A Token Economy is a form of Behaviour Modification which uses the principles of
Operant Conditioning and is based on B F Skinner’s (1953) concept of behaviour shaping
through selective positive reinforcement. It is designed to increase desirable behaviour
and decrease undesirable behaviour with the use of tokens.
Individuals receive tokens (secondary reinforcers) immediately after displaying desirable
behaviour. The tokens are collected and later exchanged for a meaningful object or
privilege (primary reinforcer).
The primary goal of a Token Economy is to increase desirable behaviour and decrease
undesirable behaviour. Often Token Economies are used in institutional settings (such
as psychiatric hospitals or correctional facilities) to manage the behaviour of individuals
who may be aggressive or unpredictable. However, the larger goal of Token Economies
is to teach appropriate behaviour and social skills that can be used in one's natural
environment. Special education (for children with developmental or learning disabilities,
hyperactivity, attention deficit, or behavioural disorders), regular education, colleges,
various types of group homes, military divisions, nursing homes, addiction treatment
programmes, occupational settings, family homes (for marital or parenting difficulties),
and hospitals may also use token economies. Token economies can be used individually
or in groups. Token Economies have become a standard part of class management in
education - sticker charts, etc.
Several elements are necessary in every Token Economy:-
· Tokens: Anything that is visible and countable can be used as a token. Tokens should
preferably be attractive, easy to carry and dispense, and difficult to counterfeit.
Commonly used items include poker chips, stickers, point tallies, or play money.
When an individual displays desirable behaviour, he or she is immediately given a
designated number of tokens. Tokens have no value of their own. They are collected
and later exchanged for meaningful objects, privileges or activities. Individuals
can also lose tokens (response cost) for displaying undesirable behaviour.
· A clearly defined target behaviour: Individuals participating in a token economy
need to know exactly what they must do in order to receive tokens. Desirable and
undesirable behaviour is explained ahead of time in simple, specific terms. Where
possible, the target behaviour should be expressed in positive terms - eg: “Remain
quiet at meal times” rather than “Don’t talk at meal times”.The number of tokens
awarded or lost for each particular behaviour is also specified.
· Primary reinforcers: primary reinforcers are the meaningful objects, privileges,
or activities that individuals receive in exchange for their tokens. Examples include
food items, toys, extra free time, or outings. The success of a token economy depends
on the appeal of the primary reinforcers. Individuals will only be motivated to earn
tokens if they anticipate the future reward represented by the tokens. A well-designed
token economy will use primary reinforcers chosen by individuals in treatment rather
than by staff.
· A system for exchanging tokens: A time and place for purchasing primary reinforcers
is necessary. The token value of each primary reinforcer is pre-determined based
on monetary value, demand, or therapeutic value. For example, if the reinforcer is
expensive or highly attractive, the token value should be higher. If possession of
or participation in the reinforcer would aid in the individual's acquisition of skills,
the token value should be lower. If the token value is set too low, individuals will
be less motivated to earn tokens. Conversely, if the value is set too high, individuals
may become easily discouraged. It is important that each individual can earn at least
some tokens.
· A system for recording data: Before treatment begins, information (baseline data)
is gathered about each individual's current behaviour. Changes in behaviour are then
recorded on daily data sheets. This information is used to measure individual progress,
as well as the effectiveness of the token economy. Information regarding the exchange
of tokens also needs to be recorded.
· Consistent implementation of the Token Economy by staff: In order for a Token Economy
to succeed, all involved staff members must reward the same behaviours, use the appropriate
amount of tokens, avoid dispensing primary reinforcers for free, and prevent tokens
from being counterfeited, stolen, or otherwise unjustly obtained. Staff responsibilities
and the rules of the Token Economy should be described in a written manual. Staff
members should also be evaluated periodically and given the opportunity to raise
questions or concerns.
Initially tokens are awarded frequently and in higher amounts, but as individuals
learn the desirable behaviour, opportunities to earn tokens decrease. (The amount
and frequency of token dispensing is called a reinforcement schedule.) For example,
in a classroom, each student may earn 25 to 75 tokens the first day, so that they
quickly learn the value of the tokens. Later, students may earn 15 to 30 tokens per
day. By gradually decreasing the availability of tokens (fading), students should
learn to display the desirable behaviour independently, without the use of - instead
responding to more natural reinforcers such as praise. Reinforcers that individuals
would normally encounter in society, such as verbal praise, should accompany the
awarding of tokens to aid in the fading process.
Normal results
Ideally, individuals will use the skills learned in a Token Economy in their everyday
surroundings. They will display the undesirable behaviour less frequently or not
at all. They will also engage in positive, adaptive behaviours more often.
Abnormal results
If the Token Economy was ineffective or time spent in the Token Economy was limited,
individuals may show no changes or actual increases in the undesirable behaviour.
Ethics & Risks
Token Economies as such do not allow for variations in clients’ abilities. This might
result in fewer tokens being given to the more maladapted clients because they are
more unstable and less able to learn new skills.
