Token Economy
Study: Christensen et al. (2004)

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:

The students were referred to the school behavior team because they had been identified as being at risk for emotional-behavioral disorders. They were identified through a formal screening process and teacher referrals. The students were both enrolled in general education classrooms and had exhibited a high rate of problem behavior.

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional/behavioral difficulties (BI):

Eduardo was referred by his teacher due to a high rate of inappropriate classroom behavior. The rate of inappropriate behavior was verified through baseline data collection. Justin was referred by the principal and the classroom teacher. This was due to a high rate of office referrals that were related to disruptions and a lack of work completion.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:

• below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
• identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?

%

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:

• emotional disability label,
• placed in an alternative school/classroom,
• non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
• designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?

%

Please describe the study design:

The design associated with Eduardo was a ABAB with several changes in the reinforcement schedule instituted during the second B phase. The design associated with Justin was a ABAC where the C condition also represented adjustments to the reinforcement schedule used.

Clarify and provide a detailed description of the treatment in the submitted program/intervention:

The intervention for Educardo consisted of peers delivering tokens to the students on regularly scheduled intervals if appropriate behaviors were demonstrated. Specifically, each target student was given a peer partner who prompted the target student to mark whether he had been acting appropriately for the time interval. The peer partner also rated the target student's performance with matches of positive behavior across the interval earning two points for the target student, matches of inappropriate behavior earning one point, and non-matches earning zero points. These points were collected in the form of token which were then placed into a jar so the target student could then turn these points in for backup reinforceres. The interventio for Justin consisted of peers delivering either green tokens for postive behavior or red tokens for inappropirate behavior during the established interval. The green tokens were worth 1 point and if he had 2 or fewer red tokens, he was given a bonus point.

Clarify what procedures occurred during the control/baseline condition (third, competing conditions are not considered; if you have a third, competing condition [e.g., multi-element single subject design with a third comparison condition], in addition to your control condition, identify what the competing condition is [data from this competing condition will not be used]):

The baseline condition was business as usual in which there was no formal management program in place. This consisted of inappropirate behavior either being ignored by the teacher or given attention through reprimands or redirection.

Please describe how replication of treatment effect was demonstrated (e.g., reversal or withdrawal of intervention, across participants, across settings)

The treatment effect was demonstrated through the use of within participant intervention withdrawals for both Eduardo and Justin.

Please indicate whether (and how) the design contains at least three demonstrations of experimental control (e.g., ABAB design, multiple baseline across three or more participants).

The design used for Eduardo has three demonstrations of experimental control across (1) baseline and PBS1, RS1, (2) PBS1, RS1 and the second baseline, and (3) second baseline and PBS2, RS2 phases. The data indicate level changes with minimal variability and trend within each phase. The design used for Justin was simialr to Eduardo's with the PBS, RS-schedule being altered between baseline phases. However, there are three including, (1) baseline to PBS, RS1, RS2, RS1, (2) the PBS condition to baseline, and (3) three baseline back to the PBS condition with different reinforcement schedules. The within phase data patterns for each baseline are variable, but the overlap with the PBS phases is minimal. Taken together, this shows that there was a level change from baseline to PBS phases and reduction in the amount variability within PBS phases as compared to baseline phases.

If the study is a multiple baseline, is it concurrent or non-concurrent?

N/A

How was the program delivered?

Individually
Small Group
Classroom

Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:

• Targeted measures
  Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills, that the program was directly targeted to improve.
  • In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
  • In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
• Broader measures
  Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.
  • In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
  • In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be on-task behavior in another setting.
• Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates, which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.

If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion: