity. Most conditions were conducted in a closed economy, and pigeons distributed their token allocation in ways that permitted food and water consumption. When the price of all tokens was equal and low, most pigeons preferred the generalized tokens. When token‐production prices were manipulated, pigeons reduced production of the tokens that increased in price while increasing production of the generalized tokens that remained at a fixed price. The latter is consistent with a substitution effect: Generalized tokens increased and were exchanged for the more expensive reinforcer. When food and water were made freely available outside the session, token production and exchange was sharply reduced but was not eliminated, even in conditions when it no longer produced tokens. The results join with other recent data in showing sustained generalized functions of token reinforcers, and demonstrate the utility of token‐economic methods for assessing demand for and substitution among multiple commodities in a laboratory context.     

AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECTS OF TOKEN REINFORCEMENT ON DIVERGENT VERBAL RESPONDING1

The effect of token reinforcement on three classes of divergent verbal responding to verbal stimulus items from three measures of the Wallach-Kogan Creativity test was examined. The subjects consisted of two “gifted”, two “average”, and two “learning disabled” children from a public-school setting. The design utilized both an intra-subject and inter-subject multiple-baseline design with a reversal design added. Tokens were dispensed contingent upon the number of appropriate verbal responses to each stimulus item, i.e., a continuous schedule of reinforcement was used—one token per appropriate response. Interobserver agreement on “appropiateness” was 993%. The tokens could be used to “purchase” items listed in a “menu” format (e.g., ball and jacks—100 tokens). Consistently large effects of token reinforcement were observed, without generalization of effect across the three classes of behaviors, or conditions. These results support the works of Goetz and Baer (Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6 , 209–217), Goetz and Salmonson (Behavior Analysis and Education, G. Semb, (Ed.), University of Kansas, 1972, 53–61), and Maloney and Hopkins (Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973, 6 , 425–434). Implications lie in continued experimental analysis of behavior approach to the concept called “creativity”. Additionally, implications are made in classroom application of assessing and intervening in the area of divergent responding for children with deficits in those areas.     

Discrete-trial choice in pigeons: Effects of reinforcer magnitude

The preference of pigeons for large reinforcers which occasionally followed a response versus small reinforcers which invariably followed a response was studied in a discrete-trial situation. Two differently colored keys were associated with the two reinforcement alternatives, and preference was measured as the proportion of choice trials on which the key associated with uncertain reinforcement was pecked. A combination of choice and guidance trials insured that received distributions of reinforcement equalled the scheduled distributions. For five of six subjects, preference for the uncertain reinforcer appeared to be a linear function of the magnitude of the certain reinforcer. In addition, there was greater preference for the response alternative associated with uncertain reinforcement than would be expected on the basis of net reinforcer value.     

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF REINFORCEMENT,RESPONSE COST,AND MIXED PROGRAMS ON CLASSROOM BEHAVIORS1

Six elementary school children served as subjects in an experiment comparing the relative effectiveness of (1) token reinforcement, in which children received tokens for attending and for correct arithmetic performance; (2) response cost, in which children received “free” tokens at the start of a period but lost them for inattention and for arithmetic performance below a specified level; and (3) a combination of both token reinforcement and response cost. During training, the six subjects received all three procedures in counterbalanced sequence. The effects of the three procedures were assessed by a within-subject comparison divided into three phases: (i) baseline, (ii) training, (iii) withdrawal of tokens. Introduction of the three token procedures markedly increased the two dependent measures. However, there were no differences across the procedures in the amount of change produced in either attending behavior or arithmetic performance. During baseline, the subjects averaged 29% attending behavior and 6.4 correct problems. These levels increased to 85% for attending behavior and 11.4 correct problems for arithmetic performance during training. Removal of all token procedures significantly decreased attending behavior (to an average of 65%), but produced a nonsignificant reduction in arithmetic performance (to an average of 7.6 correct problems). There was evidence that this lack of differential effects of the three token procedures was not due to an inability to discriminate among them. Furthermore, the subjects were evenly divided in their preference for the three procedures.     