Risks involved in token economies are similar to those in other forms of Behaviour
Modification. Staff members implementing the therapy may intentionally or unintentionally
neglect the rights of individuals receiving treatment. Token Economies should never
deprive individuals of their basic needs, such as sufficient food, comfortable bedding,
or reasonable opportunities for leisure. If staff members are inadequately trained
or there is a shortage of staff, desirable behaviours may not be rewarded or undesirable
behaviours may be inadvertently rewarded, resulting in an increase of undesirable
behaviour. Patrick Corrigan (1995) damned Token Economies as manipulative, abusive
and humiliating.
Conversely, the same year (1995) S D Comer was of the view that sufficient boundaries
had been set on basic rights that clinicians could not cross them. However, Comer
also expressed the view that the restrictions would also have a limiting effect on
the effectiveness of Token Economy programmes.
Controversy exists regarding placing individuals in treatment against their will
(such as in a psychiatric hospital), and deciding which behaviours should be considered
desirable and which should be considered undesirable.
Evaluation
K O’Leary & S O’Leary (1976) report that Token Economy programmes work in schools.
Advantages of token economies are that behaviours can be rewarded immediately, rewards
are the same for all members of a group, use of punishment in the form of loss of
tokens gained (response cost) is less restrictive than other forms of punishment,
and individuals can learn skills related to planning for the future. Carla Lyon &
R Legarde (1997) successfully used tokens in teaching children with ADHD.
Disadvantages include considerable cost, effort, and extensive staff training and
management. Some professionals find token economies to be time-consuming and impractical.
Only about 30% of staff in many schools actually use such programmes consistently.
Russell Barkley (2002) has proposed that parents of children with ADHD should use
Token Economies at home, with value tokens assigned to each clearly mapped-out responsibility
of the child. Even minor instances of good behaviour should be given some reward,
according to Barkley.
Token Economies have proved effective in the treatment of some addictions. Nancy
Petry, Ken Kolodner, Rui Li, Jessica Pierce, John Roll, Maxine Stitzer & John Hamilton
(2006) used the reward of entries into a prize draw as tokens in treating alcoholics
effectively. Jody Sindelar, Todd Olmstead & Nancy Petry (2007) found similar success
using the same concept with 120 cocaine abusers on a 12-week programme. The higher
the prize draw pay-out - eg: $240, rather than $80 - the higher the percentage of
drug-free urine samples the participants provided; they also stayed clean longer
and were more likely to complete the programme.
Paul Emmelkamp (1994) looked at the widespread use of Token Economies in psychiatric
units with psychotic clients and found the therapy very effective in reducing inappropriate
behaviour. In 1968 Teodoro Ayllon & Nathan Azrin carried out a study in which female
clients who had been hospitalised 16 years on average were rewarded with plastic
tokens for behaviours such as making their beds and combing their hair. The tokens
were then exchanged for things like watching a movie or being allowed an extra visit
to the canteen. The number of daily chores the clients carried out increased from
around 5 to over 40. The therapy was much more effective where the desired behaviour
was already in the client’s repertoire. It proved impossible to improve the behaviour
of someone who did little other than eat and sleep. James Le Page (1999) found a
Token Economy programme used with violent clients in an acute psychiatric unit led
to a 43% reduction in negative incidents.
G L Paul & R J Lentz (1977), working with long-term hospitalised schizophrenic clients,
reported the use of tokens in psychiatric hospitals leading to considerable improvements
in self-care and pro-social behaviour. There was also some evidence of symptom reduction
- a remarkable achievement given that concurrent to the use of tokens there was a
substantial reduction in the number of drugs being administered. After 4 years of
being treated under a Token Economy system, 98% of their clients had been released
from their institution, compared with 71% treated under any other kind of programme.
However, T McMonagle & A Sultana (2001) have questioned the value of such studies
since data was not collected on the behaviours and experiences of the clients once
they had left the treatment programme.
Since the primary reinforcers in a Token Economy are determined in conjunction with
the clients, they should have real appeal for the individuals concerned. This enables
the programme to be tailored specifically to individuals.
Due to the effects of Classical Conditioning, the effects of the programme may be
contextualised - context-dependent learning - to where the programme took place -
eg: a prisoner may be taught appropriate behaviour in the prison setting but that
behaviour may not be generalised to the outside world when the prisoner is released.
Whereas a token is obvious and immediate, everyday reinforcement is subtle and often
delayed. It has also been evidenced that, in some instances, clients only behave
in the desired manner to receive token - effectively producing ‘token dependency’.
Another explanation of the apparent but contextualised success of Token Economies
is that it is the increased attention of the institution’s staff that leads to an
increase in the desired behaviour rather than the token itself and that staff using
tokens develop a more positive attitude to clients, leading to improvements in how
they are treated.
It is important to note, according to Comer (2002), particularly in terms of dealing
with psychotic disorders such as Schizophrenia, that Token Economies do pretend to
offer a ‘cure’. They are intended merely to enable clients to adapt better to their
social world. The mental illness still remains.
