We assessed the efficacy of, and preference for, accumulated access to reinforcers, which allows uninterrupted engagement with the reinforcers but imposes an inherent delay required to first complete the task. Experiment 1 compared rates of task completion in 4 individuals who had been diagnosed with intellectual disabilities when reinforcement was distributed (i.e., 30-s access to the reinforcer delivered immediately after each response) and accumulated (i.e., 5-min access to the reinforcer after completion of multiple consecutive responses). Accumulated reinforcement produced response rates that equaled or exceeded rates during distributed reinforcement for 3 participants. Experiment 2 used a concurrent-chains schedule to examine preferences for each arrangement. All participants preferred delayed, accumulated access when the reinforcer was an activity. Three participants also preferred accumulated access to edible reinforcers. The collective results suggest that, despite the inherent delay, accumulated reinforcement is just as effective and is often preferred by learners over distributed reinforcement.

BDataPro is a Microsoft Windows®-based program that allows for real-time data collection of multiple frequency-and duration-based behaviors, summary of behavioral data (in terms of average responses per min, percentage of 10-s intervals, and cumulative responses within 10-s bins), and calculation of reliability coefficients. The current article describes the functionality of the program. BDataPro is freely available for download from the authors' institution websites. Keywords Computerized data collection. Data analysis. Data collection validation. Observational data Observing, recording, and quantifying behavior is fundamental to behavioranalytic practice and research. Computerized data collection programs are advantageous to behavior analysts as a means to obtain precise behavioral data while automating data analysis (Kahng & Iwata, 1998). The need for precise and efficient data collection tools has become particularly acute with the recent rise

exchange periods and food. Some conditions were conducted in a closed economy, in which the pigeons earned all their daily ration of food within the session. Relative to comparable open-economy conditions, response rates in the closed economy were less affected by changes in token-production ratio, resulting in higher levels of food intake and body weight. Some of the results are consistent with the economic concept of unit price, a cost-benefit ratio comprised of responses per unit of food delivery, but most are well accounted for by a consideration of the number of responses required to produce exchange periods, without regard to the amount of reinforcement available during those exchange periods.

No abstract

Four pigeons were exposed to a token-reinforcement procedure with stimulus lights serving as tokens. Responses on one key (the token-production key) produced tokens that could be exchanged for food during an exchange period. Exchange periods could be produced by satisfying a ratio requirement on a second key (the exchange-production key). The exchange-production key was available any time after one token had been produced, permitting up to 12 tokens to accumulate prior to exchange. Token accumulation, measured in terms of both frequency (percent cycles with accumulation) and magnitude (mean number of tokens accumulated), decreased as the token-production ratio increased from 1 to 10 across conditions (with exchange-production ratio held constant), and increased as the exchange-production ratio increased from 1 to 250 across conditions (with token-production ratio held constant). When tokens were removed, accumulation decreased markedly compared to conditions with tokens and the same schedules. These data show that token accumulation is an orderly function of token-production and exchange-production schedules, and they are broadly consistent with a unit-price model based on local and global responses per reinforcer.

Six pigeons were studied in a token economy in which tokens could be produced and exchanged for food on one side of an experimental chamber and for water on the opposite side of the chamber. Responses on one key produced tokens according to a token-production fixed ratio (FR) schedule. Responses on a second key produced an exchange period during which tokens were exchanged for water or food. In Experiment 1a, food tokens could be earned and exchanged under restricted food budgets, and water tokens could be earned and exchanged under water restricted budgets. In Experiment 1b, a third (generalized) token type could be earned and exchanged for either food or water under water restricted budgets. Across Experiments 1a and 1b, the number of tokens accumulated prior to exchange increased as the exchange-production schedule was increased. In Experiment 1b, pigeons produced more generalized than specific tokens, suggesting enhanced reinforcing efficacy of generalized tokens. In Experiment 2, the FR token-production price was manipulated under water restriction and then under food restriction. Production of each token type generally declined as a function of its own price and increased as a function of the price of the alternate type, demonstrating own-price and cross-price elasticity. Production of food and water tokens often changed together, indicating complementarity. Production of specific and generalized tokens changed in opposite directions, indicating substitutability. This is the first demonstration of sustained generalized functions of tokens in nonhumans, and illustrates a promising method for exploring economic contingencies in a controlled environment.

Three experiments were conducted with pigeons to identify the stimulus functions of tokens in second-order token-reinforcement schedules. All experiments employed two-component multiple schedules with a token-reinforcement schedule in one component and a schedule with equivalent response requirements and/or reinforcer density in the other. In Experiment 1, response rates were lower under a token-reinforcement schedule than under a tandem schedule with the same response requirements, suggesting a discriminative role for the tokens. In Experiment 2, response rates varied systematically with signaling functions of the tokens in a series of conditions designed to explore other aspects of the temporal-correlative relations between tokens and food. In Experiment 3, response rates were reduced but not eliminated by presenting tokens independent of responding, yoked to their temporal occurrence in a preceding token component, suggesting both a reinforcing function and eliciting/evocative functions based on stimulus-food relations. Only when tokens were removed entirely was responding eliminated. On the whole, the results suggest that tokens, as stimuli temporally correlated with food, may serve multiple stimulus functions in token-reinforcement procedures--reinforcing, discriminative, or eliciting--depending on the precise arrangement of the contingencies in which they are embedded.

Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Eunice K. Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. We thank Amber Mendres and John C. Borrero for their assistance in developing portions of this chapter.