The effects of token reinforcement,feedback and response cost on standardized test performance

The primary purpose of the present study was to compare the differential effects of token reinforcement, feedback, and response cost on the test performance of delinquent boys. Eighty students were randomly assigned to three experimental groups and one control group of 20 subjects each. Each experimental group received a standard and a modified administration of the verbal section of the WISC. For the token reinforcement group, the modified WISC administration permitted students to earn tokens contingent on correct responses; the response cost group forfeited tokens contingent on incorrect responses; and the feedback group simply received information regarding the accuracy of each response. The control group received two standard WISC administrations. The primary measure was the difference in verbal I.Q. scores between the standard and modified WISC administrations. Results indicated that the token reinforcement and response cost groups achieved significantly higher scores than the feedback and control groups. No significant differences were found between the token reinforcement and response cost groups nor between the feedback and control groups. The implications of these findings for clarifying the relationship between motivational condition and test performance are discussed.     

An experimental evaluation of tokens as conditioned reinforcers in retarded children

Since the publication of experimental reports by Wolfe (1936) and Cowles (1937), that tokens could be established as conditioned reinforcers, many accounts have appeared on the implementation of token systems in human subjects. Tokens have been successfully used as prosthetic motivational devices in a great variety of situations and subjects, such as retarded children (Birnbrauer, Wolf, Kidder and Tague, 1965), adult psychotics (Ayllon and Azrin, 1969), delinquent children and adolescents (Tyler, 1967; Phillips and Wolf, 1968), low achievers in schools (Clark, Lachowicz and Wolf, 1968), emotionally disturbed children (Hewett, Taylor and Artuso, 1969) and in normal classroom settings (O'Leary, Becker, Evans and Saudargas, 1969). In these reports, administration of tokens usually produced an increase in the frequency of desirable social and productive behavior. However, none of these studies showed that the effect of the tokens depended on their role as conditioned reinforcers based on the standard exchange systems being used. No assessment was provided about the separate contribution of the social reinforcement operations involved in dispensing tokens in a social setting.A suggestion about the possible confounding effects of social reinforcement in token administration comes from the failure to establish token systems in subjects who are partially unresponsive to social reinforcement (Hamblin et al., 1970; Ribes and Souza e Silva, in preparation). The present research was conducted with the aim of isolating the effects of conditioned reinforcement as such—apart from those produced by the social reinforcement provided in the delivery of tokens.     

Second-order schedules of token reinforcement with pigeons: effects of fixed- and variable-ratio exchange schedules

Pigeons' key pecks produced food under second-order schedules of token reinforcement, with light-emitting diodes serving as token reinforcers. In Experiment 1, tokens were earned according to a fixed-ratio 50 schedule and were exchanged for food according to either fixed-ratio or variable-ratio exchange schedules, with schedule type varied across conditions. In Experiment 2, schedule type was varied within sessions using a multiple schedule. In one component, tokens were earned according to a fixed-ratio 50 schedule and exchanged according to a variable-ratio schedule. In the other component, tokens were earned according to a variable-ratio 50 schedule and exchanged according to a fixed-ratio schedule. In both experiments, the number of responses per exchange was varied parametrically across conditions, ranging from 50 to 400 responses. Response rates decreased systematically with increases in the fixed-ratio exchange schedules, but were much less affected by changes in the variable-ratio exchange schedules. Response rates were consistently higher under variable-ratio exchange schedules than tinder comparable fixed-ratio exchange schedules, especially at higher exchange ratios. These response-rate differences were due both to greater pre-ratio pausing and to lower local rates tinder the fixed-ratio exchange schedules. Local response rates increased with proximity to food under the higher fixed-ratio exchange schedules, indicative of discriminative control by the tokens.     

