SOME EFFECTS OF TOKEN REWARDS ON SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT OF CHILDREN WITH DOWN'S SYNDROME¹

Abstract

The effectiveness of a token economy system in producing improvement in the academic performance of children with Down's syndrome was tested. One group of seven children received token reinforcement for correct responses and showed significant improvement both in arithmetic and language. A second matched group of six children received only verbal praise for correct responses to the same instructional materials and failed to improve in arithmetic but showed significant gains in language. Re-test scores one year later revealed that the Token Group maintained its gains in both subjects whereas the language performance of the No-Token Group showed a significant decline.Behavior modification research with children of normal intelligence (e.g., Haring, Hayden, and Nolen, 1969;Miller and Schneider, 1970;Chadwick and Day, 1971) has amply demonstrated the effectiveness of token economy systems in producing improvement when successful performance on academic subjects is selected as the "target behavior" for modification. There are few comparable studies with retarded children (e.g., Birnbrauer, Wolf, Kidder, and Tague, 1965). The purpose of the present study was to provide additional empirical data bearing on this problem.Specifically, an attempt was made to test whether a group of children with Down's syndrome would make significantly greater gains in certain school subjects when such learning was supported by a token economy system than when the same material was taught to a second group of comparable children without the support of a 1The authors are indebted to the following for their indispensible assistance in the collection and analysis of the data presented in this report:

Effects of Type and Combination of Feedback upon Conceptual Learning by Children: Implications for Research in Academic Learning

“…The effects of information variables inherent in instructional programs, however, have not been evaluated (e.g., Staats & Butterfield, 1965;Staats et al, 1964Staats et al, , 1970Walker & Hops, 1976;Willis et al, 1972;Wolf et al, 1968). A related methodological problem is created by an emphasis on the importance of delivering positive verbal feedback along with tokens (e.g., Dalton, Rubino, & Hislop, 1973;Kuypers et al, 1968). Theoretically, the goal is to establish the teacher's comments as positive reinforcers.…”

“…A procedure used by Willis et al (1972) exemplifies a related methodological problem (see also, Dalton et al, 1973;Kuypers et al, 1968;Walker & Hops, 1976;Whitlock & Buschell, 1967). These investigators emphasized the importance of pairing positive verbal feedback with token delivery (cf.…”

Exchange schedules in token economies: A preliminary investigation of second‐order schedule effects

“…Token economies have broad applicability and have been used effectively across a variety of settings, populations, and behaviors. For example, token economies have been implemented in inpatient psychiatric settings (Kaufman & O'Leary, ), group homes (Liberman, Ferris, Salgado, & Salgado, ), and classrooms (Glynn, ), with individuals who are typically developing (Sran & Borrero, ) and those diagnosed with intellectual or developmental disabilities (Dalton, Rubino, & Hislop, ). They have also been used to target a range of behaviors, including adherence with medical treatments and diets (Da Costa, Rapoff, Lemanek, & Goldstein, ) and work‐related safety behavior (Fox, Hopkins, & Anger, ).…”

Home-school token economies: Bridging the communication gap

“…They have been employed with a variety of children in a variety of settings. Their values in working with emotionally disturbed or behaviorally disturbed children (Ayllon & Roberts, 1974;Moser, 1974;Richard, et al, 1973), learning disabled children (McKenzie, et al, 1968;Wadsworth, 1971), educable mentally retarded children (Dalton, et al, 1973 ;Knapczyk & Livingston, 1973), and regular class children (Hodges, 1972;Koch & Breyer, 1974) have been well documented. Token economy systems also have been designed for the home and school (Bailey, et al, 1970;Coleman, 1973;Dickinson, 1974;McLaughlin & Malaby, 1974), showing that behavior can be controlled in one setting by administering reinforcers in another.…”