Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The effects of positive reinforcement and a token program in a public junior high school class Main, George C. 1972

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1972_A4_7 M33.pdf [ 5.78MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101647.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101647-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101647-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101647-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101647-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101647-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101647-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101647-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101647.ris

Full Text

c  THE EFFECTS OF POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT AND A TOKEN PROGRAM IN A PUBLIC JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL CLASS by  B.Sc,  George C. Main U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master o f E d u c a t i o n i n the F a c u l t y of Education We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming required standard  t o the  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1972  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s  in p a r t i a l  fulfilment  o f the  requirements  an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r I further  reference  I agree t h a t and s t u d y .  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s  thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . of  It  this thesis for financial  or  i s understood that copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n gain shall  written permission.  Department The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada  for  Columbia  not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  ABSTRACT The  operant l e v e l o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r  f o r s i x students  was  obtained  i n a non-academic grade n i n e c l a s s r e c e i v i n g  an i n d i v i d u a l i z e d program o f i n s t r u c t i o n i n mathematics and science.  Two c o n d i t i o n s , e d u c a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e and p r a i s i n g  appropriate behavior  while i g n o r i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavior,  introduced successively. behavior  were  Both p r o c e d u r e s r e d u c e d i n a p p r o p r i a t e  with f i v e subjects.  When a token r e i n f o r c e m e n t  pro-  gram, u s i n g back-up r e i n f o r c e r s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e i n the s c h o o l , was i n t r o d u c e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the c o n d i t i o n s o f e d u c a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s and p r a i s i n g and i g n o r i n g ; dramatic the e m i s s i o n subjects.  decline i n  o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses o c c u r r e d w i t h a l l s i x  Withdrawal o f the t o k e n program, l e a v i n g  Education-  a l s t r u c t u r e and p r a i s i n g and i g n o r i n g i n e f f e c t , r e s u l t e d i n an i n c r e a s e o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r The  with f i v e  subjects.  token program was r e i n t r o d u c e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n  gency c o n t r a c t s .  withcontin-  The r e s u l t was a d e c l i n e o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e  b e h a v i o r below the mean o f the f i r s t t o k e n phase f o r a l l subjects.  Tokens were t h i n n e d d u r i n g t h e second t o k e n phase  l e a v i n g back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , t e a c h e r - p r a i s e and a t t e n t i o n , and t h e c o m p l e t i o n during follow-up  of contracts i n e f f e c t .  Data  i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e t h i n n i n g p r o c e d u r e was  e f f e c t i v e w i t h no subsequent i n c r e a s e i n b e h a v i o r subject.  obtained  f o r any  The token program, u t i l i z e d d u r i n g one of the f o u r  b l o c k s i n t h e s c h o o l time t a b l e , appeared t o reduce absenteeism.  F u r t h e r evidence  i z e to other c l a s s e s .  that appropriate behavior  d i d general-  TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.  PAGE 1  INTRODUCTION  1  P r i n c i p l e s of Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n D i r e c t O b s e r v a t i o n and R e c o r d i n g , Repeated Measurement, and S y s t e m a t i c M a n i p u l a t i o n o f Behavior  -3  C o n t i n g e n c i e s o f Reinforcement  4  P r a i s e and S o c i a l Reinforcement  6  Token R e i n f o r c e r s and Token Reinforcement.  .  11  Purpose and Importance o f the Study II.  13  DEFINITIONS AND HYPOTHESES  13  Definitions I n a p p r o p r i a t e and A p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r . . .  13  T e c h n i c a l Terms  15  Treatment  18  Levels  20  Hypotheses III.  8  23  PROCEDURE S e l e c t i o n and D e s c r i p t i o n o f the S u b j e c t s . . .  23  The E x p e r i m e n t a l S e t t i n g  25  Program o f I n s t r u c t i o n  25  Methods o f O b s e r v a t i o n  27  Observer T r a i n i n g  30  Order and D e s c r i p t i o n o f Treatment Order o f Treatment  32 32  Levels  D e s c r i p t i o n o f Treatment  Levels. . .  Levels  32  Baseline  32  Structure  36  P r a i s e and Ignore  38  Token 1  39  iv CHAPTER  IV.  V.  PAGE Withdrawal  44  Token I I  44  Follow-up  48 52  DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Introduction  52  Inter-Observer R e l i a b i l i t y  52  A n a l y s i s o f Data  54  Graphical Analysis  54  Statistical  55  Analysis  70  CONCLUSIONS  70  Introduction Hypothesis „ 1  VI.  70  Hypothesis I I  71  Hypothesis I I I  73  H y p o t h e s i s IV  75  Hypothesis V  75  Generalization.  77  Attendance  78  Cost  82  SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION  85  Summary  83  Discussion  83  REFERENCES APPENDIX  «  86 89  V  LIST OF TABLES TABLE  PAGE ° 33  I . The Seven E x p e r i m e n t a l C o n d i t i o n s II.  The S t r u c t u r e Imposed on the Mathematics and  III.  Science  37  Program  Inter-Observer  R e l i a b i l i t y F o r A l l Treatment 53  Levels IV. Means o f Treatment L e v e l s V. A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e  56  Table  56  VI. S i g n i f i c a n t and N o n - S i g n i f i c a n t  Hypothesized 57  Contrasts V I I . D i f f e r e n c e s Among Treatment L e v e l Means . . . .  60  V I I I . C r i t i c a l Ranges F o r D i f f e r e n c e s Among Means . .  61  IX. S i g n i f i c a n t  and N o n - S i g n i f i c a n t  Mean  D i f f e r e n c e s Between Treatment L e v e l Means . . . X. D e s c r i p t i o n o f E a r l y (E) and L a t e Within  ( L ) Stages  Treatment L e v e l s  XI. A n a l y s i s of Variance  Table  65  66 F o r Twelve Means . .  X I I . D i f f e r e n c e s Among Means F o r Twelve Stages . . .  66 67  X I I I . C r i t i c a l Ranges F o r D i f f e r e n c e s Among Twelve  XIV.  Stage Means  68  Significant  and N o n - S i g n i f i c a n t Mean D i f f e r e n c e s 69  XV. Comparison Between Means o f B a s e l i n e and XVI.  72  Ignore F o r S i x S u b j e c t s  Number o f Times Each S u b j e c t  Was C a l l e d To The  Vice-Principal's Office XVII. Attendance F o r E x p e r i m e n t a l C l a s s XVIII.  and P r a i s e  Record o f L a t e s Over Treatment L e v e l s  79 80 81  vi  LIST OP FIGURES FIGURE  PAGE  1.  R e c o r d i n g Sheet  28  2.  P e r c e n t I n t e r v a l s o f Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Averaged Over Six Subjects  3.  Percent I n t e r v a l s  90 of Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e  B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 1 4.  Percent I n t e r v a l s  91  of Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e  B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 2 5.  92  P e r c e n t I n t e r v a l s o f Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 3  6.  Percent I n t e r v a l s  93  o f Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e  B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 4. 7.  Percent I n t e r v a l s  94  of Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e  B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 5 8.  Percent I n t e r v a l s  •  95  o f Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e  B e h a v i o r and V e r b a l i z a t i o n Over E x p e r i m e n t a l Conditions f o r Subject 6 . .  96  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The  f o c u s o f t h i s t h e s i s i s on t h e e d u c a t i o n o f  underachieving j u n i o r high school students.  Underach-  ievement i n the j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l i s o f t e n a t t r i b u t e d to such causes  as low i n t e l l i g e n c e , poor m o t i v a t i o n , l a c k  o f i n t e r e s t , e m o t i o n a l problems, poor home l i f e ,  cultural  d e p r i v a t i o n and o t h e r v a r i a b l e s which r e l a t e poor s c h o o l performance t o some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e s t u d e n t .  How-  ever, c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h u s i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s and t e c h n i q u e s o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l a n a l y s i s o f b e h a v i o r , has demonstrated t h a t s c h o o l f a i l u r e can o f t e n be overcome b y i n t r o d u c i n g d i f f e r e n t t e a c h i n g programs and b y t h e e f f e c t i v e use o f c o n t i n g e n c y management p r i n c i p l e s ( S k i n n e r , 1968, p . 61). F u r t h e r , growing disenchantment w i t h s p e c i a l  education  and r e m e d i a l c l a s s e s i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l has g i v e n a d d i t i o n a l impetus f o r the development o f i n d i v i d u a l i z e d r u c t i o n a l programs and c o n d i t i o n i n g methodologies  inst-  applicable  to the r e g u l a r classroom. I.  PRINCIPLES OF BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION  B e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n p r i n c i p l e s are an outgrowth o f operant c o n d i t i o n i n g t e c h n i q u e s .  S i n c e the p u b l i c a t i o n  of S k i n n e r ' s S c i e n c e and Human B e h a v i o r (1953)»  these  t e c h n i q u e s have been used b y s p e c i a l i s t s i n t h e f i e l d o f psychology,  medicine,  n u r s i n g , and e d u c a t i o n , on a b r o a d  2  spectrum o f d e v i a n t  behaviors.  F o r example, Rose, Sundel,  Delange, Corwin, Palumbo (1970), P h i l l i p s  (1968), and  S u l z b a c h e r and Sherman (1970), used operant techniques t o decelerate  undesired  conditioning  behaviors.  The t h r e e  s t u d i e s showed d e c r e a s e d f r e q u e n c y o f c h r o n i c problems o f t r u a n c y , destruction.  school  runaways, p e t t y l a r c e n y and p r o p e r t y  However, operant c o n d i t i o n i n g p r i n c i p l e s  may be used as more than a d e c e l e r a t i n g t a c t i c i n remediation settings.  Perhaps more important t o t e a c h i n g  i s the  p o s s i b l e u s e o f t h e t e c h n i q u e t o generate d e s i r a b l e b e haviors  as i l l u s t r a t e d b y the work o f Lovaas,  P e r l o f f and S c h a e f f e r  Berberich,  (1966) w i t h s c h i z o p h r e n i c  children,  and A l l y o n and A z r i n (1968) w i t h mental h o s p i t a l a d u l t patients.  I n t h e former study, mute c h i l d r e n were made  to t a l k by r e i n f o r c i n g successive  approximations t o t h e  terminal behavior, while i n the l a t t e r , c o n t r i v e d  rein-  f o r c e r s i n t h e form o f tokens were used t o make i n c o n t i n e n t mental p a t i e n t s u s e t h e t o i l e t . Ullman and K r a s n e r (1966, p.2) d e s c r i b e  behavior  m o d i f i c a t i o n as "The a p p l i c a t i o n o f the r e s u l t s o f l e a r n ing theory  and e x p e r i m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y . "  In this  regard,  behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n techniques l e a d t o a manipulation o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s t h a t c o n t r o l and shape b e h a v i o r according  to well defined  specifications.  Thus t h e r e i s  a demand upon t h e experimenter t o i n d i v i d u a l i z e h i s d i a g n o s i s and treatment a c c o r d i n g his subjects.  t o t h e p a r t i c u l a r needs o f  E s s e n t i a l l y , behavior modification  involves  3  three procedures:  d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n and r e c o r d i n g o f  b e h a v i o r , r e p e a t e d measurement, and a s y s t e m a t i c manipu l a t i o n o f events t h a t a l t e r b e h a v i o r ( L o v i t t , 1970). D i r e c t O b s e r v a t i o n and R e c o r d i n g , Repeated  Measurement,  and S y s t e m a t i c M a n i p u l a t i o n o f B e h a v i o r B e f o r e a b e h a v i o r o r response can be measured, i t must be d e f i n e d i n o b s e r v a b l e terms so t h a t i t can be r e c o r d e d t o t a b u l a t e f r e q u e n c y o f response. H a r t , A l l e n , B u e l l , H a r r i s and Wolfe  F o r example,  (1964) r e c o r d a c r y  i f i t i s heard a t f i f t y f e e t over a f i v e second If  interval.  the d u r a t i o n o f the c r y i s l e s s than f i v e seconds i t i s  not r e c o r d e d .  I f the t a r g e t b e h a v i o r i s "tantrums", the  f r e q u e n c y o f o u t b u r s t s , i u c h as c r y i n g , i s r e c o r d e d d i r e c t l y r a t h e r than u s i n g a l e s s d i r e c t p e r s o n a l i t y s c o r e o r an i n t e r v i e w .  test  Thus, the b e h a v i o r m o d i f i e r must  d e f i n e the event t o be observed i n terms o f i t s t o p o graphy o r form, and then, he must d e c i d e upon a method o f r e c o r d i n g the b e h a v i o r . No matter how the event t o be observed i s d e f i n e d , a l l b e h a v i o r m o d i f i e r s r e c o r d events r e p e a t e d l y over time. In  the token r e i n f o r c e m e n t program conducted b y O'Leary,  Becker, Evans , and Saudargas (1969), t h e r e were six  o b s e r v a t i o n days spaced over a twenty-nine  period.  fifty-  week  T h i s e x p e n d i t u r e o f e f f o r t i s warranted i n t h a t  it  i s the o n l y way i n which the experimenter knows whether  or  n o t h i s treatment i s e f f e c t i v e :  i f i t i s meeting  with  s u c c e s s , how s u c c e s s f u l i t has been q u a n t i t a t i v e l y , and  4  when d u r i n g treatment and Houser  (1970)  the e f f e c t s were observed.  Sulzbacher  say:  An e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l a n a l y s i s o f b e h a v i o r i s the c o n t i n u o u s measurement o f changes i n b e h a v i o r as a f u n c t i o n o f m a n i p u l a t i o n o f o b j e c t i v e l y d e f i n e d environmental variables. An o f t e n o v e r l o o k e d advantage o f t h i s s t r a t e g y i s t h a t when a t a c t i c f a i l s t o c o n t r o l the b e h a v i o r o f a l l o r some o f the i n d i v i d u a l s t o which i t i s a p p l i e d , t h i s f a i l u r e i s c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d by the d a t a . When the b e h a v i o r m o d i f i e r has d e c i d e d t o change c e r t a i n b e h a v i o r s , c o n d i t i o n s must be arranged i n such a way t h a t random e n v i r o n m e n t a l v a l i d i t y f a c t o r s (Campbell  c o n d i t i o n s and o t h e r i n t e r n a l  and S t a n l e y , 1963)  do n o t com-  pete w i t h t h e t e c h n i q u e s used t o change t h e b e h a v i o r . The b e h a v i o r under study i s measured i n an i n i t i a l o r b a s e l i n e c o n d i t i o n f o r a designated p e r i o d of time.  Thus  d a t a a r e t h e n o b t a i n e d d u r i n g t h e base p e r i o d which g i v e s the experimenter treatments  a measure o f h i s s u b j e c t s * b e h a v i o r b e f o r e  are i n t r o d u c e d .  Normally  a single  treatment  i s then a p p l i e d , i n t r o d u c i n g one v a r i a b l e a t a time. F u r t h e r o b s e r v a t i o n s a r e made t o a s s e s s the e f f e c t s o f each treatment b e f o r e the next i s i n t r o d u c e d . C o n t i n g e n c i e s o f Reinforcement A c o n t i n g e n c y i s d e f i n e d as a s e t o f c o n d i t i o n s under which p a r t i c u l a r responses may o r may n o t produce p a r t i c u l a r consequences ( C a t a n i a , 1968,  p . 330).  One may  speak o f b o t h p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e c o n t i n g e n c i e s .  A  p o s i t i v e c o n t i n g e n c y can be s t a t e d as f o l l o w s , "When you do your homework and hand i t i n you may do something more  5 enjoyable."  On the other hand, a negative contingency  found under the c o n d i t i o n of induced or a r t i f i c i a l l y created motivation and the threat of punishment would be the statement,  "Unless your homework i s handed i n you  w i l l be kept a f t e r s c h o o l *  H  Skinner (1968, p.4) defined three v a r i a b l e s which compose the contingencies of reinforcement under which l e a r n i n g takes p l a c e .  F i r s t , there must e x i s t a s i t u a t i o n  or occasion i n which behavior occurs; secondly, the r e s ponse i t s e l f must be emitted; and l a s t l y , the behavior must receive some consequence.  Contingencies of r e i n -  forcement then, are merely the conditions which p r e v a i l between behavior, that i s the response o f the subject, and the p o s i t i v e consequences of that behavior — the reinforcers.  B a s i c a l l y , behavior m o d i f i c a t i o n i n t h i s  study w i l l be used t o mean changing behavior by r e i n f o r c i n g the kind one wants t o encourage and i g n o r i n g the kind one wants t o discourage. Research conducted i n i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s and i n the operant c o n d i t i o n i n g laboratory, have v e r i f i e d that delayed r e i n f o r c e r s tend t o r e t a r d the a c q u i s i t i o n of behavior (Renner, 1964).  More r e c e n t l y , Schwartz  and Hawkins (1970)* Sulzbacher and Sherman (1970), and Glynn $1970) studied delayed c o n d i t i o n i n g procedures i n the classroom and found behaviors changed only when the contingencies were applied t o them d i r e c t l y .  Thus,  6 to be e f f e c t i v e , a r e i n f o r c e r must f o l l o w the b e h a v i o r immediately.  Furthermore,  emitted  the a p p l i c a t i o n o f  c o n t i n g e n c i e s o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f t e n r e q u i r e s the  exper-  imenter t o shape b e h a v i o r by r e i n f o r c i n g s u c c e s s i v e approximations  t o the t e r m i n a l b e h a v i o r .  used t o produce responses  Shaping  i s then  t h a t , because of t h e i r low  oper-  ant l e v e l s , might not otherwise be e m i t t e d o r might be e m i t t e d o n l y a f t e r a c o n s i d e r a b l e p e r i o d of time ( C a t a n i a , 1968,  p.  346).  T h i s study i s concerned  w i t h the a p p l i c a t i o n of  con-  t i n g e n c i e s o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t i n the a c q u i s i t i o n and maintenance  of d e s i r a b l e c l a s s r o o m b e h a v i o r s .  To t h i s  end,  r e i n f o r c e r s w i l l be used t o shape c e r t a i n t a r g e t b e h a v i o r s and t o a f f e c t o t h e r b e h a v i o r s t h a t are compatible them.  with  The k i n d s o f r e i n f o r c e r s and c o n t i n g e n c i e s used i n  t h i s p r o j e c t are w e l l documented i n the l i t e r a t u r e . c o n s i s t of p r a i s e , s o c i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t , token ment, and  reinforce-  extinction.  P r a i s e and S o c i a l  Reinforcement  P r a i s e i s used here t o r e f e r t o a r e i n f o r c i n g sequence. Tom"  F o r example, the statement,  con-  "You're d o i n g  fine,  can f u n c t i o n as a r e i n f o r c e r r e g a r d l e s s of our i n a b -  ility The  They  t o s p e c i f y the p r e c i s e response  important  t o which i t r e f e r s .  t h i n g t o note i s t h a t the f o c u s i s on the  and not on the  boy  response.  S o c i a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t on the o t h e r hand, i s the p r o c e s s o r o p e r a t i o n by which a response reinforced.  —  not the s u b j e c t —  is  Statements such as "That i s a good example."  7 o r "That answer i s c o r r e c t . " are examples of s o c i a l  rein-  forcement. I n the l a s t decade s e v e r a l s t u d i e s on the m o d i f i c a t i o n of d e v i a n t b e h a v i o r s w i t h s u b j e c t s i n p r i s o n s , d e t e n t i o n homes, mental i n s t i t u t i o n s , ample evidence  and o u t - p a t i e n t c l i n i c s  give  t h a t the t e c h n i q u e s of p r a i s i n g a p p r o p r i a t e  b e h a v i o r w h i l e i g n o r i n g u n d e s i r a b l e responses  and  tokens  w i l l modify b e h a v i o r , and t h a t each i n i t s e l f i s s u f f i c i e n t to a c c o m p l i s h t h i s t a s k . (TJllman and K r a s n e r , 1965; 1970;  S t a c h n i k and Mabry, 1966, 1970;  McGinnies  and F e r s t e r ,  Fargo, Behrns and  Ulrick, Nolan,  1971)  In the p u b l i c s c h o o l , the m a j o r i t y of s t u d i e s have been done i n p r i m a r y or i n t e r m e d i a t e grades w i t h the t e a c h e r as the key element i n the m o d i f i c a t i o n of student behavior. Thomas,  ( H a l l , Lund, Jackson,  1968.)  1968;  Madsen, Becker  That i s , the t e a c h e r has been taught  and to  d e l i v e r p r a i s e and o t h e r s o c i a l r e i n f o r c e r s , t o i g n o r e i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r and how  t o p r o v i d e o t h e r consequences  to improve academic performance. s t i m u l i connected  P r a i s e and o t h e r  social  w i t h the t e a c h e r ' s b e h a v i o r ( s m i l e s ,  f a c i a l e x p r e s s i o n s , hugging  a c h i l d , contact,  a t t e n t i o n ) have been e s t a b l i s h e d as e f f e c t i v e of c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o r .  (Thomas, Becker  1968;  1970.)  Madsen and Madsen,  and Rosenhan and Greenwald  nearness, controllers  and Armstrong,  Z i g l e r and Kanzer (1971)  (1971)  found t h a t v e r b a l r e i n -  f o r c e r s p r i m a r i l y h a v i n g a p r a i s e c o n n o t a t i o n , (good, c o r r e c t , r i g h t ) lengthened i n an a r i t h m e t i c c l a s s .  fine,  the t a s k performance of c h i l d r e n  F u r t h e r , Z i g l e r and Kanzer found  8  p r a i s e as a r e i n f o r c e r t o be more e f f e c t i v e w i t h c h i l d r e n from low socio-economic c l a s s homes.  homes, than w i t h those from  Of concern t o t h i s study was  the c o n c l u s i o n  of Rosenhan and Greenwald, t h a t o l d e r c h i l d r e n — to f o u r t e e n y e a r s of age  —  middle-  thirteen  were more i n f l u e n c e d than  younger c h i l d r e n by p r a i s e d i r e c t e d t o the c o r r e c t n e s s o f the r e s p o n s e .  That i s , the o l d e r c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r  study  were more r e s p o n s i v e t o b e i n g t o l d t h e i r performance c o r r e c t o r r i g h t , than by b e i n g t o l d i t was  was  good o r f i n e .  However, w h i l e the a u t h o r s concluded t h a t s t u d e n t s do e r e n t i a t e between "person r e i n f o r c e r s " n i c e ) and "performance r e i n f o r c e r s " t h e r e was  no mention o f how  (good,  f i n e , that's  (that's correct,  t h i s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n was  I n c o n c l u s i o n , p r a i s e and o t h e r s o c i a l s t i m u l i w i t h the t e a c h e r ' s b e h a v i o r have been e s t a b l i s h e d as i v e r e i n f o r c e r s o f many c h i l d r e n ' s b e h a v i o r . the c o n t i n g e n t use  made. connected effect-  However, when  reinforcement  successful.  Token R e i n f o r c e r s and Token The  right),  o f t e a c h e r a t t e n t i o n and p r a i s e i s n o t  e f f e c t i v e i n c o n t r o l l i n g b e h a v i o r , token programs o f t e n are  diff-  Reinforcement  term "token r e i n f o r c e r " i s d e f i n e d by C a t a n i a  (1969,,p. 348)  as "A c o n d i t i o n e d r e i n f o r c e r t h a t the  organism  may  accumulate and l a t e r exchange f o r o t h e r r e i n f o r c e r s . "  The  o b j e c t i v e o f any program i n v o l v i n g tokens i s t o d e s i g n  a m o t i v a t i n g environment i n which p r i n c i p l e s of p o s i t i v e r e i n f o r c e m e n t and e x t i n c t i o n ! operate a t maximum e f f e c t i v e -  9 ness i n p r o d u c i n g d e s i r e d "behaviors and e l i m i n a t i n g undesi r e d ones.  Token economies have been v e r y s u c c e s s f u l i n  achieving t h i s o b j e c t i v e i n a v a r i e t y o f environmental tings. 1968;  set-  F o r example, i n mental h o s p i t a l s ( A y l l o n and A z r i n , Montgomery and McBurney, 1970), i n p r i s o n s (Cohen,  F i l i p c z a k and B i s , 1970), i n r e s i d e n t i a l treatment c e n t e r s ( P h i l l i p s , 1968; B a i l e y , Wolf and P h i l l i p s ,  1970), i n comm-  u n i t y h e a l t h c e n t e r s (Rose, Sundel, Delange,  Corwin and  Palumbo, 1970), i n s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n c l a s s e s (O'Leary and Becker, 1967; McKenzie, C l a r k , Wolf, K o t h e r a , Benson, 1968; A x e l r o d , 1971; Broden,  H a l l , Dunlap and C l a r k , 1970), and  i n r e g u l a r c l a s s r o o m s (Glynn, 1970and Mandelker,  Brigham  and B u s h e l l , 1970). The r a t i o n a l e o f f e r e d f o r employing  t o k e n systems i n  the c l a s s r o o m was t h a t o t h e r i n c e n t i v e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e s c h o o l such as t e a c h e r a t t e n t i o n and grades, were n o t e f f e c t i v e i n themselves  since the subjects i n v o l v e d  exhibited  a h i g h f r e q u e n c y o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s when these were manipulated  (OILeary and Becker, 1967). B i j o u and Baer (1961)  found t h a t a weakness o f grades as a r e i n f o r c e r stems from the f a c t t h a t grades a r e p r e s e n t e d t o s t u d e n t s up t o n i n e weeks a f t e r t h e e m i t t e d r e s p o n s e .  However, when grades  are made c o n t i n g e n t upon academic b e h a v i o r s i n a t o k e n - p o i n t system,  t h e l e v e l o f academic b e h a v i o r has i n c r e a s e d  (McKenzie,  et a l . ,  1968).  S i m i l a r l y , Broden,  e t a l . (1970),  found t h a t when t e a c h e r a t t e n t i o n and a t o k e n r e i n f o r c e m e n t system were used t o b r i n g about c o n t r o l i n a d i s r u p t i v e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l c l a s s r o m , t h e t o k e n system i n c r e a s e d  10 s t u d y l e v e l s and d e c r e a s e d d i s r u p t i v e "behaviors o f c l a s s members. was  F u r t h e r evidence o f the power o f t h i s  technique  documented b y Cohen, F i l i p c z a k and B i s (196?) who  found d r a m a t i c g a i n s i n language,  s p e l l i n g and a r i t h m e t i c  by p r i s o n inmates who had been i n t r o d u c e d t o a t o k e n omy.  econ-  I n a p p l y i n g a token system t o f o u r grade n i n e geo-  graphy c l a s s e s , Glynn (1970) found a s i g n i f i c a n t  improvement  from i n i t i a l b a s e l i n e t o f i n a l b a s e l i n e f o r e x p e r i m e n t e r determined t o k e n t r e a t m e n t s .  I n a review o f t o k e n r e i n f o r c e -  ment programs i n s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n c l a s s r o o m s , A x e l r o d (1971* p. 371)  stated that " . . .  p o s i t i v e r e s u l t s were almost  i n v a r i a b l y o b t a i n e d even w i t h d i f f e r e n t types o f t a r g e t b e h a v i o r s and v a r i o u s k i n d s o f p o p u l a t i o n s . " A f u r t h e r advantage  o f u s i n g tokens as r e i n f o r c e r s i n  the s c h o o l i s t h a t the t e a c h e r ' s r a t e o f s o c i a l c o n t a c t i s h i g h e r w i t h s t u d e n t s r e c e i v i n g c o n t i n g e n t tokens than w i t h those who r e c e i v e n o n c o n t i n g e n t t o k e n s . 3-970» P- 169.)  (Mandelker,  et a l . ,  The a u t h o r s found t h a t the p r o c e d u r e i n -  v o l v i n g the c o n t i n g e n t d e l i v e r y o f t o k e n appeared  to bring  c o n t i n g e n c i e s t o b e a r on the t e a c h e r ' s a t t e n d i n g b e h a v i o r beyond those t h a t r e s u l t from the mere p r a i s i n g o f s t u d e n t s for  good work. In  summary, the f u n c t i o n o f a token system i s p r i m a r -  i l y t o m a i n t a i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y on the part of students i n competition with other a v a i l a b l e  activ-  i t i e s such as daydreaming, t a l k i n g w i t h one's n e i g h b o r s , l o o k i n g around the room, and o t h e r t a s k - i r r e l e v a n t b e h a v i o r s .  11  Studies on delayed r e i n f o r c e r s have found that the most e f f ective r e i n f o r c e r i s one that i s given frequently (Renner, 1964-), and the more frequently given the more e f f e c t i v e l y the behavior being r e i n f o r c e d w i l l compete with other behaviors.  Hence, to increase the frequency of a p a r t i c u l a r  behavior, one must r e i n f o r c e that behavior as often as possible.  When a c t i v i t i e s such as p l a y i n g a game, or work-  ing i n the l i b r a r y , are used as r e i n f o r c e r s , however, there i s l e s s time a v a i l a b l e f o r academic tasks.  The advantage  of token r e i n f o r c e r s i s that they permit the teacher to provide frequent reinforcement without i n t e r r u p t i n g academic i n s t r u c t i o n .  The duration of the back-up a c t i v i t i e s ,  such as games, may  then become dependent on the number of  tokens accumulated  by the student.  In e f f e c t , t h i s r e s u l t s  i n a c o n t r o l over the amount of time spent by the student away from educational a c t i v i t i e s . II PURPOSE AND  IMPORTANCE OP THE STUDY  The s c a r c i t y of published research on p o s i t i v e r e i n forcement procedures and token programs i n the p u b l i c j u n i o r high school classroom suggests the need f o r a d d i t i o n a l r e search.  This t h e s i s studies the e f f e c t of p r a i s i n g approp-  r i a t e behavior while ignoring inappropriate behavior with students i n a regular grade nine general mathematics and science c l a s s .  To t h i s end, one attempts to e s t a b l i s h con-  tingencies of reinforcement i n such a way that appropriate behaviors are r e i n f o r c e d , while inappropriate and d i s r u p t i v e behaviors are ignored.  Thus, the focus i s on acceptable  12 performance and not on undesirable responses. The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s methodology may be found i n the writings of Skinner Sloggett  (1969),  (1968),  Ferster  (197D,  and Bailey, Wolfe and P h i l l i p s  Brown  (1971)*  (1970),  all  of whom concluded that p o s i t i v e reinforcement i s more e f f e c t ive than the use of threats, reprimands and punishment which tend to r e i n f o r c e and maintain d i s r u p t i v e behaviors rather than to eliminate them. A major disadvantage of applying token systems i n the p u b l i c school i s the cost of back-up r e i n f o r c e r s .  Even  the l e s s expensive r e i n f o r c e r s , such as candy, may place a burden on the teacher's or school board's budget.  Hence, t h i s  t h e s i s studies a token system which uses back-up r e i n f o r c e r s r e a d i l y available i n the school and cost nothing to implement. Besides the cost f a c t o r , another disadvantage of appl y i n g token systems i n the p u b l i c school i s concerned with the technique of withdrawing tokens from the educational s e t t i n g without d i s r u p t i n g any gains made.  This thesis  examines the use of a contract system as a means of withdrawing tokens.  13 CHAPTER I I DEFINITIONS AND HYPOTHESES The  d e f i n i t i o n s o f f e r e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r have been  s e p a r a t e d i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s .  The f i r s t  series of d e f i n -  i t i o n s i s o f the t a r g e t b e h a v i o r s and a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r . The of  second  s e t o f d e f i n i t i o n s d e f i n e s the t e c h n i c a l terms  the e x p e r i m e n t a l a n a l y s i s o f b e h a v i o r .  c o n t a i n s d e f i n i t i o n s o f the treatment I n a p p r o p r i a t e and A p p r o p r i a t e The  The l a s t  group  levels.  Behavior  f o r e g o i n g s e c t i o n i n t r o d u c e d the t e c h n i q u e s o f  b e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n and some o f the r e s u l t s o f t h e i r application.  Throughout the I n t r o d u c t i o n , the terms  " i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r " , " d e v i a n t b e h a v i o r , " and " d i s r u p t i v e b e h a v i o r " were used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y , and because of  the wide v a r i e t y o f d e f i n i t i o n s o f f e r e d b y the many  s t u d i e s c i t e d , no attempt  t o d e f i n e o r g i v e examples o f  them were made a t t h a t time. The  t a r g e t b e h a v i o r s ( b e h a v i o r s t o be m o d i f i e d ) s e -  l e c t e d f o r t h i s study were d e s i g n e d t o meet t h r e e  criteria.  First,  t o be  o n l y those b e h a v i o r s which c a n be expected  maintained  o u t s i d e o f the t r a i n i n g s i t u a t i o n were s e l e c t e d .  Thus, the "Relevance 1968,  of Behavior Rule"  ( A y l l o n and A z r i n ,  p . 5 0 ) was c o n s i d e r e d s e r i o u s l y , because no matter  how o b j e c t i v e l y d e f i n e d the b e h a v i o r , and how c l e a r l y i f i e d as a t a r g e t , t h a t b e h a v i o r cannot be expected maintained is  spec-  t o be  o u t s i d e o f the t r a i n i n g s i t u a t i o n u n l e s s t h e r e  some r e i n f o r c e m e n t f o r i t t h e r e .  Therefore, behaviors  14  s e l e c t e d as t a r g e t s b y the w r i t e r i n the one p e r i o d o f the day  when s u b j e c t s were w i t h him were o f the type t h a t one  would n o r m a l l y expect t o be r e i n f o r c e d i n o t h e r and  classes  learning situations. The  second c r i t e r i o n was the "Dimensions o f B e h a v i o r  R u l e " ( A y l l o n and A z r i n , 1968, p . 40) which r e q u i r e s a d e f i n i t i o n o f the t a r g e t b e h a v i o r i n terms o f i t s topography, t h e r e b y removing t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r s u b j e c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and  f o r c i n g o b s e r v e r s t o r e c o r d b e h a v i o r i n terms o f some  p h y s i c a l aspect  of the response.  I n an attempt t o s e l e c t f o r o b s e r v a t i o n  and m o d i f i c a t i o n  b e h a v i o r t h a t was r e l e v a n t , the s u b j e c t ' s p r e v i o u s h i s t o r y was examined.  school  Those b e h a v i o r s were i d e n t i f i e d which  seemed t o i n h i b i t a s u b j e c t ' s  success i n a l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n .  I n a sense, t h i s i s an a p p l i c a t i o n o f the "Relevance o f Beh a v i o r R u l e " i n t h a t the t a r g e t b e h a v i o r s are r e q u i r e d by the  student n o t o n l y t o complete s c h o o l b u t a l s o t o f u n c t i o n  i n the l a b o u r  force outside  the s c h o o l .  F o r the purpose o f t h i s t h e s i s , i n a p p r o p r i a t e i o r w i l l r e f e r t o the f o l l o w i n g f o u r c a t e g o r i e s :  behavnon-  attending behavior; noisy-disruptive behavior; p h y s i c a l contact;  and v e r b a l i z a t i o n .  They a r e d e f i n e d as f o l l o w s :  N o n - a t t e n d i n g b e h a v i o r . The student b r e a k s eye c o n t a c t w i t h t h e a s s i g n e d t a s k , s t a r e s o f f i n t o space, t u r n s head t o look at another student o r person. T h i s i s o n l y n o t e d when the s t u d e n t i s s e a t e d a t h i s desk working by h i m s e l f . N o i s y - d i s r u p t i v e b e h a v i o r . Tapping p e n c i l o r o t h e r o b j e c t s , snapping f i n g e r s , slamming books on desk, r u s t l i n g paper, stamping f e e t . (Observers r a t e o n l y what t h e y hear, not what t h e y see.)  15 Grabbing o b j e c t s o r work from another s t u d e n t . Knocking another s t u d e n t ' s book, pen o r any i t e m o f f h i s desk. Throwing an o b j e c t a t another p e r s o n without h i t t i n g him. P e r f o r m i n g any a c t i o n which causes another s t u d e n t t o be non-attending. P h y s i c a l contact. H i t t i n g , pushing, shoving, p i n c h i n g , s l a p p i n g , s t r i k i n g another student w i t h any o b j e c t , o r p o k i n g another s t u d e n t w i t h an o b j e c t . Throwing an o b j e c t which h i t s another s t u d e n t . Verbalization. C a l l i n g out answers without b e i n g c a l l e d upon. Making comments without b e i n g c a l l e d upon. T a l k i n g t o o t h e r s t u d e n t s d u r i n g i n d i v i d u a l work p e r i o d s without the p e r m i s s i o n of the t e a c h e r . A l s o i n c l u d e d are g r u n t s o r groans which are heard by o b s e r v e r s . The  term " a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r " used throughout  the  body o f t h i s t h e s i s r e f e r s t o b e h a v i o r s a n t i t h e t i c t o the d e f i n e d i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses, b e h a v i o r s e m i t t e d by s t u d e n t s .  and i n g e n e r a l t o d e s i r a b l e F o r example, s t u d e n t s are  e m i t t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r when t h e y demonstrate t h a t t h e y are p a y i n g a t t e n t i o n t o the t e a c h e r , o r another who  may  be  student  speaking, o r when t h e y are engaged i n an a s s i g n e d  t a s k without d i s t u r b i n g o t h e r s t u d e n t s nearby.  When g i v e n  work t o do, t h e y s e t out t o do i t without w a s t i n g  time.  Hence, a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r i s b e h a v i o r which i n c r e a s e s the p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t a student w i l l complete a s s i g n e d t a s k s and do them w e l l , thus i n c r e a s i n g h i s chances o f s u c c e s s . T e c h n i c a l Terms The  terms d e f i n e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n are those  throughout  the body of t h i s t h e s i s .  The  used  d e f i n i t i o n s have  been taken from C a t a n i a $1968), p. 3 2 7 - 3 4 9 ) ,  and are  a l p h a b e t i c a l l y f o r ease of c r o s s - r e f e r e n c i n g .  arranged  16  Attention. An organism i s s a i d t o a t t e n d t o a s t i m u l u s when the v a r i a t i o n o r e l i m i n a t i o n o f t h a t s t i m u l u s produces a change i n the organism's operant b e h a v i o r . A v e r s i v e s t i m u l u s . A s t i m u l u s t h a t i s e f f e c t i v e as a n e g a t i v e r e i n f o r c e r o r as a p u n i s h e r . Avoidance. The postponement o r p r e v e n t i o n o f the o c c u r r e n c e o f an a v e r s i v e s t i m u l u s b y a response. Behavior.  A n y t h i n g an organism  does.  C o n d i t i o n e d r e i n f o r c e r . A s t i m u l u s t h a t has become e f f e c t i v e as a r e i n f o r c e r because i t has c o n s i s t e n t l y p r e ceded another r e i n f o r c e r . Contingency. The c o n d i t i o n s under which p a r t i c u l a r responses may o r may not produce p a r t i c u l a r consequences. Continuous r e i n f o r c e m e n t (CRF). Reinforcement e v e r y response w i t h i n the l i m i t s o f an o p e r a n t .  of  Control. The s y s t e m a t i c m o d i f i c a t i o n o r maintenance o f b e h a v i o r b y the m a n i p u l a t i o n o f s p e c i f i a b l e e x p e r i m e n t a l conditions. Covert Behavior. B e h a v i o r t h a t i s n o t observed o r o b s e r v a b l e and i s t h e r e f o r e o n l y i n f e r r e d . Delay of reinforcement. The time from a response t o a subsequent r e i n f o r c e m e n t . Reinforcement may become l e s s e f f e c t i v e as i t s d e l a y i n c r e a s e s . D i f f e r e n t i a l reinforcement. The r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f some responses b u t n o t o t h e r s , depending on the temporal, t o p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r p r o p e r t i e s o f the responses which are emitted. D i s c r i m i n a t i o n . Any d i f f e r e n c e i n r e s p o n d i n g i n the presence o f d i f f e r e n t s t i m u l i . Escape. response.  