Child- versus teacher-administered token programs in a psychiatric hospital school

The purpose of this study was to: (a) compare student-administered token programs with similar programs administered by professional teachers, (b) investigate the contribution of feedback to the success of token systems, (c) compare the effectiveness of peer and teacher feedback, and (d) test a sequence of withdrawal from token programs designed to increase generalization. Results indicated that (a) peers could do just as well as teachers in reducing disruptive behavior through a token program, (b) feedback is not solely responsible for the effectiveness of token reinforcement, (c) peer feedback may be more effective than teacher feedback, and (d) withdrawal from token reinforcement to feedback may be a successful method of retarding the increases in disruptive behavior usually found when backup reinforcers are eliminated.The project was supported by Grant OEG 0-71-2872 (607) from the U.S. Department of Education and Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The opinions expressed herein, however, do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the U.S. Office of Education, and no official endorsement by that Office should be inferred. The author would like to thank Drs. L. Krasner, A. O. Ross, and K. Feldman for their assistance throughout the study, and Dr. K. D. O'Leary for his invaluable help. Also gratefully acknowledged is the help of R. Spitalnik, R. Kent, M. Hageman. S. Ransom, W. Kaler, S. Golembeski and E. Howard.