RISKY CHOICE IN PIGEONS: PREFERENCE FOR AMOUNT VARIABILITY USING A TOKEN-REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM

Pigeons were given repeated choices between variable and fixed numbers of token reinforcers (stimulus lamps arrayed above the response keys), with each earned token exchangeable for food. The number of tokens provided by the fixed‐amount option remained constant within blocks of sessions, but varied parametrically across phases, assuming values of 2, 4, 6, or 8 tokens per choice. The number of tokens provided by the variable‐amount option varied between 0 and 12 tokens per choice, arranged according to an exponential or rectangular distribution. In general, the pigeons strongly preferred the variable option when the fixed option provided equal or greater numbers of tokens than the variable amount. Preference for the variable amount decreased only when the alternatives provided widely disparate amounts favoring the fixed amount. When tokens were removed from the experimental context, preference for the variable option was reduced or eliminated, suggesting that the token presentation played a key role in maintaining risk‐prone choice patterns. Choice latencies varied inversely with preferences, suggesting that local analyses may provide useful ancillary measures of reinforcer value. Overall, the results indicate that systematic risk sensitivity can be attained with respect to reinforcer amount, and that tokens may be critical in the development of such preferences.     

Token mediated tool exchange between tufted capuchin monkeys (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Cebus apella</Emphasis>)

Three experiments were conducted to test whether a pair of tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) could generalize their ability to exchange tokens and tool objects with a human experimenter to similar exchanges with a conspecific partner. Monkeys were tested in side-by-side enclosures, one enclosure containing a tool-use apparatus and one or more token(s), and the other enclosure containing one or more tool object(s). The monkeys willingly transferred tokens and tools to a conspecific with little practice. Following a small amount of training, we also found that the monkeys would select situation-appropriate tokens to exchange for specific tools, but did not select appropriate tool objects in response to another monkey’s token transfers. Implications regarding role reversal are discussed.     

Are monkeys able to plan for future exchange?

Whether or not non-human animals can plan for the future is a hotly debated issue. We investigate this question further and use a planning-to-exchange task to study future planning in the cooperative domain in two species of monkeys: the brown capuchin (Cebus apella) and the Tonkean macaque (Macaca tonkeana). The rationale required subjects to plan for a future opportunity to exchange tokens for food by collecting tokens several minutes in advance. Subjects who successfully planned for the exchange task were expected to select suitable tokens during a collection period (5/10?min), save them for a fixed period of time (20/30?min), then take them into an adjacent compartment and exchange them for food with an experimenter. Monkeys mostly failed to transport tokens when entering the testing compartment; hence, they do not seem able to plan for a future exchange with a human partner. Three subjects did however manage to solve the task several times, albeit at very low rates. They brought the correct version of three possible token types, but rarely transported more than one suitable token at a time. Given that the frequency of token manipulation predicted transport, success might have occurred by chance. This was not the case, however, since in most cases subjects were not already holding the token in their hands before they entered the testing compartment. Instead, these results may reflect subjects' strengths and weaknesses in their time-related comprehension of the task.     

RISKY CHOICE IN PIGEONS AND HUMANS: A CROSS‐SPECIES COMPARISON

Pigeon and human subjects were given repeated choices between variable and adjusting delays to token reinforcement that titrated in relation to a subject's recent choice patterns. Indifference curves were generated under two different procedures: immediate exchange, in which a token earned during each trial was exchanged immediately for access to the terminal reinforcer (food for pigeons, video clips for humans), and delayed exchange, in which tokens accumulated and were exchanged after 11 trials. The former was designed as an analogue of procedures typically used with nonhuman subjects, the latter as an analogue to procedures typically used with human participants. Under both procedure types, different variable‐delay schedules were manipulated systematically across conditions in ways that altered the reinforcer immediacy of the risky option. Under immediate‐exchange conditions, both humans and pigeons consistently preferred the variable delay, and indifference points were generally ordered in relation to relative reinforcer immediacies. Such risk sensitivity was greatly reduced under delayed‐exchange conditions. Choice and trial‐initiation response latencies varied directly with indifference points, suggesting that local analyses may provide useful ancillary measures of reinforcer value. On the whole, the results indicate that modifying procedural features brings choices of pigeons and humans into better accord, and that human—nonhuman differences on risky choice procedures reported in the literature may be at least partly a product of procedural differences.     

Using progressive ratio schedules to evaluate tokens as generalized conditioned reinforcers

The properties of operant reinforcers are dynamic and dependent on a number of variables, such as schedule and effort. There has been sparse research on the generalized conditioned properties of token reinforcement. We evaluated leisure items, edible items, and tokens using a progressive ratio schedule with three children with diagnoses of ASD and developmental delays. The highest break points occurred during the token reinforcement condition for two out of three participants, but response rates tended to be higher with edibles. We then evaluated the effects of presession access to edibles on the break points of edible items and tokens with two participants. Break points decreased only in the edible reinforcement condition, and the participants chose to work for leisure items rather than edibles when presession access to edibles was in place. These findings suggest that the tokens functioned as generalized conditioned reinforcers.     

ESTABLISHMENT OF NONDELUSIONAL RESPONSES IN A SOCIALLY WITHDRAWN CHRONIC SCHIZOPHRENIC1

Multiple treatment interventions including instructions, modelling, timeout, avoidance of repetition, and reinforcement were successful in establishing factual answers to personal background questions in a withdrawn and socially unresponsive chronic schizophrenic. The subject had previously persisted in giving only delusional responses to these questions. A multiple-baseline design across verbal replies to personal background questions demonstrated that the changes in behavior were brought about by the treatment interventions. During baseline, the subject was reinforced for any response to four questions. The experimental interventions were then introduced for the first question and moved sequentially to an additional question when the subject's responses reached the criterion of at least 80% correct for two consecutive sessions. Introduction of the experimental interventions produced an increase from a baseline level of zero to at least 80% correct for each question. The use of the token reinforcement procedure was faded out after the subject was able to answer all four questions correctly at least 80% of the time for two consecutive sessions. Fading of the token reinforcement procedure was accomplished by using increasingly intermittent schedules of token reinforcement during the last seven sessions. In the final session, no tokens were used to reinforce the subject's responding. Nine-, ten-, and 12-month followup interviews were conducted to evaluate the maintenance of treatment gains. Maintenance was found to be complete at the nine- and 10-month followups, but at the 12-month followup interview, the subject answered one question incorrectly. This study replicates an investigation previously reported in this journal.     

The effect of token reinforcement on McCarthy Scale performance for white preschoolers of low and high social position

In Study 1, the effect of making tokens contingent on correct performance of low social position preschoolers on the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilitieswas examined. Preschoolers in a token reinforcement group scored significantly higher (mean=8 IQ points) than subjects in a control group. In Study 2, the effect of tokens on McCarthyresults was examined as a function of social position in a 2×2 design. The high social position control group scored significantly above the low social position control. The low social position token reinforcement group, however, performed as well as both the high social position control and token reinforcement groups. Use of systematic reinforcement contingencies to reduce test error is discussed.     

Control of preference in children by conditioned positive reinforcement

A preference measure was employed with children to evaluate the conditioned positive reinforcing function of a stimulus that preceded reinforcement. A match-to-sample procedure was arranged in which subjects could respond to either the form or color dimension of a compound sample stimulus. Intermittent token reinforcement was provided equally for color and form matches. Two stimuli were employed (Stimulus A and Stimulus B), each consisting of a distinctive tone and colored light. One of these stimuli (the paired stimulus) preceded each token delivery, and the other did not (nonpaired stimulus). The paired stimulus was dependent upon each response to one match dimension, and the nonpaired stimulus followed each response to the other dimension. Three of the five subjects responded primarily to the dimension that was followed by the paired stimulus. This effect was obtained regardless of which stimulus (A or B) was paired and on which match dimension (color or form) the paired stimulus was dependent. These results were unaltered by discontinuing the nonpaired stimulus. The other two subjects demonstrated consistent preferences for the form dimension and Stimulus A, respectively.