The t e r m i n a t i o n o f an a v e r s i v e s t i m u l u s b y a  Extinction. of a r e s p o n s e .  The d i s c o n t i n u a t i o n o f the r e i n f o r c e m e n t  Generalization. The spread o f the e f f e c t s o f r e i n forcement i n the presence o f one s t i m u l u s t o o t h e r s t i m u l i t h a t d i f f e r from the o r i g i n a l s t i m u l u s a l o n g one o r more dimensions. I n t e r v a l s c h e d u l e . A schedule i n which a p e r i o d o f time must e l a p s e b e f o r e a response i s r e i n f o r c e d .  17 L e a r n i n g . The p r o c e s s by which b e h a v i o r i s added t o an organism's r e p e r t o r y . Negative  reinforcement.  See  reinforcement.  Operant. A c l k s s o f responses by i t s consequences.  which may  be  modified  Operant B e h a v i o r . B e h a v i o r , the p r o p e r t i e s of which may be m o d i f i e d by i t s e f f e c t on the environment. Operant b e h a v i o r i s s a i d t o be e m i t t e d because i t i s p r i m a r i l y under the c o n t r o l o f i t s consequences r a t h e r than of identifiable eliciting stimuli. Operant C o n d i t i o n i n g . The m o d i f i c a t i o n of operant b e h a v i o r by r e i n f o r c e m e n t o£ punishment. The term a l s o r e f e r s t o the a r e a o f p s y c h o l o g y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by most o f the r e s e a r c h i n t h i s s t u d y . Operant l e v e l . The u n c o n d i t i o n e d l e v e l o f an operant, or the r a t e a t which responses o c c u r b e f o r e t h e y have e x p e r i m e n t a l l y been r e i n f o r c e d . P o s i t i v e reinforcement.  See  reinforcement.  Primary r e i n f o r c e r . A r e i n f o r c e r , the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f which does not depend on i t s h a v i n g c o n s i s t e n t l y preceded some o t h e r r e i n f o r c e r , e.g. f o o d . Ratio schedule. A schedule i n which the l a s t s p e c i f i e d number o f responses i s r e i n f o r c e d .  of a  Reinforcement. The response-produced p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a p o s i t i v e r e i n f o r c e r or termination of a negative r e i n f o r c e r . R e i n f o r c e r s are s t i m u l i ; r e i n f o r c e m e n t i s an o p e r a t i o n o r a p r o c e s s . I f an organism i s more l i k e l y t o i n i t i a t e o r cont i n u e one response than t o i n i t i a t e or c o n t i n u e a second response, then the p r e s e n t a t i o n of the s t i m u l u s t h a t o c c a s i o n s the f i r s t response w i l l r e i n f o r c e the second response; the s t i m u l u s i s r e f e r r e d t o as a p o s i t i v e r e i n f o r c e r . I f the -organism i s more l i k e l y t o t e r m i n a t e or t o c o n t i n u e not engaging i n one response than i t i s t o i n i t i a t e o r c o n t i n u e a second response, then the termination o r postponement of the s t i m u l u s t h a t o c c a s i o n s the f i r s t response w i l l r e i n f o r c e the second response; the s t i m u l u s i s r e f e r r e d t o as a negative r e i n f o r c e r . R e p e r t o r y ( R e p e r t o i r e ) . The b e h a v i o r t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r organxsm, a t a p a r t i c u l a r time, i s capable of e m i t t i n g , i n the sense t h a t the b e h a v i o r e x i s t s a t a non-zero operant l e v e l , has been shaped, o r , i f i t has been e x t i n g u i s h e d , may be r a p i d l y r e c o n d i t i o n e d .  18  Shaping. The g r a d u a l m o d i f i c a t i o n o f some p r o p e r t y o f responses ( u s u a l l y , b u t n o t n e c e s s a r i l y , topography) by t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t o f s u c c e s s i v e approximations t o some c r i t e r i a of an operant c l a s s t o be e s t a b l i s h e d . S t i m u l u s . Any p h y s i c a l event, combination o f e v e n t s , o r r e l a t i o n s h i p among e v e n t s . Token r e i n f o r c e r . A conditioned r e i n f o r c e r (e.g. a p o i n t , o r c o i n ) t h a t the organism may accumulate and l a t e r exchange f o r o t h e r r e i n f o r c e r s . T e a c h i n g . The arrangement o f c o n t i n g e n c i e s o f r e i n forcement under which s t u d e n t s l e a r n . ( S k i n n e r , 1968. p . 64) Treatment  Levels  A t o k e n r e i n f o r c e m e n t program d e s c r i b e d b y O^Leary and Becker  (1967) w i t h n i n e - y e a r - o l d c h i l d r e n d e s c r i b e d as emo-  t i o n a l l y d i s t u r b e d , used tokens as a s i n g l e treatment  level.  A r e p l i c a t i o n o f t h e above s t u d y conducted b y O'Leary, Becker, Evans,  and Saudargas (1969) w i t h a grade two c l a s s ,  i n t r o d u c e d s e v e r a l v a r i a b l e s t o examine t h e i r s e p a r a t e e f f ects.  Hence, the a u t h o r s s p e c i f i e d as treatment  levels,  B a s e l i n e , Classroom R u l e s , E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e , P r a i s e and Ignore, Token I , Withdrawal, Follow-up.  Teacher  Token I I , and  While t h i s t h e s i s does f o l l o w t h e g e n e r a l de-  s i g n o f the O'Leary e t a l . (1969) study, t h e r e are some d i f f e r e n c e s t h a t e x i s t between them.  One has t o do w i t h  the e l i m i n a t i o n o f "Rules" as a treatment l e v e l .  The r e a s o n  f o r i t s e l i m i n a t i o n i s that r u l e s are normally a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a v e r s i v e p r a c t i c e s o f t e n found i n the s c h o o l .  Further-  more, the mere p a r r o t i n g o f r u l e s does n o t mean t h e y are understood.  ( S k i n n e r , 1968, p . 2 5 5 ) A l s o , i f a r u l e i s  broken i t l e a v e s t h e t e a c h e r i n an awkward p o s i t i o n when he i s a t t e m p t i n g t o p l a c e i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses on  19  extinction.  Another d i f f e r e n c e i s t h a t the s u b j e c t s i n the  p r e s e n t study were grade n i n e p u p i l s f u n c t i o n i n g i n a p u b l i c s c h o o l system, and are not c o n s i d e r e d e m o t i o n a l l y d i s t u r b e d . T h i s study, then, f o l l o w s the d e s i g n of O'Leary, e t a l . (1969) w i t h a grade n i n e mathematics and s c i e n c e c l a s s . The  study was  performed  w i t h a c l a s s t h a t met  w r i t e r f o r one hour each day throughout The ows:  terms used f o r the treatment  w i t h the  the s c h o o l y e a r .  l e v e l s are d e f i n e d as  foll-  (Note - an i n t e n s i v e d e s c r i p t i o n of each d e f i n i t i o n  f o l l o w s i n Chapter  III.  D e f i n i t i o n s are i n c l u d e d a t t h i s  time i n o r d e r t o c l a r i f y terms used i n the hypotheses.) B a s e l i n e . A p e r i o d i n which the operant b e h a v i o r under s t u d y i s measured b e f o r e c o n t i n g e n c i e s are i n t r o d u c e d . T h i s i s the operant l e v e l d e f i n e d as the u n c o n d i t i o n e d l e v e l of an operant, o r the r a t e at which responses o c c u r b e f o r e t h e y have been r e i n f o r c e d . ( C a t a n i a , 1968, p. 341) The t e a c h e r conducts the c l a s s i n h i s normal manner. S t r u c t u r e . R e f e r s t o the a r r a n g i n g of a c t i v i t i e s and the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f the i n s t r u c t i o n a l program t o a l l o w f o r c e r t a i n t a s k s t o be performed w i t h i n g i v e n time i n t e r vals. Thus each p e r i o d of i n s t r u c t i o n i n mathematics and s c i e n c e i s d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e d i s t i n c t segments i n which s t u d e n t s moved from one a c t i v i t y t o another, never remaini n g w i t h the a c t i v i t y beyond i t s a l l o t t e d time. P r a i s e and I g n o r e . A p p r o p r i a t e or d e s i r a b l e b e h a v i o r s are r e i n f o r c e d w h i l e i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s are p l a c e d on extinction. That i s , a v e r s i v e s t i m u l i p r e s e n t e d t o the t e a c h e r , r e c e i v e no consequences. S t r u c t u r e remains i n effect. Token I . S t r u c t u r e and P r a i s e and Ignore remain i n e f f ect. C o n d i t i o n e d r e i n f o r c e r s i n the form of p o i n t s are g i v e n t o s t u d e n t s c o n t i n g e n t upon the e m i s s i o n of a p p r o p r i a t e beh a v i o r s o r approximations t h e r e o f . The schedule of r e i n f o r c e ' ment i s as c l o s e t o CRP as p o s s i b l e . Withdrawal. S t r u c t u r e and P r a i s e and Ignore remain i n effect^ Tokens are withdrawn t o t e s t whether tokens and back-up r e i n f o r c e r s and not o t h e r f a c t o r s such as changes t h a t n o r m a l l y o c c u r d u r i n g the s c h o o l y e a r , account f o r any o b s e r v a b l e change i n b e h a v i o r .  20  Token II» P r a i s e and Ignore and E d u c a t i o n S t r u c t u r e remain i n e f f e c t . Tokens are r e i n t r o d u c e d but on an i n t e r v a l schedule. F u r t h e r , tokens become c o n t i n g e n t not o n l y on the e m i s s i o n of a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r , but a l s o on the c o m p l e t i o n o f a s s i g n e d t a s k s . Thus, tokens r e i n f o r c e a cont i n g e n c y c o n t r a c t system. Follow-up. Token p o i n t s are d i s c o n t i n u e d i n Token I I , l e a v i n g back-up r e i n f o r c e r s c o n t i n g e n t upon t a s k c o m p l e t i o n . P r a i s e and Ignore remains i n e f f e c t , but E d u c a t i o n S t r u c t u r e does n o t . I I . HYPOTHESES I n the I n t r o d u c t i o n s e v e r a l s t u d i e s were c i t e d t h a t found the c o n t i n g e n t use o f t e a c h e r - p r a i s e and e f f e c t i v e i n c o n t r o l l i n g student b e h a v i o r . p r a i s e d e n o t i n g c o r r e c t n e s s was  attention  In p a r t i c u l a r ,  found more e f f e c t i v e  with  o l d e r s u b j e c t s than p r a i s e h a v i n g a performance c o n n o t a t i o n . I n the study used as a model f o r t h i s paper,  O'Leary, e t a l .  (1969), d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the two, w i t h the r e s u l t t h a t the two  o l d e s t s t u d e n t s i n the study, who  had  been d i s r u p t i v e a l l y e a r , became p r o g r e s s i v e l y more u n r u l y . Other c h i l d r e n o b s e r v i n g these boys b e i n g d i s r u p t i v e , little  with  o r no a v e r s i v e consequences, became d i s r u p t i v e them-  s e l v e s . (O'Leary e t a l . , 1969,  P- 9)  Hence, the  first  h y p o t h e s i s under s t u d y l e a d s t o a s e p a r a t e examination these two v a r i a b l e s , P r a i s e and  of  Ignore.  H y p o t h e s i s I . When t e a c h e r - p r a i s e of c o r r e c t n e s s i s a p p l i e d t o s t u d e n t s i n a grade n i n e non-academic c l a s s c o n t i n g e n t upon the e m i s s i o n of a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r , w h i l e i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r i s p l a c e d on e x t i n c t i o n by i g n o r i n g i t , then i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses w i l l d e c r e a s e . I n view of the f a c t t h a t tokens  a d m i n i s t e r e d by  a  t e a c h e r have been found t o i n c r e a s e the t e a c h e r ' s r a t e o f s o c i a l c o n t a c t , and hence t o a c c e l e r a t e the use  of p o s i t i v e  21 r e i n f o r c e m e n t i n t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l environment  (Mandelker,  Brigham, and B u s h e l l , 1970), then the f o l l o w i n g hypotheses are d e s i g n e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e the e f f e c t o f token  reinforcers  on i n a p p r o p r i a t e "behavior. H y p o t h e s i s I I . When token r e i n f o r c e r s i n t h e form o f p o i n t s a r e used xn c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , w i t h no a v e r s i v e c o n t i n g e n c i e s employed, then i n a p p r o p r i a t e behaviors w i l l decelerate. H y p o t h e s i s I I I . When the two t r e a t m e n t s , P r a i s e and Ignore, and Token I a r e compared, then Token I w i l l be more e f f e c t i v e i n c o n t r o l l i n g and d e c e l e r a t i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses. A x e l r o d (1971)»  i n r e v i e w i n g token r e i n f o r c e m e n t  grams i n s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n classrooms s t u d i e s s h o u l d attempt without  suggested  pro-  that future  t o d e v i s e means o f withdrawing  tokens  i n t e r r u p t i n g the p r o g r e s s o f s t u d e n t s , and t h a t  g r e a t e r use be made o f r e i n f o r c e r s a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g i n t h e classroom,  t h a t i s , those r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e t o t h e t e a c h e r .  T h i s p r o p o s a l then i s t h e s u b j e c t o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n the following hypothesis. H y p o t h e s i s IV. When the mean:, o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s averaged o v e r s u b j e c t s i n Token I I i s compared w i t h t h a t o f Token I , then r e s u l t s w i l l i n d i c a t e t h a t i n a p p r o p r i a t e behaviors decelerated. The  s u p p o s i t i o n i n the f o l l o w i n g hypothesis i s that  students w i l l  r e c e i v e r e i n f o r c e m e n t f o r academic performance  and w i l l become m o t i v a t e d by the c o m p l e t i o n o f a s s i g n e d tasks.  Thus, by t h i n n i n g tokens g r a d u a l l y over time,  students  w i l l r e a c h a p o i n t i n which the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s used i n the token economy are a v a i l a b l e b y the c o m p l e t i o n o f a cont r a c t , without h a v i n g t o accumulate p o i n t s i n t h e p r o c e s s .  22  The procedure then r e q u i r e s the c o m p l e t i o n o f more complex t a s k s and l o n g e r p e r i o d s of time between which the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s are o b t a i n a b l e .  Thus, back-up r e i n f o r c e r s are  t h i n n e d , l e a v i n g t e a c h e r - p r a i s e and a t t e n t i o n and the a c c omplishment o f t a s k s as the o n l y immediately a v a i l a b l e forcers.  As a b a s i s f o r examining t h i s p r o c e d u r e ,  rein-  the  following hypothesis i s offered. H y p o t h e s i s V. When the treatment l e v e l , Follow-up, i s reached, the mean o f the i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s averaged over s u b j e c t s w i l l remain a t a l e v e l e q u a l t o t h a t of Token I I .  23  CHAPTER I I I PROCEDURE I. SELECTION AND DESCRIPTION OP THE SUBJECTS T h i s s t u d y was conducted  i n one o f two grade n i n e non-  academic mathematics and s c i e n c e c l a s s e s i n the L a n g l e y Secondary High S c h o o l , L a n g l e y , B r i t i s h Columbia.  Prom a  p o o l o f s i x t y s t u d e n t s a t the s t a r t o f the s c h o o l y e a r , t h i r t y were randomly s e l e c t e d and a s s i g n e d t o the w r i t e r f o r g e n e r a l mathematics and s c i e n c e .  Prom t h i s  original  group o f t h i r t y , n i n e were s e l e c t e d f o r c l o s e study on the b a s i s o f p r e v i o u s h i s t o r y , and recommendations o f the s c h o o l c o u n s e l l o r s and t e a c h e r s .  Because t h r e e s t u d e n t s moved out  of the d i s t r i c t d u r i n g t h e study, the f o l l o w i n g d e s c r i p t i o n a p p l i e s t o the s i x who remained. S c h o o l r e c o r d s c o n t a i n e d a n e c d o t a l r e p o r t s made by the s u b j e c t s * p r e v i o u s t e a c h e r t h a t these s t u d e n t s " d i d not pay a t t e n t i o n i n c l a s s " , 'did not f o l l o w i n s t r u c t i o n s " , o r "complete assignments."  Much o f t h e i r c l a s s time  was  r e p o r t e d l y spent " t a l k i n g t o o t h e r " , " l o o k i n g out the window", "daydreaming", "making d i s t u r b i n g n o i s e s " , and " p l a y i n g w i t h o b j e c t s brought  to class".  A l l were a t l e a s t two grade  l e v e l s b e h i n d t h e i r p e e r s and were b o r d e r l i n e s t u d e n t s l y o b t a i n i n g grades  above C- o r low average.  rare-  The s i x were  c o n s i d e r e d b e h a v i o r problems by the c o u n s e l l o r s , and as p o t e n t i a l high school drop-outs. ial  Each had been i n a remed-  c l a s s the p r e v i o u s y e a r . Two boys, s u b j e c t s two and s i x , had a l i s t  s u s p e n s i o n s d a t i n g from grade one.  of school  The predominant r e p o r t e d  24  cause was  " d i s r u p t i n g the c l a s s " and " g e n e r a l  disobedience".  J u s t b e f o r e the s c h o o l y e a r began, b o t h were charged t h e f t and the p o s s e s s i o n of s t o l e n goods.  with  Charges were  dropped, but b o t h were p l a c e d under the care o f a  social  worker. A r e p o r t made the p r e v i o u s y e a r by r e m e d i a l  teachers  l i s t e d a l l s u b j e c t s as c h r o n i c b e h a v i o r problems, and having a high frequency  of absenteeism  s t u d e n t s were so d i s r u p t i v e t h a t two  and t r u a n c y .  of the t h r e e  as These  teachers  r e f u s e d t o t e a c h e i t h e r the s t u d e n t s o r the course t h e y were i n again.  What these t e a c h e r s r e p o r t e d as "Sheer d i s o b e d -  i e n c e " may  be brought i n t o the more a n a l y t i c terms o f escape  and avoidance  behavior.  o f t e n cheated  on d a i l y assignments and exams.  two,  three, f i v e ,  and  F o r example, the s i x s u b j e c t s  s i x b i t through  p r o j e c t o r s and p l a c e d gum  on l e n s e s .  g r a p h i c f i g u r e s and v a r i o u s p r o f a n e desks,  o f t e n d i s m a n t l e d the desks,  Subjects  e l e c t r i c a l wires  on  They c a r v e d pornoe x p r e s s i o n s on  their  and were r e p o r t e d l y hab-  i t u a l l y late f o r class. F o u r s u b j e c t s , ( s u b j e c t s one,  two,  f o u r and  five)  were s i x t e e n y e a r s o l d a t the s t a r t of the s c h o o l y e a r . S u b j e c t t h r e e was IQ's  e i g h t e e n , and  ranged from 98 t o 120,  s u b j e c t s i x was  fifteen.  but r e c o r d s a l s o r e p o r t e d  r e a d i n g s c o r e s as much as f i v e grades below grade  level.  Because of the wide v a r i e t y of t e s t s used, b o t h f o r r e a d i n g and IQ s c o r e s , w i t h no i n d i c a t i o n as to the form o f t e s t  or  the p u b l i c a t i o n d a t e , the above i n f o r m a t i o n i s o f f e r e d r a t h e r t e n t a t i v e l y and must be used as a rough guide  only i n evalu-  25 a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l p a s t performance and a b i l i t y . II. The  THE EXPERIMENTAL SETTING  c l a s s r o o m used i n t h i s s t u d y was a r e g u l a r s c h o o l  room c o n t a i n i n g t h i r t y - f i v e desks and c h a i r s , c h a l k boards on two w a l l s , windows on a t h i r d , rear.  and a t a c k b o a r d  Other than a s c r e e n suspended from the f r o n t  hand c o r n e r o f the c e i l i n g ,  and a three-drawer  a t the right  filing  i n e t , the room was s i m i l a r t o o t h e r classrooms  cab-  i n the s c h o o l .  D u r i n g t h e y e a r s e v e r a l changes were made t o accomodate the i n d i v i d u a l i z e d mathematics program, b u t these were minor adjustments such as p r o v i d i n g s h e l v e s and d i v i d e r s f o r s t o r i n g programmed m a t e r i a l s , books, magazines,  filmstrips,  p r o j e c t o r s , and o t h e r r e s o u r c e m a t e r i a l s . Desks were p l a c e d i n rows.  A s e a t i n g p l a n was made  a f t e r t h r e e weeks o f s c h o o l b e f o r e b a s e l i n e measurements; s e a t i n g was n o t changed a t any time d u r i n g t h e y e a r for  a c t i v i t i e s r e q u i r i n g group p a r t i c i p a t i o n .  except  The o r i g i n a l  n i n e s u b j e c t s were arranged i n two groups, one of Jbur on one  s i d e o f the c l a s s r o o m and t h e o t h e r group o f f i v e on  the o p p o s i t e s i d e .  The t h r e e v a c a n c i e s c r e a t e d b y s u b j e c t s '  l e a v i n g s c h o o l were soon f i l l e d w i t h new s t u d e n t s whom t h e c o u n s e l l o r s judged III. The  c o u l d b e n e f i t from t h e program. PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION  g e n e r a l mathematics n i n e and t e n program i n t h i s  school used the p r e s c r i b e d t e x t i n conjunction with I n d i v i d u a l i z i n g Mathematics ( F o l e y , Bower, Smith, Burke and Basten,  1970), a program p u b l i s h e d b y Addison  Wesley.  