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).

Individuals responsible for training educational and support staff in schools and agencies may lack experience in evidence‐based training techniques. In particular, staff may have difficulty providing effective performance feedback, which is a critical component of many training models. Though many dimensions of feedback (e.g., accuracy, timing, consistency) may influence the effectiveness of feedback delivery, the impact of feedback specificity on performance is unknown. Accordingly, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of feedback specificity (vague vs. specific) on acquisition of trial‐based functional analysis skills with eight graduate students studying applied behavior analysis. Overall, specific feedback was associated with improved skill acquisition for all trainees, whereas vague feedback actually decreased performance, relative to baseline, for three trainees. Implications for staff training practices and future areas of research will be discussed.