26  Other r e s o u r c e m a t e r i a l i s d e s c r i b e d below: The Kit  E d u c a t i o n a l Developmental L a b o r a t o r i e s Study  i n Science  (McGraw-Hill).  There a r e no a u t h o r s  c a t i o n dates i n d i c a t e d on these k i t s .  Skill  or p u b l i -  They a r e composed o f  f i v e boxes o f t e n l e s s o n s c o v e r i n g major study s k i l l s . student works i n d e p e n d e n t l y . for  step-by-step  reinforcement.  Each  The l e s s o n s a r e programmed  l e a r n i n g and s e l f - c h e c k i n g f o r immediate They a r e s i m i l a r i n d e s i g n t o the more fam-  i l i a r S.R.A. Reading K i t s . The  E d u c a t i o n a l Developmental L a b o r a t o r i e s A r i t h m e t i c  S k i l l s Program (McGraw H i l l ) .  These a r e t h r e e boxes o f  f i l m s t r i p s , t w e n t y - f i v e i n each, f o r use w i t h a C o n t r o l l e d Reader which enables of  the t e a c h e r t o p r e s e n t  a wide v a r i e t y  arithmetic s k i l l building a c t i v i t i e s . R e f r e s h e r A r i t h m e t i c by Edwin I . S t e i n ( A l l y n and  Bacon I n c . , Boston, 1961.) f e a t u r e s i n d i v i d u a l i z e d a s s i g n ments a c c o r d i n g t o each s t u d e n t ' s need. a remedial  textbook  I t i s d e s i g n e d as  i n g e n e r a l mathematics and o f f e r s many  e x e r c i s e s r i c h w i t h consumer a p p l i c a t i o n s . An assortment o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y a c t i v i t i e s c o l l e c t e d b y the w r i t e r .  two hundred mathematical These i n c l u d e games,  mathematical p u z z l e s and l a b s used f o r i n - d e p t h s t u d y as w e l l as d r i l l  on major  skills.  Movies and f i l m s t r i p s a v a i l a b l e through the l o c a l r e source  c e n t r e , c o v e r i n g a wide v a r i e t y o f t o p i c s i n s c i e n c e .  With the e x c e p t i o n o f the E d u c a t i o n a l Development Study S k i l l K i t s and the movies and f i l m s t r i p s , the r e g u l a r  27 t e x t s p r e s c r i b e d by the B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Educ a t i o n f o r the S c i e n c e n i n e course were used.  Due  to l a c k  of  l a b o r a t o r y space, however, many t o p i c s n o r m a l l y  covered  in  a s c i e n c e l a b o r a t o r y were m o d i f i e d , and p r e s e n t e d by  m o n s t r a t i o n , l e c t u r e , f i l m s , and through s e l e c t e d projects.  de-  library  A d e s c r i p t i o n of the o p e r a t i o n of the mathematics  and s c i e n c e programs i s g i v e n i n the d i s c u s s i o n of E d u c a t i o n a l Structure to f o l l o w . IV. OBSERVATION S u b j e c t s were observed t w i c e a week, on Mondays and Thursdays.  Each o b s e r v e r was  given three r e c o r d i n g sheets,  ( F i g u r e 1), a tape r e c o r d e r , and e a r p l u g , and a p e n c i l . Three s u b j e c t s were randomly a s s i g n e d t o each o b s e r v e r . o b s e r v e r s then c o p i e d the names on the f i r s t one name i n each s e t of rows and columns.  The  r e c o r d i n g sheet,  Names were then  p l a c e d i n the same o r d e r on the o t h e r two r e c o r d i n g s h e e t s . Note t h a t each row ropriate behaviors.  of a s e t c o r r e s p o n d t o one The  inapp-  symbols used were:  N/A  - non-attending  N/D  - noisy disruptive  P.C.-  of the  behavior behavior  p h y s i c a l contact  Verv. - v e r b a l i z a t i o n The  f i f t h row, P/-  Praise  C^-  Criticism  T -  Threats  x  was  headed by the  symbols:  used t o e v a l u a t e t e a c h e r responses  and thus t o  the t e a c h e r t o any d e v i a t i o n s from the e x p e r i m e n t a l ure.  alert proced-  FIGURE 1 RECORDING SHEET  fn«jpg,iafl  . )  (s.  )  Xifoncfmrff  Poor  Y  A"  6  V  5  Io 1  X*IT0UVf!l i  6T  H  s  PlTC J. ?  t  i  6T I  1  $•  X  ,7  V  W / O  Pf VERB  p/ Cx r* fSi  )  /  3  /  3 3  3 i  i  3  /  3 H  ie i  3  V  3  0"  W/D  pr Pv/  Cv  Tx /  J.  ,?  V  4  •3  />  /  A  3  pc  ro oo  29  The  f i f t h row d i d n o t form p a r t o f t h e a n a l y s i s o f d a t a ,  but was d e s i g n e d f o r the s o l e purpose o f e n s u r i n g r o p r i a t e behaviors  were p l a c e d on e x t i n c t i o n .  that  inapp-  Thus, o b s e r -  v e r s p l a c e d a check when the t e a c h e r p r a i s e d an i n d i v i d u a l , a c r o s s when a t h r e a t o r c r i t i c i s m was made. i a t i o n was made between t e a c h e r - p r a i s e , to i n d i v i d u a l students,  No d i f f e r e n t -  c r i t i c i s m , and t h r e a t s  and p r a i s e , c r i t i c i s m ,  and t h r e a t s  t o the c l a s s as a whole.  I n o t h e r words,  teacher-attention  to inappropriate behavior  was marked i n the f i f t h row o f  each s e t b y p l a c i n g a c r o s s i n t h e a p p r o p r i a t e teacher-attention to appropriate  while  r e s p o n s e s r e c e i v e d a check.  Each column on t h e r e c o r d i n g sheet second i n t e r v a l .  square,  Observers, seated  represents  a ten-  at the side o r r e a r o f  the c l a s s , made a check i f one o f t h e i r s u b j e c t s e m i t t e d an i n a p p r o p r i a t e response i n the row a s s i g n e d  t o the behavior,  and i n the column r e p r e s e n t i n g t h a t p a r t i c u l a r t e n - s e c o n d interval. five-minute  sheet  observation  s e s s i o n f o r each s u b j e c t .  Observers recorded  each s u b j e c t on t h e f i r s t  f o r f i v e minutes, so t h a t the f i r s t  represented completing erved  The t h i r t y columns o f a s e t comprised a s i n g l e  three five-minute the f i r s t  t h e same t h r e e  sheet,  recording  recording  sheet  observational sessions.  the observer  immediately re-obs-  s u b j e c t s , i n t h e same o r d e r , f o r an  a d d i t i o n a l f i f t e e n minutes —  f i v e minutes p e r s u b j e c t .  O b s e r v e r s then were p e r m i t t e d  a five-minute  proceeding  After  with the t h i r d observation  t h a t each s u b j e c t was r e c o r d e d  sheet.  break  before  T h i s meant  f o r a t o t a l o f f i f t e e n min-  u t e s , 9 0 t e n - s e c o n d i n t e r v a l s , spread  over a one hour p e r i o d .  30  If, o n l y one  due  t o the absence of a s u b j e c t , the o b s e r v e r  o r two  s u b j e c t s t o observe,  had  then a f i v e or t e n -  minute b r e a k f o l l o w e d each s e t of f i v e - m i n u t e o b s e r v a t i o n s . T h i s a l l o w e d the experimenter i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses the middle,  t o o b t a i n a r e c o r d of student  d u r i n g the f i r s t f i f t e e n  minutes,  and the l a s t f i f t e e n minutes of each p e r i o d .  Rather than use  a stop watch, ten-second  were r e c o r d e d on c a s s e t t e t a p e s . r e c o r d e r s as t i m e r s .  Observers  An adaptor was  intervals  then used  tape  made to p e r m i t two  s e r v e r s t o use the same tape machine d u r i n g  ob-  reliability  checks. I n t e r - o b s e r v e r agreement was o b s e r v e r s make simultaneous over any one  but independent  so t h a t t h e y were unable  sheet.  Thus, a r e l i a b i l i t y  two  check l a s t e d f o r f i f t e e n  minutes,  i n t e r v a l s on t h r e e  diff-  measured by comparing the  r e c o r d s f o r agreement, i n t e r v a l  x 100,  observers  t o see each o t h e r ' s r e c o r d i n g  Agreement was  p e r c e n t agreement was  The i n -  a s s u r e d by h a v i n g  over n i n e t y c o n s e c u t i v e ten-second erent s u b j e c t s .  two  observations  of the f i f t e e n minute time segments.  dependence of the o b s e r v a t i o n was sit  a n a l y s e d by h a v i n g  by i n t e r v a l ,  and  the  c a l c u l a t e d (number of agreements  d i v i d e d by the t o t a l number of i n t e r v a l s  observed.)  V. OBSERVER TRAINING At the s t a r t  of the s c h o o l y e a r , e i g h t grade 12 s t u d -  ents w i t h spare p e r i o d s were s e l e c t e d and t r a i n e d t o Three of these s t u d e n t s were a b l e t o observe year.  An a d d i t i o n a l f i v e  i n February.  The  over the  s t u d e n t s were s e l e c t e d and  same p r o c e d u r e s  observe. entire trained  were used f o r b o t h s e s s i o n s .  31  In  the f i r s t  week o f t r a i n i n g the o b s e r v e r s were t o l d  t h a t the w r i t e r was s t u d y i n g v a r i o u s types o f c l a s s r o o m b e h a v i o r and wanted t o measure the r a t e a t which the i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s o c c u r r e d i n h i s c l a s s , and the f r e q u e n c y of p r a i s e , c r i t i c i s m and t h r e a t s made b y the t e a c h e r . reduce  To  o b s e r v a t i o n a l d i s t o r t i o n o r g e n e r o s i t y e r r o r which  may have b i a s e d the d a t a , no mention o f treatment  levels,  the o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e study, o r d e s c r i p t i o n o f the s u b j e c t s were made.  D u r i n g t h i s week, i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s were  e x p l a i n e d and demonstrated  b y the w r i t e r .  During t h i s  time  the r e c o r d i n g s h e e t s and tape r e c o r d e r s were used and time was spent d i s c u s s i n g t h e method o f r e c o r d i n g . In  the second week o f t r a i n i n g , the o b s e r v e r s s a t i n  the c l a s s .  F o r the f i r s t  few days t h e y p r a c t i s e d o b s e r v i n g  some s t u d e n t s , none o f whom were s e l e c t e d as s u b j e c t s , and d i s c u s s e d t h e i r r e s u l t s l a t e r i n the day w i t h the w r i t e r . The  c l a s s was t o l d t h a t the grade 12 s t u d e n t s were  working  on p r o b a b i l i t y l a b s i n mathematics and were n o t t o be d i s turbed.  D u r i n g t a l k s w i t h the o b s e r v e r s , the w r i t e r s t r e s s e d  t h a t t h e y were t o make d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n s o f what they heard and saw, and were n o t t o make judgements o f i n t e n t . F u r t h e r , t h e y were n o t t o t a l k , s m i l e , r e a c t o r i n t e r a c t w i t h the c l a s s i n any manner.  The b a l a n c e o f the second  week was used t o accustom the o b s e r v e r s t o the procedure necessary t o perform r e l i a b i l i t y  checks.  T r a i n i n g sessions continued u n t i l i n t e r - o b s e r v e r r e l i a b i l i t y measured n i n e t y p e r c e n t .  T h i s l e v e l was r e a c h e d  d u r i n g t h e t h i r d week o f t r a i n i n g f o r b o t h the September and  32 F e b r u a r y groups.  I n the f o u r t h week, o b s e r v e r s began t o  r e c o r d the responses  of the s u b j e c t s .  Observers were s c h e d u l e d i n such a way to observe  o n l y once a week.  t h a t t h e y had  When not o b s e r v i n g , they were  g i v e n the p r i v i l e g e of g o i n g t o the student lounge  or l i b r a r y  i n s t e a d of a s u p e r v i s e d s t u d y c l a s s . Throughout the study, o b s e r v e r s met  w i t h the  writer  f o r l u n c h e v e r y Wednesday t o d i s c u s s any problems t h e y were h a v i n g i n i n t e r p r e t i n g b e h a v i o r s , or r e c o r d i n g r e s p o n s e s . V I . ORDER AND Order of Treatment The  DESCRIPTION OP TREATMENT LEVELS Levels  seven treatment l e v e l s of the s t u d y were B a s e l i n e ,  E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e , P r a i s e and Ignore, Token I , Token I I , and F o l l o w - u p . f o r a l l c l a s s members.  The seven phases were i n e f f e c t The f i r s t  f o u r c o n d i t i o n s were i n s t -  i t u t e d i n the o r d e r of h y p o t h e s i z e d i n c r e a s i n g F o r example, i t was  Withdrawal,  effectiveness.  thought t h a t E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e would  have l e s s e f f e c t than P r a i s e and Ignore, and t h a t the accumu l a t e d e f f e c t o f E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e and P r a i s e and  Ignore  would be l e s s e f f e c t i v e than the combined e f f e c t o f Educa t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e , P r a i s e and Ignore  and Tokens and Back-up  Reinforcement. T a b l e I d e p i c t s the d e s i g n of the seven conditions.  experimental  Each column i s headed by the name of the  treat-  ment l e v e l , w i t h the e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e s of each l i s t e d below. D e s c r i p t i o n o f Treatment Baseline.  Levels  B a s e l i n e measures i n d i c a t e the number o f  TABLE I THE SEVEN EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS  Baseline  Educational Structure  P r a i s e and Ignore  Educational Structure + P r a i s e and Ignore  Token I  P r a i s e and Ignore + Educational Structure + Tokens and Back-up Reinforcement  Withdrawal  P r a i s e and Ignore + Educational Structure  Token I I  Follow-up  P r a i s e and Ignore +  P r a i s e and Ignore +  Educational Structure +  Back-up Reinforcement + Contracts  Tokens and Back-up Reinforcement + Contracts  34 ten-second  i n t e r v a l s , out o f n i n e t y , i n which t h e i n a p p -  r o p r i a t e "behaviors o c c u r r e d .  D u r i n g t h i s phase the t e a c h e r  r e a c t e d t o the b e h a v i o r o f the s t u d e n t s i n whatever way he felt  suitable.  Students  were asked  t o pay a t t e n t i o n , t o  stop t a l k i n g , t o g e t on w i t h t h e i r work.  N e i t h e r the p a r t -  i c u l a r type o f a c t i v i t y n o r i t s d u r a t i o n was t h e same on each day o f the b a s e l i n e p e r i o d . F o r example, the mathematics program was d i v i d e d i n t o e l e v e n u n i t s w i t h a p r e t e s t and p o s t - t e s t f o r each. u n i t was f u r t h e r s u b d i v i d e d i n t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y  Each  t h i r t y to  f o r t y t a s k s , each c o v e r i n g a p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i v e , y e t s h o r t enough so t h a t two o r more c o u l d be completed i n a period.  Questions  each t a s k .  on the p r e t e s t covered the t o p i c s on  Hence, a student a c h i e v i n g s e v e n t y p e r c e n t on  the p r e t e s t was r e q u i r e d t o complete o n l y the t a s k s which corresponded  t o t h e i n c o r r e c t q u e s t i o n s . A s c o r e under  s e v e n t y p e r c e n t r e q u i r e d the s t u d e n t t o complete a l l t a s k s f o r that u n i t .  When t h e s t u d e n t f i n i s h e d a u n i t , an ach-  ievement t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d . determined  The r e s u l t s o f t h i s  the d i r e c t i o n the s t u d e n t was t o t a k e .  test  A low  s c o r e r e q u i r e d t h a t he work on supplementary u n i t s w i t h the t e a c h e r , o r r e p e a t those t a s k s which t h e achievement t e s t i n d i c a t e d he had n o t mastered.  A score of n i n e t y  p e r c e n t o r more p e r m i t t e d him t o p r o c e e d  t o t h e next  unit,  o r t o work on i n - d e p t h t o p i c s o f the u n i t completed.  Each  u n i t had f o u r r e l a t e d i n - d e p t h t o p i c s i n t e n d e d t o move s t u d e n t s i n t o more advanced work.  Each s t u d e n t was r e q u i r e d  35 t o complete  the i n - d e p t h t o p i c s o f f o u r u n i t s , b u t t h e y were  f r e e t o choose which f o u r t h e y were t o do.  When a u n i t was  f i n i s h e d , the student was p e r m i t t e d t o spend one p e r i o d p l a y i n g a game, l i s t e n i n g t o a tape, o r p e r f o r m i n g a wide range  o f a c t i v i t i e s such as r e a d i n g a book, working  on p r o -  grammed m a t e r i a l s i n a l g e b r a and t r i g o n o m e t r y , o r showing movies t o o t h e r c l a s s e s . diligently,  I n a d d i t i o n , s t u d e n t s who worked  c o m p l e t i n g a s s i g n e d t a s k s on time, were g i v e n  the p r i v i l e g e o f b e i n g a b l e t o b r i n g d r i n k s and c o n f e c t i o n s t o c l a s s from d i s p e n s i n g machines i n the student  lounge.  T h i s meant t h a t some s t u d e n t s were a b l e t o b r i n g d r i n k s and candy t o c l a s s each day p r o v i d i n g t h e i r c l a s s w o r k and homework were kept up t o d a t e . N e i t h e r the mathematical it  was the same each day.  dependently  a c t i v i t y n o r the d u r a t i o n o f  Some s t u d e n t s may have worked i n -  on a s s i g n e d t a s k s one day, w h i l e the next was  spent w i t h the t e a c h e r on d r i l l  e x e r c i s e s , o r g o i n g over  work t h e y were h a v i n g d i f f i c u l t y w i t h .  Others may have been  i n v o l v e d w i t h one a c t i v i t y o r another as a reward pleting a unit.  f o r com-  T h i s procedure had been f o l l o w e d from t h e  s t a r t o f the s c h o o l y e a r t o enable s t u d e n t s t o a d j u s t t o i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n , and a l s o t o enable the e x p e r i menter t o observe what a c t i v i t y a student s e l e c t e d when t h e opportunity arose.  By such o b s e r v a t i o n one c o u l d  determine  the a c t i v i t i e s which would serve as r e i n f o r c i n g events f o r the token program. (Homme, C s a n y i , Gonzales, Rechs, 1969, p. 10)  However, t h e l o o s e a p p l i c a t i o n o f the c o n t i n g e n c i e s  36 of reinforcement  l i s t e d above had  appropriate behaviors,  little  e f f e c t on the i n -  o r on g e n e r a l c l a s s r o o m c o n t r o l ,  thus were d i s c o n t i n u e d u n t i l Token I I and phase when they were e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  the Follow-up  introduced.  B a s e l i n e l a s t e d f i v e weeks d u r i n g which time t e n  ob-  s e r v a t i o n a l s e s s i o n s were h e l d . Structure. First,  T h i s phase was  i n t r o d u c e d f o r two  reasons.  i t has been s t a t e d t h a t a g r e a t d e a l o f the  i n token reinforcement  programs may  be  a f u n c t i o n of  h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d regimen of the program and not of r e i n f o r c i n g contingencies. Thus, the program was erences t h a t may  a function  h i g h l y s t r u c t u r e d to examine the  e x i s t between the token and  d i v i d u a l i z e d mathematics and  to prevent  the  importance  spent  developing  s c i e n c e program, the  this i n experiment' necessary  them from w a s t i n g t i m e .  a time p e r i o d was  ar tasks occurred.  Hence,  s p e c i f i e d d u r i n g which p a r t i c u l -  T h i s enabled  the t e a c h e r to  present  study s k i l l s i n a s e q u e n t i a l o r d e r and y e t s t i l l the i n d i v i d u a l needs of the s t u d e n t .  The  on pages 25-27 were used f o r t h i s purpose. c a t e s how  diff-  structure  e r found t h a t an imposed s t r u c t u r e appears t o be  each day  6)  se.  Second, a f t e r s e v e r a l y e a r s  f o r students  the  (O'Leary e t a l . , 1969* p.  phase o f the experiment, and hence to assess of s t r u c t u r e p e r  success  the one-hour p e r i o d was  c a t e r to  materials Table  listed  II i n d i -  structured.  Item 3 under Mathematics r e f e r s t o a s e r i e s o f l e c t u r e s and demonstrations d e v e l o p e d as an overview of the e n t i r e  TABLE I I THE STRUCTURE IMPOSED ON THE MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PROGRAMS  Mathematics Individual d r i l l  on b a s i c  Science  Review o f p r e v i o u s vrork  10 min.  New work  30 min.  min.  Laboratory i n t r o d u c t i o n  15 min.  min.  L a b o r a t o r y work . . . .  45 min.  min. Presentation of a general t o p i c of i n t e r e s t Independent work on t a s k s  20 min.  min.  . . 15 min.  38 program.  Three c o n t e n t areas were c o v e r e d —  the s l i d e  r u l e , b a s i c p r o b a b i l i t y p r i n c i p l e s , and f l o w - c h a r t s .  By  p r e s e n t i n g these t o p i c s t o the c l a s s , the t e a c h e r was a b l e to b r i n g t o g e t h e r f a c t s and s k i l l s from a l l u n i t s under study, and a t the same time t o broaden t h e s t u d e n t s ' e x p e r i e n c e s and u n d e r s t a n d i n g In  o f mathematics.  s c i e n c e , two s t r u c t u r e s e x i s t e d .  time f o r study s k i l l s  The f i r s t  and was d e s i g n e d t o develop  allowed  skills  such as i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , e v a l u a t i o n , and the o r g a n i z a t i o n of  d a t a , how t o o u t l i n e , make n o t e s , drawt,conclusions, and  survey j o u r n a l a r t i c l e s .  T h i s p a r t i c u l a r s t r u c t u r e was  d e s i g n e d t o use t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f s u c c e s s i v e  approximation,  s i m u l a t i o n , and t r a n s f e r , t o f o c u s on b e h a v i o r a l change and skill  development.  A c t i v i t i e s were arranged  so t h a t s t u d -  ents were r e c y c l e d t o t h e same problem areas w i t h examples requiring increased s k i l l The  second  and s o p h i s t i c a t i o n .  s t r u c t u r e r e q u i r e d an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o l a b -  oratory procedures,  f o l l o w e d b y one o f t h e experiments i n  the p r e s c r i b e d s c h o o l t e x t .  O f t e n the t e a c h e r redemons-  t r a t e d a p r e v i o u s l a b o r a t o r y assignment t o p o i n t out conc l u s i o n s the c l a s s had o v e r l o o k e d . The  S t r u c t u r e p e r i o d l a s t e d t h r e e weeks; s i x observ-  a t i o n a l s e s s i o n s were made d u r i n g t h a t time. P r a i s e and I g n o r e .  T h i s treatment  l e v e l and a l s o  Token I were d e s i g n e d s p e c i f i c a l l y t o reduce i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavior. of  Hence c o n t i n g e n c i e s were a p p l i e d t o the e m i s s i o n  appropriate responses.  To a c c o m p l i s h t h i s , the t e a c h e r  39  c o n c e n t r a t e d on the topography if  o f the b e h a v i o r .  F o r example,  a student worked q u i e t l y on a t a s k , the t e a c h e r p r a i s e d  h i s e f f o r t s and h i s a t t e n t i o n t o h i s work, r e g a r d l e s s of h i s accuracy or p r o d u c t i v i t y . get b e h a v i o r was  Thus, the a n t i t h e s i s t o the  the w r i t e r ' s main c o n c e r n .  tar-  Needless t o say,  o t h e r b e h a v i o r s such as those concerned w i t h work q u a l i t y were p r a i s e d , but these were secondary c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . P r a i s e and Ignore c o n d i t i o n , then, was  The  d e s i g n e d t o use  p r a i s e and o t h e r s o c i a l s t i m u l i t o r e i n f o r c e a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r and t o i g n o r e a l l forms o f d e v i a n t , d i s r u p t i v e ,  and/  or i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses. The P r a i s e and Ignore treatment  l e v e l l a s t e d f o u r weeks;  seven o b s e r v a t i o n a l s e s s i o n s were h e l d . Token I.  As i m p l i e d i n the i n t r o d u c t o r y s e c t i o n ,  a  token economy i s a s t r u c t u r e d p l a n which e n a b l e s a l a r g e group of people t o be t r a i n e d w i t h a minimum number of p e r sonnel.  Tokens p r o v i d e a method of r e i n f o r c e m e n t which can  be u t i l i z e d i n v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s f o r a g r e a t many p e o p l e w i t h i n d i v i d u a l l i k e s and d i s l i k e s .  The main advantage i s  t h a t tokens e l i m i n a t e the need t o s t u d y each p e r s o n , t o see what i s s p e c i f i c a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g f o r him,  thus s a v i n g many  hours which would o t h e r w i s e have been spent i n o b s e r v i n g the individual.  D u r i n g t h i s phase o f the study, c o n d i t i o n s de-  s c r i b e d as E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e and P r a i s e and Ignore were continued. Tokens were awarded i n the form of p o i n t s .  Each s t u -  dent c a r r i e d w i t h him a weekly r e p o r t sheet on which p o i n t s  40  were p l a c e d .  A r u b b e r stamp, a p p r o x i m a t e l y  three  of an i n c h i n diameter, was  stamped on the back of  sheet.  worth f i v e p o i n t s .  Each i m p r e s s i o n  was  quarters this  At the  end  of the week, unused p o i n t s were t r a n s f e r a b l e t o the f o l l o w i n g weekly r e p o r t sheet  w i t h no p e n a l t y  imposed.  S t u d e n t s were t o l d t h a t t h e y would r e c e i v e p o i n t s f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s and  a t t e n t i v e n e s s i n c l a s s , and  that c e r t a i n  performances would r e c e i v e more p o i n t s than o t h e r s . t h e y were informed  t h a t p o i n t s would not n o r m a l l y be  f o r the c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h e i r work. siasm  Further,  shown by the c l a s s , two  Because of the  charts, prepared  given  enthu-  i n advance,  l i s t i n g the r e s p o n s e s t h a t earned p o i n t s , and back-up r e i n f o r c e r s t h a t p o i n t s c o u l d be  spent  Instead,  students  the t e a c h e r  allowed  the  w i t h the p l a n n i n g o f the c o n t i n g e n c i e s . was  allowed  t o spend a p p r o x i m a t e l y  and p r e p a r e two  charts.  two  on were not  used.  t o become i n v o l v e d That i s , the c l a s s  periods to discuss  These c h a r t s l i s t e d the f o l l o w i n g  items: Token I - Performances to E a r n P o i n t s : 1.  On  time f o r c l a s s  2.  Possess materials necessary paper, p e n c i l s and books.)  3.  Work q u i e t l y on a s s i g n e d work.  4.  Follow i n s t r u c t i o n s .  5.  Work q u i e t l y on group a c t i v i t i e s without i n g other students,  6.  Do  not t a l k out o f t u r n .  t o do work (such  as  disturb-  41  Token I - Items t o be Purchased  a t any Time:  1.  F r e e p e r i o d t o p l a y games.  2.  Free p e r i o d t o l i s t e n t o tape r e c o r d e r or r a d i o with ear p l u g .  3.  F r e e p e r i o d t o do homework, go t o the l i b r a r y , read anything i n c l a s s .  4.  P e r m i s s i o n t o go t o the s t u d e n t lounge and buy candy, d r i n k s or f o o d from the d i s p e n s i n g machine to eat i n c l a s s .  5.  Other d e s i r a b l e a c t i v i t i e s i n agreement w i t h the teacher.  or  These c h a r t s were d i s p l a y e d i n the c l a s s r o o m on a pinboard adjacent to a chalkboard.  Each p e r i o d the  teacher  p l a c e d a number b e s i d e each i t e m i n the second l i s t r e p r e s e n t the c o s t of t h a t i t e m .  to  Hence, i f the program o f  i n s t r u c t i o n r e q u i r e d t h a t the e n t i r e c l a s s be p r e s e n t , a l a b i n s c i e n c e f o r example, then items one, might have been v a l u e d a t two  two  and  hundred p o i n t s w h i l e  three item  f o u r might have been a s s e s s e d t e n p o i n t s t o purchase number o f items from the d i s p e n s i n g machine. chose i t e m one  any  A student  ( p l a y a game), and e l e c t e d not t o do the  i v i t y d e s i g n e d f o r t h a t day,  was  t h a t he had t o make up  f u t u r e time.  T h i s was  t h i s a c t i v i t y a t some  made p o s s i b l e by d e s i g n i n g the s c i e n c e  program t o p e r m i t one week i n e v e r y two activities.  t h i s and o f t e n took one  months t o be  Students  put  were aware o f  o r two p e r i o d s o f f , but were d i s c o u r -  aged from t a k i n g more than two.  No  student p r o t e s t e d t h i s  r u l e , and i n g e n e r a l a l l were v e r y c o - o p e r a t i v e . While  the purchase  act-  p e r m i t t e d t o do so on the  understanding  a s i d e f o r "catch-up"  who  p r i c e of the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s  42  v a r i e d each, day, t h e y were always a v a i l a b l e . F o r the f i r s t  two weeks o f Token I , the t e a c h e r gave  each s t u d e n t f i v e p o i n t s f o r b e i n g on time f o r c l a s s , and another  f i v e f o r b e i n g p r e p a r e d f o r c l a s s w i t h paper, p e n c i l s  and books.  T h i s meant t h a t e v e r y student c o u l d r e c e i v e en-  ough p o i n t s each day t o purchase a back-up r e i n f o r c e r , was always v a l u e d a t f i v e o r t e n p o i n t s . throughout  which  P o i n t s were g i v e n  each p e r i o d i n the f o l l o w i n g manner:  If a l l  p u p i l s were working q u i e t l y , the t e a c h e r would i n t e r r u p t them, g i v e p r a i s e f o r a t t e n t i v e n e s s , p o i n t out the c o r r e c t ness o f the b e h a v i o r d u r i n g an assignment, and then to  g i v e everyone p o i n t s .  fifty,  proceed  P o i n t s g i v e n ranged from f i v e t o  dependent on the b e h a v i o r o f s t u d e n t s  p r e c e d i n g the d e s i r a b l e form o f b e h a v i o r .  immediately  The l o n g e r the  p e r i o d o f d e s i r a b l e b e h a v i o r , the g r e a t e r the number o f p o i n t s awarded.  When one o r more s t u d e n t s were e m i t t i n g i n a p p r o p -  r i a t e b e h a v i o r s , the t e a c h e r would l o o k f o r someone nearby who was working, and g i v e him p o i n t s , and p r a i s e him f o r his  c o r r e c t b e h a v i o r so t h a t a l l c o u l d hear.  As soon as  one  o r more s t u d e n t s i n the group who were n o t a t t e n d i n g ,  or were b e i n g d i s r u p t i v e , d i s p l a y e d a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r , the t e a c h e r would g i v e them p o i n t s ( u s u a l l y f i v e ) and p r a i s e them f o r t h e i r c o r r e c t b e h a v i o r . in  Students  working  groups r e c e i v e d p o i n t s i f t h e y t a l k e d q u i e t l y and showed  t h e y were c o - o p e r a t i n g w i t h each o t h e r .  Once a g a i n p o i n t s  g i v e n any student were always accompanied by v e r b a l p r a i s e , and o c c a s i o n a l l y a p a t on the back. The  f o r e g o i n g procedures  c o n t i n u e d f o r the b a l a n c e o f  43  the Token I p e r i o d w i t h some m o d i f i c a t i o n s .  Noisy-disruptive  "behavior and p h y s i c a l c o n t a c t  c o n t r o l of  contingencies  very quickly.  came under the  Non-attending b e h a v i o r and  a l i z a t i o n however, were more d i f f i c u l t Thus c o n t i n g e n c i e s t o be  were a l t e r e d s l i g h t l y t o a l l o w r e i n f o r c e r s  of the work.  e r made c o n t r a c t s w i t h the  students.  Contracts t a s k was  some f o r a hundred when a u n i t o f work was  ceive  the q u a l i t y o r  T h i s meant t h a t i n e f f e c t the  some were worth f i v e p o i n t s when one  followed  verb-  to b r i n g under c o n t r o l .  a p p l i e d t o t a s k c o m p l e t i o n , but not  correctness  the  teach-  varied,  involved,  complete.  All  the format of c o m p l e t i o n by a s p e c i f i e d time t o r e -  points. A second m o d i f i c a t i o n added an e x t r a back-up r e i n f o r c e r .  A f t e r two  weeks of Token I , some s t u d e n t s had  enormous bank o f p o i n t s .  accumulated  I n f e a r t h a t the c o n t i n u e d  f o r c e r s would l o s e t h e i r r e i n f o r c i n g p r o p e r t y ,  an  rein-  auctions  were  introduced. At no had  her  asions  charge t o the w r i t e r , one  Home Economics  teacher  c l a s s p r e p a r e cakes, p i e s and buns on s e v e r a l o c c t o be  auctioned  f o r p o i n t s i n the w r i t e r ' s c l a s s .  These a r t i c l e s were e n c l o s e d occurred. i a b l y was  i n boxes and  a regular  Each i t e m went to the h i g h e s t b i d d e r , the  who  invar-  student w i t h the most r e m a i n i n g p o i n t s .  t i o n s took no more t h a n t e n minutes and  d i d not  b e h a v i o r of s t u d e n t s d u r i n g the b a l a n c e of the I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t the s e r v a t i o n were not member o f the  auction  t r e a t e d any  class.  subjects  a f f e c t the period.  selected for  d i f f e r e n t l y from any  Contingencies  Auc-  ob-  other  were a p p l i e d t o a l l  44  students.  A l l back-up r e i n f o r c e r s were those r e a d i l y  avail-  a b l e t o any t e a c h e r and c o s t n o t h i n g t o implement. Withdrawal.  On the f i r s t  day of t h i s phase,  the t e a c h -  e r walked i n t o the room and took the c h a r t s o f f the w a l l which d i s p l a y e d the b e h a v i o r t h a t earned p o i n t s , and the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s . he was how  He then e x p l a i n e d t o the c l a s s  v e r y p l e a s e d w i t h t h e i r improved b e h a v i o r and  that stressed  much t h e y had accomplished a c a d e m i c a l l y w i t h t h e i r  e c t performance.  corr-  He then proceeded w i t h a s c i e n c e demons-  t r a t i o n , l e a v i n g the s t u d e n t s no time t o argue o r d i s c u s s the c e s s a t i o n o f the token program.  Educational Structure,  and P r a i s e and Ignore, remained i n e f f e c t . l a s t e d t h r e e weeks. Token I I .  Withdrawal  S i x o b s e r v a t i o n a l s e s s i o n s were h e l d .  Tokens and back-up r e i n f o r c e r s were i n t r o -  duced as suddenly as t h e y had been t a k e n away.  Hox^ever,  the experimenter p r e p a r e d c h a r t s ahead o f time on how  stud-  ents would e a r n and spend p o i n t s , and d i d not s e t any p o i n t l i m i t s except f o r i t e m seven, (below) These  charts  were p l a c e d i n the same l o c a t i o n as those p r e p a r e d by the s t u d e n t s i n Token I , and are as f o l l o w s : Token I I :  How  You May  Earn P o i n t s -  1.  Be on time f o r c l a s s . That i s , be i n the room b e f o r e the b e l l r i n g s .  2.  Be p r e p a r e d t o s t a r t the l e s s o n by h a v i n g the r e q u i r e d books and i n s t r u m e n t s .  3.  Complete a s s i g n e d work on t i m e .  4.  Do work r e l a t e d t o mathematics and  5.  Help w i t h c l a s s management d u t i e s .  6.  C o n t r a c t t o complete  a p r o j e c t of  science.  assignment.  45  i n a g i v e n p e r i o d of  time.  7.  Complete an achievement t e s t w i t h marks between: (a) 70% t o 79% . . . 20 p o i n t s (b) 80% t o 89% . . . 40 p o i n t s ( c ) 90% t o 100% . . 80 p o i n t s  8.  I n a d d i t i o n , p o i n t s w i l l be g i v e n t o s t u d e n t s who show t h e y are working on a s s i g n e d t a s k s , are not d i s t u r b i n g o t h e r s and are c o - o p e r a t i n g w i t h o t h e r s t u d e n t s on a group p r o j e c t .  9.  Do neat and a c c u r a t e work.  Token I I :  You May  Spend P o i n t s To  -  1.  Purchase d r i n k s , candy and f o o d from the lounge.  2.  To o b t a i n p e r m i s s i o n t o work q u i e t l y i n the on a s p e c i f i c t o p i c t h a t we agree upon.  3.  To l i s t e n t o a tape r e c o r d e r , o r r a d i o w i t h an plug.  4.  To p l a y games.  5.  To work on a l g e b r a .  6.  To buy  any p r i v i l e g e we  student library ear  agree upon.  Token p o i n t s were r e i n t r o d u c e d one week p r i o r t o the Easter holidays.  D u r i n g t h i s week, p o i n t s a d m i n i s t e r e d were  made c o n t i n g e n t upon a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s b e i n g e m i t t e d s t u d e n t s , and upon t a s k c o m p l e t i o n . cedure as the l a s t two  T h i s was  The  the same p r o -  weeks o f Token I and r e s u l t e d i n a  d e c e l e r a t i o n of i n a p p r o p r i a t e behaviors. token program was  by  No  change i n the  made f o r the f i r s t week f o l l o w i n g E a s t e r .  t h i r d week o f Token I I saw  the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a con-  t i n g e n c y c o n t r a c t i n g scheme d e s i g n e d t o t h i n p o i n t s from the program.  I n t h i s phase tokens  were g i v e n f o r the com-  p l e t i o n of an a s s i g n e d t a s k , f o r the c o m p l e t i o n  of a u n i t  of work, and f o r grades o b t a i n e d on a l l t e s t s .  In other  46  words, academic b e h a v i o r s were under the c o n t i n g e n c i e s o f the token program while a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s were r e i n f o r c e d by p r a i s e and t e a c h e r a t t e n t i o n .  The o n l y change made i n  back-up r e i n f o r c e r s was the a d d i t i o n o f l i b r a r y  privileges.  D u r i n g t h i s phase t h e mean o f t h e i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavi o r s averaged  over the s i x s u b j e c t s i n Token I ( F i g u r e 2, ;  p. 9©' ) was used as a guide o r measure d u r i n g t h e t h i n n i n g procedure.  Had i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s a c c e l e r a t e d h i g h e r  than t h i s mean the t e a c h e r would have immediately a p p l i e d the c o n t i n g e n c i e s o f t h e token program t o the a p p r o p r i a t e responses u n t i l t h e y were brought The procedure  back down t o t h i s  f o r t h i n n i n g p o i n t s was v e r y  level.  simple.  At the s t a r t o f week t h r e e , s t u d e n t s were asked t o complete t h e i r weekly r e p o r t sheet s t a t i n g what t h e y i n t e n d e d t o a c c o m p l i s h t h a t week i n mathematics and s c i e n c e .  While  the c l a s s c a r r i e d on w i t h t h e i r work, t h e t e a c h e r met w i t h each i n d i v i d u a l t o d i s c u s s h i s proposed t o s e t the v a l u e o f i t s c o m p l e t i o n ,  work s c h e d u l e , and  or part thereof i n points.  Some s t u d e n t s , those h a v i n g d i f f i c u l t y u n d e r s t a n d i n g mathematics, were r e q u i r e d t o show t h e i r work each day, thus r e c e i v i n g o r n o t r e c e i v i n g p o i n t s c o n t i n g e n t upon t h e comp l e t i o n o f the t a s k , which now had t o be c o r r e c t as w e l l as complete.  Students  who had l i t t l e  d i f f i c u l t y under-  s t a n d i n g t h e i r a s s i g n e d work were p e r m i t t e d t o work a l l week, a l t h o u g h spot checks were made p e r i o d i c a l l y . The  r e s u l t s o f t h e d a t a f o r week t h r e e , a l o n g w i t h t h e  academic performance o f s t u d e n t s , prompted a change i n t h e  47  program f o r week f o u r . t h e i r proposed by the t e a c h e r .  On Monday, s t u d e n t s a g a i n  work l o a d f o r the week and had t h i s However, t h e y a l s o suggested  completed checked  the v a l u e o f  t h e i r program, thus b r i n g i n g the c o n t i n g e n c i e s under s t u d ent-teacher c o n t r o l .  D u r i n g the week the t e a c h e r checked t h e  progress of a l l students during the i n d i v i d u a l i z e d p o r t i o n of each l e s s o n , b u t gave no p o i n t s f o r p a r t i a l c o m p l e t i o n as was the case d u r i n g week t h r e e . u n t i l Friday.  I n s t e a d , p o i n t s were w i t h e l d  On F r i d a y , the t e a c h e r c o l l e c t e d a l l e x e r c i s e  books and weekly r e p o r t sheets t o mark over the weekend.  He  r e t u r n e d them the f o l l o w i n g Monday, the s t a r t o f week f i v e . Once a g a i n , b o t h the o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a and student performance prompted a f u r t h e r change d u r i n g week f i v e . Back-up r e i n f o r c e r s were made a v a i l a b l e t o s t u d e n t s f r e e o f charge,  a l t h o u g h l i b r a r y p r i v i l e g e s remained c o n t i n g e n t  upon the student k e e p i n g h i s work u p - t o - d a t e .  Thus, s t u d -  ents were t o l d t h e y c o u l d use t h e l i b r a r y t o work on e i t h e r t h e i r s c i e n c e p r o j e c t , which r e q u i r e d the use o f a d d i t i o n a l r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l , o r t h e i r mathematics program, as a r e ward f o r the e x c e l l e n t work completed  the p r e v i o u s week, and  t h a t as l o n g as t h e y c o n t i n u e d t o work as q u i c k l y and as a c c u r a t e l y as t h e y had been d o i n g , t h e y would n o t be f o r any i t e m .  Students  then completed  sheet on the Monday o f week f i v e ,  charged  t h e i r weekly r e p o r t  and s e t the v a l u e o f t h e  i week's work i n p o i n t s without  c o n s u l a t a t i o n w i t h the t e a c h e r .  One v e r y n o t i c e a b l e f e a t u r e was the f a c t t h a t s t u d e n t s s e t r a t h e r low p o i n t l i m i t s .  An a n a l y s i s o f t h e i r weekly r e p o r t  sheets i n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s appeared  t o be more  concerned.  48  w i t h c o m p l e t i n g t h e i r program than t h e y were w i t h o b t a i n i n g back-up r e i n f o r c e r s .  I n most i n s t a n c e s , t h e i r  self-directed  p l a n c a l l e d f o r the c o m p l e t i o n o f more work than t h e y c o u l d n o r m a l l y be expected t o do i n c l a s s time.  Because o f t h i s ,  the t e a c h e r t o l d the s t u d e n t s he would not a s s i g n any homework, b u t would l e a v e i t up t o each i n d i v i d u a l t o determine what he o r she would have t o do a t home t o complete  the  week's p r o j e c t i o n s . On F r i d a y o f week f i v e , many s t u d e n t s were d i s c o v e r e d t o have s u r p a s s e d t h e i r p r o j e c t i o n o f t a s k c o m p l e t i o n as s e t the p r e v i o u s Monday.  A l s o , no s t u d e n t had s e l e c t e d  free  time t o p l a y games b u t i n s t e a d chose t o l i s t e n t o tapes and r a d i o s w i t h ear p l u g s , and t o o b t a i n r e f r e s h m e n t s from the s t u d e n t lounge.  The l i b r a r y had been used e x t e n s i v e l y  and  r e p o r t s from the l i b r a r i a n i n d i c a t e d t h a t s t u d e n t s had been well-behaved.  Two  o b s e r v e r s were s t a t i o n e d i n the  library  on Thursday o f week f i v e t o observe the b e h a v i o r o f t h r e e s u b j e c t s who  e l e c t e d t o work t h e r e .  Data from t h e i r o b s e r v -  a t i o n s s u p p o r t e d the statements made by the Hence, i t was  librarian.  d e c i d e d t o b r i n g Token I I t o a c l o s e , a week  e a r l i e r than planned.  Token I I l a s t e d f o r f i v e weeks w i t h  ten observational sessions held. Follow-up.  U n l i k e the withdrawal of tokens  Token I , Follow-up l e f t  following  a v a i l a b l e the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s  of the t o k e n program c o n t i n g e n t upon t a s k c o m p l e t i o n .  The  s t u d e n t s were t o l d by the t e a c h e r t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l  had  performed e x c e l l e n t work and t h a t p o i n t s would be tinued.  discon-  I n s t e a d s t u d e n t s c o u l d s e l e c t any a c t i v i t y t h e y  49 f e l t d e s i r a b l e i f t h e i r work was Hence, t h e r e was e v e r , one  completed.  no change over the p r e v i o u s week.  c o n t i n g e n c y was  school remaining,  correctly  introduced.  How-  With s i x weeks o f  s t u d e n t s a p p a r e n t l y began t o be aware o f  the ending o f s c h o o l and a subsequent grade. evidence by the number who  f r e q u e n t l y asked the  what s p e c i f i c grade t h e y would r e c e i v e . r e - s t a t e d the requirements  T h i s was  in  teacher  Hence, the t e a c h e r  f o r each mark, i n c l u d i n g a pass  s t a n d i n g i n mathematics and s c i e n c e .  These requirements  d u p l i c a t e d and g i v e n t o each student and became the  were  guide-  l i n e f o r p r e p a r i n g t h e i r weekly r e p o r t . The  first  f o u r days of Follow-up  were spent  a program w i t h each i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t . s i g n e d t o a l l o w the student t o go one  outlining  The program was  de-  grade l e v e l p a s t h i s  a n t i c i p a t e d mark i n each c o r s e . F o r example, i f a student e l e c t e d t o work f o r a 0 s t a n d i n g i n mathematics, then would have t o complete e i g h t u n i t s o f work. was  Thus a program  d e s i g n e d f o r the s t u d e n t which i n d i c a t e d not o n l y when  the u n f i n i s h e d u n i t s were t o be cmopleted, a d d i t i o n a l requirements a B standing.  but a l s o what  were n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e  ( T h i s n o r m a l l y r e q u i r e d the c o m p l e t i o n of  i n - d e p t h t o p i c s r e l a t e d t o the u n i t s completed, supplementary  two  although a  u n i t i n a l g e b r a o r t r i g o n o m e t r y was p e r m i s s i b l e  and i n some cases encouraged.) was  he  Moreover, s i n c e each u n i t  s u b d i v i d e d i n t o a s e r i e s of t a s k s , the program f o r each  student c o n s i s t e d of s i x weekly r e p o r t sheets which i n d i c a t e d the number of t a s k s t o be completed  each week.  T h i s endeavor r e s u l t e d i n s t u d e n t s ' s e l e c t i n g o n l y those  50  r e i n f o r c e r s t h a t d i d n o t use up c l a s s time.  F o r example, two  members o f the c l a s s were chosen each day t o o b t a i n d r i n k s , and c o n f e c t i o n s from the lounge c l a s s time.  so t h a t t h e y would not l o s e  F u r t h e r , t h e r e were no r e q u e s t s f o r a f r e e p e r -  i o d f o r the b a l a n c e  of the year.  The t e a c h e r p r a i s e d the  c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h e i r work and f o r the l a s t two weeks o f Follow-up, ion.  p u r p o s e l y p l a c e d a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r on e x t i n c t -  That i s , a l l b e h a v i o r except f o r academic performance  was i g n o r e d .  Work completed  on time r e c e i v e d no mention and  no t e a c h e r - p r a i s e , b u t the q u a l i t y and a c c u r a c y was p r a i s e d . Students  w i s h i n g t o use the l i b r a r y p l a c e d t h e i r names on  the c h a l k board w i t h t h e i r d e s t i n a t i o n , and l e f t .  Students  w i s h i n g t o l e a v e the room were p e r m i t t e d t o do so without h a v i n g t o ask. The t e a c h e r f r e q u e n t l y reminded s t u d e n t s d u r i n g F o l l o w up t h a t these freedoms were extended  t o a l l members o f the  c l a s s because i t had been demonstrated t h a t t h e y c o u l d d e a l w i t h the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t went w i t h them.  The l a s t  weeks  of the program, o b s e r v a t i o n days 55 t o 58 were marked b y a g e n e r a l d e c l i n e i n the use o f back-up r e i n f o r c e r s .  The  t e a c h e r r o l e became t h a t o f a c o n s u l t a n t where s t u d e n t s brought problems t o him, sought w i t h t h e i r work.  Follow-up  h i s a d v i c e , and c a r r i e d on  came t o a c l o s e two weeks b e f o r e  the end o f the s c h o o l term t o g i v e o b s e r v e r s time t o p r e p a r e f o r f i n a l exams.  D u r i n g the f o u r weeks o f Follow-up,  seven  o b s e r v a t i o n a l s e s s i o n s were h e l d . The  o v e r a l l procedure  was aimed a t t r a n s f e r r i n g  control  of r e s p o n d i n g from the token system t o o t h e r c o n d i t i o n e d  51 r e i n f o r c e r s such as t e a c h e r - p r a i s e , and f i n a l l y t o grades. (Kuypers,  Becker,  O'Leary, 1968, p . 101).  I n an attempt t o  a c h i e v e t r a n s f e r from the token system t o the more  traditional  c l a s s r o o m s i t u a t i o n , the d e l i v e r y o f tokens was always p r e ceded b y p r a i s e .  The arrangement was i n t e n d e d t o e s t a b l i s h  s o c i a l events as c o n d i t i o n e d r e i n f o r c e r s and t o a l l o w the t e a c h e r t o m a i n t a i n student b e h a v i o r w i t h s o c i a l ment a l o n e .  The second  by O'Leary and Becker  reinforce-  g e n e r a l technique used was a p r o p o s a l  (1967), namely t o r e q u i r e p r o g r e s s i v e l y  more b e h a v i o r t o r e c e i v e one o f the back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , i n c r e a s i n g time between r e i n f o r c e m e n t s .  The authors  thus  claimed  t h a t a t r a n s f e r o f tokens t o t e a c h e r - p r a i s e c o u l d e v e n t u a l l y be e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h i s manner.  52 CHAPTER IV LATA ANALYSIS AND I.  RESULTS  INTRODUCTION  T h i s c h a p t e r o u t l i n e s the methods used t o a n a l y z e the d a t a and p r e s e n t s the r e a d e r w i t h the r e s u l t s . o b s e r v e r r e l i a b i l i t y i s made f i r s t ,  A d i s c u s s i o n of  f o l l o w e d by the d e s r i p -  t i o n o f g r a p h i c a l and s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s .  L a s t l y , the  r e s u l t s are p r e s e n t e d i n t h e f i g u r e s and t a b l e s . At t h i s p o i n t one must emphasize t h a t t h i s s e c t i o n of the t h e s i s d e a l s w i t h d a t a a n a l y s e s .  I t w i l l be l e f t t o  the c h a p t e r on C o n c l u s i o n s t o d i s c u s s t h e r e s u l t s and implications. II.  INTER-OBSERVER RELIABILITY  I n t e r - o b s e r v e r r e l i a b i l i t y checks  were conducted  through-  out the study i n a manner which p e r m i t t e d each o b s e r v e r t o be checked  a t l e a s t once d u r i n g each treatment  level.  summary o f the r e l i a b i l i t i e s over each treatment  A  level i s  presented i n Table I I I . A r e l i a b i l i t y s e s s i o n i s the simultaneous  but  independ-  ent o b s e r v a t i o n made by t h e r e l i a b i l i t y checker on each o f the t h r e e s u b j e c t s a s s i g n e d an o b s e r v e r . i t y s e s s i o n l a s t e d f o r f i f t e e n minutes,  Thus, a r e l i a b i l d u r i n g which time  the r e l i a b i l i t y checker and o b s e r v e r s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e c o r d e d each s u b j e c t once f o r f i v e minutes. minutes,  At the end o f f i f t e e n  the r e l i a b i l i t y checker then proceeded  to record  the b e h a v i o r s o f t h r e e o t h e r s u b j e c t s randomly a s s i g n e d t o another observer.  I n o t h e r words, each time two o b s e r v e r s  i n d e p e n d e n t l y observed  three subjects, a r e l i a b i l i t y session  53  TABLE I I I INTER-OBSERVER RELIABILITY RECORD FOR ALL TREATMENT LEVELS  TREATMENT LEVEL  Baseline  Educational Structure Praise and Ignore  Token I  Withdrawal  Token I I  Follow-up  BEHAVIOR Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending  NUMBER OF RELIABILITY SESSIONS 16  RELIABILITY  93% 90% 75% 78%  to to to to  92% t o 12  95% t o 92% t o  77% t o  11  82% t o 82% t o 78% t o 78% t o  Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending  16  88% t o 93% t o 78% t o 78% t o  Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending  12  Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending Noisy-disruptive P h y s i c a l Contact Verbalization Non-attending  95% t o  12  85% t o 78% t o 87% t o  90% t o 88% t o 80% t o 78% t o  92% t o  10  92% t o 80% t o 84% t o  100% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 100% 100% 97%  93%  MEAN  98% 98% 90% 92%  97% 97% 92% 89% 98% 98% 89% 87%  100% 9 9% 100% 99% 100% 98% 100% 91% 100% 99% 100% 98% 100% 98% 98% 96% 100% 99% 100% 99% 100% 96% 96% 94% 100% 98% 100% 99% 100% 99% 100% 95%  54-  was h e l d .  Two o r more r e l i a b i l i t y  s e s s i o n s c o u l d then be  h e l d on any one day o f o b s e r v a t i o n . The  reliability  the lowest reliability The  range r e p o r t e d i n Table  and h i g h e s t p e r c e n t  I I I i s merely  agreement found d u r i n g a  s e s s i o n f o r each o f the i n a p p r o p r i a t e  mean f o r each b e h a v i o r ,  behaviors.  over treatment l e v e l s , was  c u l a t e d b y adding a l l r e l i a b i l i t y  s c o r e s f o r each  and d i v i d i n g by t h e number o f r e l i a b i l i t y  cal-  behavior  sessions.  I I I . ANALYSIS OF DATA ' Graphical Analysis. S t a t i s t i c a l and g r a p h i c a l a n a l y s e s  o f the d a t a were  made on the combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s target subjects l e f t  f o r the s i x  a t the end o f the study.  Figure 2  d e p i c t s the average p e r cent o f combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavior  o f s i x s u b j e c t s over the seven e x p e r i m e n t a l  sessions.  F i g u r e s 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 r e p r e s e n t the p e r c e n t a g e o f combined inappropriate behavior d u r i n g the seven phases:  f o r each o f the s i x s u b j e c t s  Baseline, Educational  Structure,  P r a i s e and Ignore, Token I , Withdrawal, Token I I and F o l l o w up. The  p e r c e n t a g e o f combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r  c a l c u l a t e d by c o u n t i n g  a l l o f the ten-second i n t e r v a l s  was during  which one o r more i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses were observed, d i v i d i n g t h i s number b y the t o t a l number o f i n t e r v a l s and m u l t i p l y i n g b y one hundred.  —ninety—  Because o f comparisons t o be  made l a t e r between non- a t t e n d i n g b e h a v i o r each graph c o n t a i n s a l s o the p e r c e n t  and v e r b a l i z a t i o n ,  of i n t e r v a l s  which i n a p p r o p r i a t e v e r b a l responses were  emitted.  during  55 Statistical The  Analysis  d e s i g n was  a t w o - f a c t o r (persons by  treatment)  model, w i t h r e p e a t e d measures i n the second f a c t o r — v e i n g t a k e n as random.  That i s , treatments  each s u b j e c t s e r v e d as h i s own throughout  a l l treatment  persons  were f i x e d ,  control, tested repeatedly  phases.  The mean p e r c e n t s of i n -  a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s f o r each s u b j e c t over the seven i t i o n s are p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e LV. of v a r i a n c e on the p e r c e n t a g e s h a v i o r s , averaged  while  The  r e s u l t s o f an  condanalysis  of combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e be-  w i t h i n the seven e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s ,  are summarized i n T a b l e  V.  Note, however, t h a t the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e f o r r e p e a t e d measures ( K i r k , 1968.  pp.  131-14-3) w i t h a randomized  b l o c k d e s i g n assumes t h a t p o p u l a t i o n p a i r s of treatment  c o v a r i a n c e s between  l e v e l s are c o n s t a n t , i n a d d i t i o n t o the  s t a n d a r d a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e assumption,  and t h a t the pop-  u l a t i o n v a r i a n c e s f o r the seven treatments These assumptions,  are homogeneous.  i f v i o l a t e d , would r e s u l t i n a p o s i -  t i v e b i a s i n the F - t e s t .  For designs having  repeated  measures on the same s u b j e c t s , a c o n s e r v a t i v e F - t e s t may used t o p r o v i d e a lower bound.  ( K i r k , p. 143).  c o n v e n t i o n a l F s t a t i s t i c w i t h (k-1) and n-1) of  and 6 (n-1) l e v e l s (7)  (k-1) degrees  Thus, the  (k-1)  freedom i s r e p l a c e d by an F s t a t i s t i c h a v i n g ©  be  degrees (k—1)  o f freedom.  (k=number o f  ; n=number o f s u b j e c t s (6)3.  G e i s e r and  treatment Green-  house (1958) have shown t h a t as h e t e r o g e n e i t y of v a r i a n c e s and c o v a r i a n c e s between p a i r s o f treatments decreases  i n value.  The  increases, 9  lowest v a l u e © can take i s l / ( k - l ) .  56 TABLE I V MEANS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIORS FOR SIX SUBJECTS OVER TREATMENT LEVELS Subject  Baseline  Structure  Praise and Ignore  Token I  Withdrawal  Token II  SI  49.62  44.83  38.17  20.30  14.33  11.33  3.17  S2  73.75  66.20  70.80  29.55  47.20  22J.71  5.33  S3  65.56  52.00  49.71  26.83  42.50  16.67  9.83  S4  50.20  32.67  40.14  12.50  35.50  9.00  3.71  S5  42.40  26.40  35.50  10.56  23.40  7-25  4.86  S6  66.44  48.33  45.43  18.10  43.83  15.33  10.33  T*2 44.99  T* 46.63  19.64  34??6  T6 13.71  T7 6.21  Tl  Mean  58.33  T4  Followup  TABLE V ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN SUBJECTS  SS  Source Between Treatments Between B l o c k s Residual Total  (Subj.)  MS  o/f  13405.85  6  2234.31  2786.58  5  557.32  1178.13  30  39.27  17370.56  41  * p < .01 Conservative  F.01, 1, 5 = 16.3  F.05, 1, 5 =  6.61  .01  F 56.89  57  TABLE VI SIGNIFICANT AND NON-SIGNIFICANT HYPOTHESIZED CONTRASTS  Contrast  F = (f^ - T ^ 2 MSres-lc^ 2  10.46  TZ|. - T i  114.36  T4 - 3  55.65  %  2.69  -  4.29  ** *  T  T  T  6 "  7 " T  6  *** p ( .05 ** p  C .01  * p < .001 -  **  5 " *1  T  non-significant  58 To ensure  t h a t the homogeneity assumptions are not taken f o r  granted, a c o n s e r v a t i v e F - t e s t w i t h 1 and n-1 degrees o f freedom i s r e p o r t e d i n each a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e t a b l e w i t h the c o n v e n t i o n a l F - t e s t .  along  Thus, the r e a d e r may be c e r t -  a i n t h a t i f the c o n s e r v a t i v e F - t e s t f o r treatment  effects i s  s i g n i f i c a n t , then the exact F - t e s t i s a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t . p.  (Kirk,  144). The  r e s u l t s o f the a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e on the p e r c e n t -  ages o f combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s averaged  w i t h i n the  seven e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s summarized i n T a b l e V, i n d i c a t e s marked d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e seven c o n d i t i o n s . a priori  Thus,  and p o s t hoc tests were used t o used t o a s s e s s  h y p o t h e s i z e d and u n h y p o t h e s i z e d c o n t r a s t s . The F r a t i o was used t o t e s t the h y p o t h e s i z e d c o n t r a s t s T3 - T i , T4 - f i ,  T4 - T3, T4. - Te and T5 - ^7.  I t should  be noted t h a t a p r i o r i t e s t s are n o r m a l l y one t a i l e d because hypotheses  u s u a l l y p r e d i c t d i r e c t i o n ( l i k e T5 <  The F r a t i o , which i s e q u a l t o the square 1968,  ^l).  of a t t e s t  (Kirk,  p . 81), uses t w i c e the e f f e c t i v e l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e =  t *C,3B)3 2  ^That  While  d e a l w i t h the a d o p t i o n o f .001  subsequent paragraphs  is  F2d(lv, 1,30)  t o f i n d the c r i t i c a l v a l u e ,  as the l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e , one mentioned a t t h i s t h a t t a b l e s r e p o r t i n g a .002 readily available.  time  l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e were n o t  Consequently,  .001 was used, however t h i s  merely makes the t e s t two s i d e d and more c o n s e r v a t i v e . Because the o v e r - a l l t e s t o f s i g n i f i c a n c e l e d t o the r e j e c t i o n o f the h y p o t h e s i s t h a t a l l treatment means are homogeneous, a t t e n t i o n was d i r e c t e d a t e x p l o r i n g t h e d a t a  59 t o f i n d the source o f the e f f e c t s .  To t h i s end, a p o s t hoc  m u l t i p l e comparison t e s t recommedned by Tukey (Winer, p. 87)  1962,  was used.  Table VI d i s p l a y s the d i f f e r e n c e s among means f o r t h e seven treatment l e v e l s . mean i s T.  The symbol used f o r a treatment  The treatment means i n the t a b l e have been o r -  dered from s m a l l e s t l e f t hand s i d e ;  to l a r g e s t across  the t o p , and down the  The d i f f e r e n c e between any two means appears  i n the body o f the t a b l e . To t e s t the r e c t a n g u l a r  a r r a y o f d i f f e r e n c e s between  treatment means f o r u n h y p o t h e s i z e d c o n t r a s t s , the t r u n c a t e d studentized was used.  range s t a t i s t i c  q f , t a b l e d i n K i r k (1968, p . 531) r  I n T a b l e V I I , the v a l u e s  i s the number o f s t e p s  of q f T  headed E  r  steps  a p a r t , p=  Hence i n T a b l e VI,  3«)  The next column  = q £ / M S e r r o r / n , l i s t s the c r i t i c a l r  between means.  (r  a p a r t the two means are, f i s the  number o f degrees o f freedom, f = 30. T]_ and T*2 are t h r e e  are l i s t e d ,  /v  difference  (The d i f f e r e n c e between any two means d i -  v i d e d by^^/MS e r r o r / n i s d i s t r i b u t e d as q r f .  Hence the d i f f -  erence between two means i s d i s t r i b u t e d as Q. f^/^^ e r r o r / n ) . r  The  c r i t i c a l ranges l i s t e d  i n t h i s column are i n f a c t those  used i n the Newman-Keuls T e s t .  However, because these v a -  l u e s f a i l t o take i n t o account t h a t the e f f e c t i v e ©<for t h e experiment as a whole i s c o n s i d e r a b l y inal l-oC»  higher  than the nom-  , w h i l e p r o v i d i n g a p r o t e c t i o n l e v e l lower l i m i t o f ( K i r k , p.91), and because t h e l a r g e s t E v a l u e used b y  Tukey's H.S.D. t e s t ( h o n e s t l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e )  fails  t o take account o f the f a c t t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the  TABLE V I I DIFFERENCES AMONG TREATMENT LEVEL MEANS  Ordered Treatment Means  _ Tn  %  6.21  7.50  =  13.71  -  T^ =  19.64  Trp =  T  6  5  = 34.46  f  2  = 44.99  f  3  = 46.63  T  T i = 58.33  ^4  s  *3  h  Description of Means  13.43  28.25  38.78  40.42  52.12  5-93  20.75  31.28  33.92  44.62  ?2 =  -  14.82  25.35  26.99  38.69  *3  -  10.53  12.17  23.87  * 4 = Token I  -  1.64  13.44  -  11.70  -  *1  f  5  \ ¥  7  = Baseline Educational Structure  = P r a i s e and Ignore  = Withdrawal = Token I I = Follow-up  TABLE V I I I CRITICAL RANGES FOR DIFFERENCES AMONG TREATMENT LEVEL MEANS TUKEY COMPROMISE PROCEDURE  Steps <=.05  <*.01  5.16  7.40  9.96  4.45  5.70  8.93  3.85  4.80  6.03  5  4.10  5.05  6  4.30  7  4.46  terror* n <=.001  C r i t i c a l Range <=.05  <=.01  <=.001  13.20  9.36  11.89  15.05  11.40  14.58  10.13  12.61  15.74  9.95  12.29  15.42  10.64  13.06  16.16  6.28  10.50  12.93  16.08  10.91  13.38  16.49  5.24  6.47  11.01  13.41  16.55  11.17  13.62  16.78  5.40  6.63  11.32  13.82  16.90  11.32  13.82  16.90  <».05  <=.01  2  2.89  3.89  3  3.49  4  <=.001  62  l a r g e s t minus the s m a l l e s t mean i s d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t the second  l a r g e s t minus the s m a l l e s t mean, and hence i s  o v e r l y c o n s e r v a t i v e , a compromise suggested 1962,  from  p. 87)  i s used.  The  by Tukey  (Winer,  c r i t i c a l range f o r T u k e y s com1  promise t e s t i s found by a v e r a g i n g the l a r g e s t R v a l u e each of the c r i t i c a l v a l u e s i n the column.  Thus the  with  last  column of Table V I I l i s t s the c r i t i c a l ranges used t o t e s t the d i f f e r e n c e s between the means l i s t e d i n T a b l e  VI.  To use °C=.05 o r oC=.01 w i t h the u s u a l t e s t f o r c o n t r a s t s (the  t , Newman-Eeuls o r Tukey) i s t o assume t h a t the u s u a l  F - t e s t (as opposed t o the Greenhouse and G e i s s e r F) i s v a l i d . R e s u l t s under t h i s assumption are i n the columns headed and ° C = . 0 1 .  °^=.05  R e s u l t s which would be more a p p r o p r i a t e t o the  lower bound Greenhouse and G e i s s e r t e s t are r e p o r t e d i n the column headed « < = . 0 0 1 . The  The  r a t i o n a l e f o r t h i s i s as f o l l o w s .  Greenhouse and G e i s s e r t e s t i s h i g h l y c o n s e r v a t i v e .  I t guarantees  t h a t °C i s no more t h a n . 0 5  heterogeneous the c o v a r i a n c e s may levels.  O r d i n a r i l y , one may  no matter  be between the  F f o r an ©Cof . 0 5 , equals 6.61  of . 0 5 . w i t h one  treatment  expect the Greenhouse and G e i s s e r  c r i t i c a l v a l u e t o c o r r e s p o n d to an a c t u a l than the nominal °C  how  -level  smaller  S i n c e the Greenhouse and G e i s s e r and f i v e degrees of freedom  ( F . 0 5 , 1 , 5 = 6 . 6 1 ) , the p r e c i s e a r e a i n the upper  t a i l of the r e g u l a r F d i s t r i b u t i o n beyond 6.61 s m a l l e r than . 0 5 .  i s much  The p r e c i s e p e r c e n t i l e rank was  not  because of the l i m i t a t i o n s of the most a c c u r a t e t a b l e s . ever, s i n c e F . o 0 1 , 6 , 3 0 = 5 . 1 2 , one may  and F . 0 0 0 5 , 6 , 3 0 = 5 . 6 6 ,  found How-  then  judge from i n t e r n a l evidence t h a t the c r i t i c a l  value  63 of  6.61 l i e s between the p e r c e n t i l e ranks o f .0005 and .00001.  However, even i f the p r e c i s e rank f o r Fg^^Q t o g i v e 6.61 c o u l d be found,  there i s s t i l l  a problem i n f i n d i n g approp-  r i a t e q-values f o r t h i s e f f e c t i v e << ; a v a i l a b l e S t u d e n t i z e d Range S t a t i s t i c T a b l e s do not go beyond .001.  Because o f  t h i s f a c t , and because o f the h i g h l y c o n s e r v a t i v e nature of  the Greenhouse and G e i s s e r F - t e s t , one may argue t h a t  5.12 i s p r o b a b l y n o t t o o f a r o f f the i d e a l v a l u e .  T h i s then  l e a d s one t o accept .001 as the e f f e c t i v e < . In  o t h e r words, the " m o d i f i e d " Greenhouse and G e i s s e r  t e s t says t h a t f o r o c = .05, one r e j e c t s the n u l l t h a t a l l treatment  hypothesis  means are e q u a l when F -bt.^5.12. 0  This i s  then tantamount t o d o i n g a u s u a l P t e s t ( F g ^ o ) w i t h e< =.001. Table VIII l i s t s  a l l s i g n i f i c a n t and n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t  means o f B a s e l i n e and E d u c a t i o n a l S t r u c t u r e t o g e t h e r w i t h the means o f the e a r l y and l a t e stages o f P r a i s e and Ignore, Token I , Withdrawal, l a t e r treatment l a t e (L) stage. for  Token I I , and Follow-up.  That i s , t h e  l e v e l s were d i v i d e d i n t o an e a r l y (E) and a Table IX d e p i c t s the e a r l y and l a t e  stages  each phase, and the mean over s i x s u b j e c t s f o r each.  Table X i s the r e s u l t s o f an a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r t h i s d a t a , w h i l e Table XI l i s t s the d i f f e r e n c e s among means. Table X I I i s a l i s t  o f the c r i t i c a l  ranges  o f the Tukey Comp-  romise T e s t used t o t e s t the r e c t a n g u l a r a r r a y o f d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e twelve treatment  means.  I n t h i s t a b l e , columns  headed b y t<=.05 and <A=01 assumes the u s u a l F t e s t  valid,  while the «C=.001 column i s used as the lower bound from the Greenhouse and G e i s s e r F - t e s t .  64  Table XIII l i s t s  a l l significant  and  non-significant  mean d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the d a t a i n t a b l e s n i n e t o  twelve.  65  TABLE IX SIGNIFICANT AND NON-SIGNIFICANT MEAN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN TREATMENT LEVEL MEANS  Significant  Non-Significant  Base v s . S t r u c t u r e ***  Structure vs. Praise  Base v s . P r a i s e **  Token I v s . Token I I  Base v s . Token I *  Token I I v s . Follow-up  Base v s . Withdrawal * Base v s . Follow-up * S t r u c t u r e v s . Token I * P r a i s e v s . Token I * P r a i s e v s . Withdrawal * P r a i s e v s . Follow-up * Token I v s . Withdrawal ** Withdrawal v s . Token I I ** Withdrawal v s . Follow-up ** *** p <.05  ]  ** p ^.01 > * p <,001 )  w i t h Tukey Compromise T e s t  66  TABLE X DESCRIPTION OP EARLY (E) AND LATE ( L ) STAGES WITHIN TREATMENT LEVELS  Treatment L e v e l  O b s e r v a t i o n Days  Stage  Mean  1-10  None  Ti-58.33  2. S t r u c t u r e  11-16  None  T =44.99  3. P r a i s e and Ignore 4.  17-19 20-23  E L  T,=54.83 T£=41.00  5. Token I 6.  24-29 30-35  E L  £5=25.73 Te=13.42  7. Withdrawal 8.  36-38 39-41  E L  T?=28.25 Tg=41.64  9. Token I I  10.  42-46 47-51  E L  Tq=19.29 Tio=8.30  11. 12. Follow-Up  52-54 55-58  E L  |ll=4.58 T -7.ll  1. B a s e l i n e  2  1 2  TABLE XI ANALYSIS OP VARIANCE TABLE FOR TWELVE MEANS Source Between Treatments  SS 23633.71  df  11 2148.52  Between B l o c k s ( S u b j e c t s )  4447.63  5  Residual  5912.22  55  Total  MS  71  * p < .01 C o n s e r v a t i v e P.01, 1,5=16.3 : P ( .01 C o n s e r v a t i v e F.05,1,5=6.61  889.53  71.13  P  30.21*  TABLE X I I DIFFERENCES AMONG MEANS FOR TWELVE STAGES  Means T  I ; L  =4.58  f  1 2  =7.H  f  1 0  =8.30  fe=13.42 f =19.29 9  T =25.73 5  T =28.25 7  T4.-4-l.OO T =41.64 8  T =44.99 2  f3=54.83 T =58.33 x  *11 ^ -  2V53  -  ?  1Q  T  6  g  9  f  5  f  7  ^  %  ?2  ?5  \  3.72  8.84  14.71  21.15  23.67  36.42  37.08  40.41  50.25  53-75  1.19  6.31  12.18  18.62  21.14  33.89  34.53  37.88  47.72  51.22  5.12  10.99  17.43  19.95  32.70  33.34  36.69  46.53  50.03  5.87  12.31  14.83  27.58  28.22  31.57  41.41  44.91  6.44  8.96  21.71  22.35  25.70  35.54  39.04  -  2.52  15.27  15.91  19.26  29.10  32.60  12.75  13.39  16.74  26.58  30.08  0.64  3.99  13.83  17.33  3.35  13.19  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  9.84 -  16.69  13.34 3.50  TABLE X I I I CRITICAL RANGES FOR DIFFERENCES AMONG TWELVE STAGE MEANS USING TUKEY COMPROMISE PROCEDURE  7* Steps  q  /rise r r o r * R*=q Al n  *,55  £.05  = .01  = .001  = .05  = .01  2  2.84  3.78  4.92  9.76  13.00  3  3.41  4.30  5.41  11.72  4  3.75  4.62  5.70  5  4.00  4.85  6  4.18  7  =.001  C r i t i c a l Range = .05  = .01  = .001  16.94  13.18  16.18  19.92  14.79  18.62  14.16  17.08  20.77  12.90  15.85  19.65  14.75  17.61  21.28  5.91  13.75  16.66  20.35  15.18  18.01  21.63  5.02  6.07  14.35  17.25  20.85  15.48  18.31  21.88  4.33  5.16  6.22  14.85  17.75  21.40  15-73  18.56  22.16  8  4.46  5.28  6.33  15.35  18.14  21.75  15.98  18.75  22.33  9  4.57  5.40  6.43  15.70  18.55  22.10  16.15  18.96  22.51  10  4.67  5.49  6.51  16.05  18.85  22.21  16.33  19.11  22.56  11  4.79  5.57  6.60  16.43  19.15  22.70  16.52  19.26  22.81  12  4.83  5.64  6.67  16.60  19.36  22.91  16.60  19.36  22.91  TABLE XIV SOME SIGNIFICANT AND NON-SIGNIFICANT MEAN DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BASELINE, STRUCTURE, AND THE EARLY AND LATE STAGES OF PRAISE AND IGNORE. TOKEN: I , WITHDRAWAL TOKEN I I , AND FOLLOW-UP  Significant Base vs P r a i s e  Non-Significant Base v s P r a i s e ( E )  (L) ***  Base v s Withdrawal (L) ***  Structure vs Praise (L)  S t r u c t u r e v s Token I (E) **  Praise  S t r u c t u r e v s Withdrawal (E) ***  P r a i s e ( L ) v s Withdrawal ( L )  S t r u c t u r e v s Token I (L) *  T o k e n l ( E ) v s Token I ( L )  Praise  ( L ) vs Token I (E) ***  Token I ( E ) v s Token I I ( E )  Praise  ( L ) v s Withdrawal (E) *  Token I ( L ) v s Token I I ( L )  (E) vs P r a i s e (L)  Token I (L) v s Withdrawal ( E ) *** Token I ( L ) v s Follow-up ( L ) Token I ( L ) vs Withdrawal (L) *  Token I ( L ) v s Follow-up (E) Token I I ( E ) v s Token I I ( L )  ***  **  P<.05| p ^ . . 0 1 Vwith Tukey  * p <.ooi)  Token I I (E) v s Follow-up ( E ) Compromise  Test  Token I I ( L ) v s Follow-up (E) Token I I ( L ) v s Follow-up ( L ) Follow-up ( E ) v s Follow-up ( L )  70 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS 1. INTRODUCTION The p l a n f o l l o w e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r statement o f each h y p o t h e s i s ,  included a r e -  f o l l o w e d b y an e v a l u a t i o n and  d i s c u s s i o n o f the i m p l i e d s t a t i s t i c a l hypotheses.  Other  f i n d i n g s are i n t r o d u c e d as they a r e a p p r o p r i a t e . H y p o t h e s i s I . When t e a c h e r - p r a i s e o f c o r r e c t n e s s i s a p p l i e d t o s t u d e n t s i n a grade n i n e non-academic c l a s s c o n t i n g e n t upon t h e e m i s s i o n o f a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r , w h i l e i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r i s p l a c e d on e x t i n c t i o n b y i g n o r i n g i t , t h e n i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses w i l l d e c r e a s e . The n u l l h y p o t h e s i s of B a s e l i n e  o f no d i f f e r e n c e between the means  (T^) and P r a i s e and Ignore ( T j ) was t e s t e d  a g a i n s t the a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t T^ would exceed T^»  Results  i n d i c a t e d ( T a b l e V I ) t h a t a t t h e lower bound o f .001 t h e d i f f e r e n c e between means was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , b u t a t t h e .01 l e v e l o f s i g n i f i c a n c e , t h e d i f f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t . The p o s t hoc comparison between t h e l a t e stage  of Praise  and Ignore ( T ^ ) and B a s e l i n e (T]^) was a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t a t the  .05 l e v e l , whereas the e a r l y stage  (T^) and B a s e l i n e was n o t . and  o f P r a i s e and Ignore  The c o n t r a s t between t h e e a r l y  l a t e means f o r P r a i s e and Ignore (T3-T4) showed s i g n i f -  i c a n c e a t t h e .05 l e v e l w i t h t h e l e s s c o n s e r v a t i v e Keuls Test.  S t a t i s t i c a l d a t a then,  Newman-  do i n d i c a t e t h a t i f t h e  normal F - t e s t i s i n d e e d v a l i d t h e n p r a i s e h a v i n g  a correct-  ness c o n n o t a t i o n may be u s e f u l i n d e c e l e r a t i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e behavior. G r a p h i c a l a n a l y s i s gave f u r t h e r support  t o t h e assum-  p t i o n t h a t t h i s treatment may have been a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n  71 F i g u r e 2 i n d i c a t e an o v e r a l l  to decelerate behavior.  c l i n e of i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r . s u b j e c t s t h r e e , f o u r , and XIV)  In p a r t i c u l a r , data f o r  s i x , ( F i g u r e s 5» 6 , 8 , and  i n d i c a t e d t h a t P r a i s e and I g n o r i n g was  w i t h these  s u b j e c t s than i t was  de-  Table  more e f f e c t i v e  w i t h the o t h e r  three  students. With the above evidence,  the w r i t e r concludes  u s i n g p r a i s e t h a t i n d i c a t e s the c o r r e c t n e s s of the w h i l e i g n o r i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses, behavior.  that response  does i n f l u e n c e  T h i s i n f l u e n c e i s not t o be i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean  t h a t P r a i s e and erating tactic.  Ignore was The  found t o be  d a t a do not  a sufficient  support  but do i n d i c a t e t h a t the b e h a v i o r s  this  conclusion,  under  study were b e i n g a f f e c t e d by the c o n t i n g e n c i e s d u r i n g t h i s treatment  decel-  i n operation  level.  H y p o t h e s i s I I . When token r e i n f o r c e r s i n the form of p o i n t s are u s e d m c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , w i t h no a v e r s i v e c o n t i n g e n c i e s employed, t h e n i n a p p r o p r i a t e behaviors w i l l decelerate. B a s e l i n e c o n d i t i o n s used back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , but p o i n t s nor the elements of P r a i s e and I g n o r e . employed a l l t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s .  The  (T4)  was  t e s t e d a g a i n s t the one  t h a t T4 was  l e s s t h a n T"-^.  s i g n i f i c a n t at the  .001  The  level  Token I  n u l l hypothesis  d i f f e r e n c e between the means of B a s e l i n e  of  no  (T-j_) and Token I  sided alternate d i f f e r e n c e was  (Table V I ) .  not  hypothesis  found t o  be  This implies  t h a t under the assumptions o f the Greenhouse and  Geisser  t e s t , the c o n d i t i o n s of Token I were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a dramatic  d e c e l e r a t i o n i n the e m i s s i o n  r a t e of i n a p p r o p r i a t e  TABLE XV COMPARISON BETWEEN MEANS OF BASELINE AND PRAISE AND IGNORE FOR SIX SUBJECTS  Subject  Base Mean  P r a i s e Mean  Decrease  SI  40  36  4  S2  74  71  3  S3  61  50  11  S4  50  40  10  S5  42  36  6  S6  67  45  22  73  responses. The trend of the data on a l l graphs i s consistent with the s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s . Hypothesis I I I . When the two treatments, Praise and Ignore, and Token I are compared, then Token I w i l l be more e f f e c t i v e i n c o n t r o l l i n g and decelerating inappropriate responses. Evaluation of the foregoing required an analysis between Token I ($4.) and Praise and Ignore ( T j ) . of no difference between T^ and T j was one sided a l t e r n a t i v e . preceding  The n u l l hypothesis  tested against  the  The r e s u l t of the analysis i n the  chapter (Table VI) l e d to a r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l  form at the . 0 0 1 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . considerable  In Figure 2 ,  a  decline i n the emission of inappropriate  be-  havior, and v e r b a l i z a t i o n , i s i n d i c a t e d ; from a mean of 4-7% i n Praise and Ignore to 2 0 % i n Token I. to eight also i n d i c a t e that Token I was  Figures  three  e f f e c t i v e with a l l  subjects. Of i n t e r e s t perhaps, i n passing, i s the comparison between Token I and Withdrawal.  The difference between  the means of Token I (T^) and Withdrawal ( $ 5 ) was  signif-  icant at the . 0 1 l e v e l , but not the . 0 0 1 l e v e l .  Hence,  i f the assumptions underlying the Greenhouse and  Geisser  test are v a l i d , then r e l i a b l e c o n t r o l of behaviors was  not  demonstrated.  late  In the comparison between the e a r l y and  stages f o r Token I and Withdrawal, the only s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t at the . 0 0 1 l e v e l was l a t e (Te)  found to be between Token I  and Withdrawal l a t e (Tg), (Table X I I I ) .  It i s  t h i s comparison which i n d i c a t e d that tokens were responsible  74  f o r the decline i n "behavior, and not other environmental contingencies. What t h i s evidence points to i s c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figure I I I , i n which the mean f o r the e n t i r e Withdrawal phase i s lower than the mean f o r Token I . Withdrawal, which i s a r e v e r s a l to Praise and Ignore, serves only one purpose, that i s to demonstrate r e l i a b l e c o n t r o l of a behavi o r a l change by showing that when the contingencies considered responsible f o r the change are removed, the behavior w i l l r e v e r t to i t s former l e v e l . Once a behavior has been set up however, i t i s possible that i t w i l l no longer be dependent upon the experimental technique  which created i t .  For example, two of subject  one's teachers remarked how well she was doing i n E n g l i s h and S o c i a l Studies.  Further questioning shed l i g h t on the  f a c t that both teachers had rewarded subject one f o r her improved behavior.  In E n g l i s h she was permitted to read  books of her choice, rather than ones assigned by the teacher; and i n S o c i a l Studies, her p r o j e c t time could be spent i n the l i b r a r y instead of the classroom. Graphs f o r subject two and f i v e (Figures 4 and 7) do indicate that tokens, and not other environmental conditions, were responsible f o r the decline i n inappropriate  behavior  during Token I . However, i t may be seen i n the graphs f o r the other four subjects that these behaviors accelerated i n the l a t e phase of Withdrawal, but not i n the e a r l y phase. This i n d i c a t e s that not enough time may have been a l l o t e d f o r the r e v e r s a l period.  75  H y p o t h e s i s I V . When the mean o f i n a p p r o p r i a t e "behaviors averaged over s u b j e c t s i n Token I I i s compared w i t h t h a t o f Token I , t h e n r e s u l t s w i l l i n d i c a t e t h a t i n a p p r o p r i a t e behaviors decelerated. The n u l l h y p o t h e s i s  o f no d i f f e r e n c e between the means  of Token I (T4.) and Token I I ( f g ) was t e s t e d a g a i n s t the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis hypothesis  t h a t T4. i s g r e a t e r t h a n Tg.  was accepted.  the e a r l y and l a t e  The n u l l  A l s o , f u r t h e r comparisons between  stages  o f Token I and Token I I were  found t o be n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t , even a t the upper bound o f . 0 5 . I t has been e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t Token I was e f f e c t i v e i n cont r o l l i n g inappropriate behavior.  S i n c e the means o f the  two phases o f Token I and Token I I a r e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , then one may conclude t h a t Token I I was a l s o ective.  eff-  F u r t h e r , the comparison between Token I I (E) and  Token I I ( L ) was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t ,  suggesting  t h a t the w i t h -  drawal o f token p o i n t s which o c c u r r e d d u r i n g Token I I ( L ) d i d not a f f e c t the b e h a v i o r s  appreciably.  H y p o t h e s i s V. When the treatment l e v e l . Follow-up, i s reached, the mean o f the i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r s average over s u b j e c t s w i l l remain a t a l e v e l e q u a l t o t h a t o f Token I I . The p r i n c i p a l d i f f e r e n c e between Token I I and Follow-up was the use o f t o k e n p o i n t s d u r i n g the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f the c o n t r a c t system i n the l a t e stage were employed d u r i n g F o l l o w - u p .  o f Token I I .  No tokens  The n u l l h y p o t h e s i s  o f no  d i f f e r e n c e between the means o f Token I I (Tg) and Follow-up (Tn) was t e s t e d a g a i n s t the one s i d e d a l t e r n a t i v e i n o r d e r to e s t a b l i s h whether o r not a token program c o u l d be r e p l a c e d by a c o n t i n g e n c y  c o n t r a c t system without  of i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r .  an i n c r e a s e  The r e s u l t s showed t h a t  there  76 was  no  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the  above means i n -  d i c a t i n g t h a t the c o n d i t i o n s of Follow-up a c h i e v e d objective. 8,  I n d i v i d u a l graphs f o r each s u b j e c t , F i g u r e  indicated that teacher-praise  could replace  and  a t t e n t i o n , and  3 to  contracts,  a token program without a f f e c t i n g b e h a v i o r .  I n p a r t i c u l a r , a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d be day  their  fifty-seven.  On  t h i s occasion,  drawn t o  a " F i e l d Day"  observation had  been  p l a n n e d w i t h events t o s t a r t immediately f o l l o w i n g a f i v e minute home-room p e r i o d .  Due  to u n f o r e s e e n  a c t i v i t i e s were postponed f o r one  hour.  T h i s meant a l l  students attended t h e i r f i r s t p e r i o d c l a s s . w r i t e r ' s involvement w i t h the he  was  unable to be  minutes.  I t was  e r v e r s had  w i t h the  Because of  a t h l e t i c events of the c l a s s u n t i l the l a s t  proceeded w i t h t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n , t h a t the  fifteen  one  e n t i r e c l a s s was  working  With the pandemonium t h a t e x i s t e d i n the  of the few  obs-  which i n c l u d e d  school  g e n e r a l l y d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , i t i s s a f e t o say t h a t was  the  day,  found on e n t e r i n g the room, t h a t the  a r e l i a b i l i t y check, and quietly.  difficulties,  c l a s s e s engaged i n e d u c a t i o n a l  this  activit-  ies. Coupled w i t h the  s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s the f a c t  the mean over a l l s i x s u b j e c t s  dropped from a p p r o x i m a t e l y  14-% i n Token I I t o 6% i n Follow-up, ( F i g u r e 2) subjects displayed  s i m i l a r trends,  procedures introduced t r o l l i n g behaviors.  that  i t may  be  and  since a l l  concluded that  i n Follow-up were e f f e c t i v e i n conI n o t h e r words, the r e s u l t s suggested  t h a t a t o k e n program c o u l d be  r e p l a c e d w i t h a student man-  aged c o n t i n g e n c y c o n t r a c t program without an i n c r e a s e  in  77 inappropriate  behavior. GENERALIZATION  D i r e c t measurements o f g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t r e n d s were n o t made d u r i n g the study.  Repeated a n e c d o t a l d a t a from the  s c h o o l p r i n c i p a l , c o u n s e l l o r s , and t e a c h e r s were p o s i t i v e and i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e was a n o t i c e a b l e and a p p a r e n t l y dramatic  change i n t h e b e h a v i o r o f many o f the s t u d e n t s i n  the c l a s s .  A p a s s i n g comment made i n the s t a f f r o o m b y a  t e a c h e r who wanted t o know whether o r n o t s u b j e c t two was still  i n s c h o o l , l e d t o t h e development o f T a b l e XVI.  E v i d e n t l y t h i s t e a c h e r had n o t i c e d t h a t s u b j e c t two had not been on t h e " c a l l - d o w n In list  list".  t h i s school the d a i l y s t a f f b u l l e t i n contains a  o f s t u d e n t s who are c a l l e d down t o t h e v i c e - p r i n c i p a l ' s  office.  To be p l a c e d on the l i s t  n o r m a l l y r e q u i r e s the  student t o be d i s o b i e n t i n c l a s s , o r t r u a n t from s c h o o l . In  any event, the s t u d e n t i s a t some odds w i t h the s t a f f  and i s r e q u i r e d t o r e p o r t t o the o f f i c e .  T a b l e XVI i n d i c a t e s  the number o f times each o f the s u b j e c t s was on the l i s t throughout  the year.  B e f o r e the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f p r a i s e and i g n o r e , t h e t o t a l number o f times s t u d e n t s were c a l l e d t o the o f f i c e was f i f t y nine. to  D u r i n g P r a i s e and Ignore,  two.  I n Withdrawal,  t h e r e was an i n c r e a s e t o n i n e , and  d u r i n g Token I I and Follow-up the  and Token I i t was reduced  s t u d e n t s were c a l l e d twice t o  office. As a f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n o f the success o f the program,  seven  s t u d e n t s were t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o i t from o t h e r c l a s s e s  78  d u r i n g the y e a r at the r e q u e s t o f t e a c h e r s and  counsellors.  ATTENDANCE Comparisons  o f the attendance r e c o r d s f o r the exper-  i m e n t a l c l a s s d u r i n g the y e a r were a l s o e n c o u r a g i n g .  The  attendance p e r c e n t a g e i n the mathematics and s c i e n c e c l a s s f o r each o f the c o n d i t i o n s i s l i s t e d i n T a b l e XVII. These  f i g u r e s are encouraging, b u t because  o f the un-  u s u a l amount o f s i c k n e s s i n e v i d e n c e throughout the s c h o o l , d u r i n g December and January, the f i r s t t h r e e f i g u r e s not be r e l i a b l e .  may  Hence, more d e f i n i t e e v i d e n c e i s needed  b e f o r e c o n c l u s i o n s about the e f f e c t s o f a token program on attendance can be made. I n a d d i t i o n , a d a i l y r e c o r d was o f a l l s t u d e n t s who p e r i o d , t h e r e was started.  kept throughout the y e a r ,  came t o c l a s s l a t e .  At the end o f each  a four-minute d e l a y b e f o r e the next p e r i o d  P e r i o d s ended and commenced a t the sound o f a b e l l  c o n t r o l l e d a u t o m a t i c a l l y by a mechanism l o c a t e d i n the A s t u d e n t was  office.  r e c o r d e d l a t e i f he a r r i v e d a f t e r the l a s t  bell.  The number o f l a t e s d u r i n g each treatment l e v e l i s r e c o r d e d i n Table XVIII. I n p a r t i c u l a r , S 2 was  a chronic late a r r i v a l  the s t a r t o f the s c h o o l y e a r u n t i l Token I .  from  After  treatment he d i d not appear l a t e f o r c l a s s u n t i l  this  Follow-up.  H i s E n g l i s h t e a c h e r n o t e d the same t r e n d i n h i s c l a s s ,  and  made s e v e r a l f a v o r a b l e comments, not o n l y on h i s p u n c t u a l i t y , but a l s o on h i s improved  academic  performance.  TABLE XVI NUMBER OF TIMES EACH SUBJECT WAS CALLED TO THE VICE-PRINCIPAL'S OFFICE  Month  Approximate Treatment L e v e l  Number o f Times SI  S2  on C a l l Down L i s t  S3  S4  S5  S6  Sept.  Pre-Baseline  2  4-  3  2  2  7  Oct.  Baseline  2  6  5  2  3  5  Nov.  Baseline-Structure  1  5  3  0  4-  3  Dec.  Structure-Praise  0  1  1  0  0  0  Jan.  P r a i s e and Ignore-Token I  0  1  0  0  0  0  Feb.  Token I  0  1  0  0  0  0  March  Token I-Withdrawal  3  2  1  1  2  0  April  Token I I  1  0  0  0  0  0  May  Token I I t o end o f Follow-up  0  0  0  0  0  1  and Ignore  TABLE XVII ATTENDANCE FOR EXPERIMENTAL CLASS  Treatment L e v e l  Attendance  P r e - B a s e l i n e t o End o f S t r u c t u r e  84%  P r a i s e and Ignore  86%  Token I  94%  Withdrawal  95%  Token I I  94%  Follow-up  98%  TABLE X V I I I RECORD OF LATES OVER TREATMENT LEVELS  Treatment  Level  Frequency  Average  p e r Day  Baseline  63  3  Structure  33  3  P r a i s e and Ignore  50  2  3  0  12  1  Token I I  0  0  Follow-up  1  0  Token I Withdrawal  82  COST The back-up r e i n f o r c e r s were those r e a d i l y t o t h e s c h o o l , and c o s t n o t h i n g t o implement.  available I n the  w r i t e r ' s o p i n i o n , programs which are dependent on the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f c a n d i e s and t o y s i n t o t h e c l a s s r o o m can o n l y be a p p l i e d f o r a l i m i t e d time because  o f the s t r a i n  eventu-  a l l y p l a c e d on e i t h e r t h e s c h o o l o r t h e t e a c h e r ' s budget. Furthermore,  a l l equipment used i n the c l a s s r o o m ,  including  tape r e c o r d e r s , was a v a i l a b l e t o a l l t e a c h e r s i n the s c h o o l . An adaptor which p e r m i t t e d two o b s e r v e r s t o use the same r e c o r d e r and a t h i r t y - f o o t e x t e n s i o n f o r an e a r p l u g were the o n l y items p u r c h a s e d .  Hence t h e t o t a l c o s t o f a l l items  and m a t e r i a l s used throughout t h e study amounted t o approxi m a t e l y two d o l l a r s . I n terms o f p e r s o n n e l , t h e o b s e r v e r s were grade s t u d e n t s who v o l u n t a r i l y gave t h e i r time.  twelve  The w r i t e r , who  was a l s o experimenter and t e a c h e r , was a member o f t h e s t a f f , and taught p h y s i c s and mathematics t o o t h e r c l a s s e s .  In  o t h e r words, t h e r e was no p e r s o n n e l c o s t t o the s c h o o l d i s t r i c t i n which t h i s study was conducted.  83 CHAPTER VT SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION I  SUMMARY  P o l l o w i n g an a n a l y s i s  of v a r i a n c e performed on the  p e r c e n t a g e s of combined i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r w i t h i n the seven e x p e r i m e n t a l alysis late  of v a r i a n c e  conditions,  and S t r u c t u r e ,  and another a n -  comparing the means of the e a r l y and  s t a g e s f o r each of P r a i s e and I g n o r e ,  d r a w a l , Token I I ,  averaged  Token I ,  and F o l l o w - u p , w i t h the means of  Baseline  a comparison o r c o n t r a s t between a l l  ment means was p e r f o r m e d .  The a n a l y s e s  permitted  With-  treat-  the  following conclusions: 1. The use of p r a i s e t h a t i n d i c a t e s the c o r r e c t n e s s of the r e s p o n s e , w h i l e i n a p p r o p r i a t e responses are i g n o r e d , does i n f l u e n c e b e h a v i o r . 2.  A t o k e n - p o i n t system d e s i g n e d t o use o n l y back-up r e i n f o r c e r s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e i n the s c h o o l and which c o s t n e i t h e r the s c h o o l n o r t e a c h e r money, t o g e t h e r w i t h p r a i s i n g and i g n o r i n g , d r a m a t i c a l l y reduced i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r .  3.  The r e i n f o r c i n g of d e s i r a b l e b e h a v i o r w i t h p o i n t s , back-up r e i n f o r c e r s , and p r a i s e was more e f f e c t i v e than r e i n f o r c i n g b e h a v i o r w i t h p r a i s e a l o n e .  4.  The use of c o n t i n g e n c y c o n t r a c t s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h tokens and back-up r e i n f o r c e r s was more e f f e c t i v e i n d e c e l e r a t i n g and c o n t r o l l i n g i n a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r than the use of tokens and back-up r e i n f o r c e r s a l o n e .  5.  Tokens can be t h i n n e d from the e d u c a t i o n a l without d i s r u p t i n g g a i n s made.  6.  The development o f c o n t i n g e n c y c o n t r a c t s p e r m i t t e d the t h i n n i n g and withdrawal of tokens from the program.  setting  I I DISCUSSION The program of i n s t r u c t i o n used throughout raise  several  questions  as to the u s e f u l n e s s  the  study may  of a token program  i n classrooms where c o n v e n t i o n a l methods of i n s t r u c t i o n are u s e d . Tokens are an a i d i n the t e a c h i n g effective,  the b e h a v i o r ,  of b e h a v i o r ,  and to be  whether i t be a simple s k i l l  or  84  a complex a t t i t u d e , must be d e f i n e d .  Only when i t i s d e f i n e d  i n measurable and o b s e r v a b l e terms may c o n t i n g e n c i e s  of r e i n -  forcement be d e s i g n e d under which the l e a r n i n g o f t h a t behavi o r takes p l a c e . The  teacher  who i s e x p e r i e n c e d i n p r e p a r i n g i n s t r u c t i o n -  a l o b j e c t i v e s and i n d i v i d u a l i z i n g h i s i n s t r u c t i o n , w i l l the t e c h n i q u e s used i n a l l b e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n m e a n i n g f u l and u s e f u l . room environment.  A token program r e d e s i g n s  studies the c l a s s -  I t does n o t make s t u d e n t s f r e e , b u t s i m p l y  makes t h e c o n t r o l e x e r c i s e d b y t h e environment l e s s to the student.  find  aversive  The t e c h n i q u e s found i n the treatment l e v e l s  i n t h i s s t u d y attempted t o produce a s o c i a l environment o f this  kind. I t should be borne i n mind t h a t t h i s t h e s i s  reports  the r e s u l t s o f b e h a v i o r m o d i f i c a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s as t h e y were a p p l i e d t o a group o f s t u d e n t s i n v o l v e d w i t h an i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n a l program.  The w r i t e r i s concerned a t t h i s  p o i n t t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o make g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s from these d a t a without f u l l y a p p r e c i a t i n g t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n a l program. and  Both t h e mathematics  s c i e n c e program i n v o l v e d n o t o n l y the t a s k o f sequencing  lessons  ( a procedure of p r e s e n t a t i o n  uation, re-analysis, r e t r i a l , a l s o the p r e s e n t i n g  analysis, t r i a l ,  re-evaluation,  eval-  and so on) b u t  of m a t e r i a l t o the student at a rate  which he c o u l d handle and which f o l l o w e d n a t u r a l l y from h i s developing  i n t e r e s t and awareness.  The program was even  more complex however, s i n c e i t r e l i e d on group p r o c e s s e s as w e l l , and thus,  a c t i v i t i e s p r e s c r i b e d r e s u l t e d from the  85  diagnosis  o f b o t h t h e group and i n d i v i d u a l needs.  Furthermore, t h i s study l i k e many which p r e c e d e d i t , found t e a c h e r - a t t e n t i o n  and the p r a i s i n g o f  behavior while i g n o r i n g  inappropriate  i n f l u e n c i n g p u p i l performance.  appropriate  behavior valuable i n  However, t e a c h e r - p r a i s e  a t t e n t i o n i s an e x t r e m e l y complex independent v a r i a b l e .  and It  i s a c o m b i n a t i o n o f many p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s and dimensions, i n c l u d i n g sex, tics,  characteris-  a n a l y z e each component  of g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . teacher-attention, outside  Perhaps  s t u d i e s may i s o l a t e these p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  Future studies  the  and v o c a l  t o name o n l y a few o f the more obvious ones.  future and  size, f a c i a l features,  separately.  should also attend  t o t h e important  topic  That i s , t o f i n d what e f f e c t s p r a i s e , and tokens may have on o t h e r environments  o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l s e t t i n g , and most i m p o r t a n t , how  generalization occurs.  F o r example, does i t occur, i f  at a l l , because o f i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r o l o f responses through i m i t a t i v e b e h a v i o r , o r group c o n t r o l o f i n d i v i d u a l b e h a v i o r , o r none o f these?  I n the w r i t e r ' s  opinion,  t h i s i s perhaps  the most i m p o r t a n t a r e a o f token programs y e t t o be i n v e s t igated.  86 REFERENCES A x e l r o d , S. Token Reinforcement Programs i n S p e c i a l C l a s s e s . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1971, V o l . 37, 371-379. A y l l o n , T. and A z r i n , N.H. The Token Economy: a l System f o r Therapy and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n . t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1968.  A MotivationN.Y., A p p l e -  B a i l e y , J.S., Wolf, M.M., P h i l l i p s , E.L. Home-based r e i n forcement and the M o d i f i c a t i o n of P r e - d e l i n q u e n t s Classroom B e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l A n a l y s i s , 1970, V o l . 3, 183-184. B i j o u , S.W. and Baer, D.M. C h i l d Development, N.Y., t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1961.  Apple-  Broden, M., H a l l , R.V., Dunlap, A., C l a r k , R. E f f e c t s of Teacher A t t e n t i o n and a Token Reinforcement system i n a Junior High School S p e c i a l Education C l a s s . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1970, V o l . 36, 341-349. Brown, D. Changing Student B e h a v i o r : A New Approach t o D i s c i p l i n e . Dubuque, Iowa, Wm. C. Brown Co., 1971. Campbell, D.T. and S t a n l e y , J.C. E x p e r i m e n t a l and Q u a s i E x p e r i m e n t a l Designs f o r R e s e a r c h . Chicago, Rand M c N a l l y & C o l , 1963. C a t a n i a , C.S. (Ed.) Contemporary Research i n Operant B e h a v i o r , Glenview, I l l i n o i s , S c o t t , Foresman & Company, 1968. Cohen, H.L., F i l i p c z a k , J . , and B i s , J . A s t u d y o f C o n t i n g e n c i e s A p p l i c a b l e t o S p e c i a l E d u c a t i o n . I n R. U l r i c h , T. S t a c h n l k and J . Mabry (Eds.) C o n t r o l o f Human Behavi o r , V o l . 2, Glenview, S c o t t , Foresman & Co., 1970. E n d l e r , N.S. The E f f e c t s of V e r b a l Reinforcement on Conformi t y and D e v i a n t B e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology, 1965, V o l . 66, 147-154. Fargo, G.A., Behrns, C , Goodman, S.A., Commons, M. Accounta b i l i t y : U t i l i z i n g Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n . I n G.A. Fargo C. Behrns and P. N o l e n ( E d s . ) . B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n i n the Classroom, Belmont, C a l i f . , Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1970. Ferster, CB. Reinforcement and Punishment i n the c o n t r o l o f Human B e h a v i o r by S o c i a l A g e n c i e s . I n E. McGinnies and C B . F e r s t e r ( E d s . ) . The Reinforcement of S o c i a l B e h a v i o r , N.Y., Houghton M i f f l i n , 1971. Glynn, E.L. Classroom A p p l i c a t i o n s o f S e l f - d e t e r m i n e d R e i n forcement. J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l A n a l y s i s , 1970, V o l . 3 ,  123-152.—  H a r t , B.M., A l l e n , K.E., B u e l l , J.S., H a r r i s , F.R. and Wolf, M.M. E f f e c t s o f S o c i a l Reinformement on Operant C r y i n g . J o u r n a l of E x p e r i m e n t a l C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y . 1964, V o l . 1,  145-153.  87  Homme, L.E. C o n t i n g e n c y Management. I n G.A. F a r g o , C. Behrns and P. Nolen. (Eds.) B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n i n The Classroom, Belmont, C a l i f . , Wadsworth PubiCo., 1970. Homme, L.E., C s a n y i , A.P., Gonzales, M.A., Rechs, J.R. How t o Use C o n t i n g e n c y C o n t r a c t i n g i n the Classroom, R e s e a r c h P r e s s , Champaign, I l l i n o i s , 1969. K r a s n e r , L . and Ullmann, L.P. Research i n Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n . N.Y., H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston, 1966. K e l l e r , P.S. L e a r n i n g Reinforcement Theory. (2nd E d . ) , N.Y., Random House, 1962. K i r k , R.E. E x p e r i m e n t a l D e s i g n Procedures f o r the B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s , Belmont, C a l i f . , Brooks/Cole Pub. Co., 1968. Lovaas, 0.1., B e r b e r i c h , J.P., P e r l o f f , B.P. and S c h a e f f e r , B. A c q u i s i t i o n o f I m i t a t i v e Speech b y S c h i z o p h r e n i c C h i l d r e n Science, V o l . 1$1, 7o$-WL o v i t t , T. B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n : The C u r r e n t Scene. E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1970, V o l . 37, 85-91. L o v i t t , T. B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n : Where Do We Go From Here. E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1970, V o l . 37, 157-167. Madsen, C«.H. , J r . and Madsen, C.K. T e a c h i n g D i s c i p l i n e : Beha v i o r a l P r i n c i p l e s Toward a P o s i t i v e Approach. Boston, A l l y n and Bacon I n c . , 1970. Mandelker, A.V., Brigham, T.A., B u s h e l l , D. The E f f e c t s o f Token P r o c e d u r e s on a Teacher's S o c i a l C o n t a c t s w i t h H e r Students. J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o r a l A n a l y s i s , 1970,  v o l . 3, l e s ^ ^ r :  —  —  McGinnies, E . and E e r s t e r , C.B. The Reinforcement o f S o c i a l B e h a v i o r , Boston, Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 19?1. McKenzie, H.S., C l a r k , M., V/olf, M.M., K o t h e r a , R., Benson, C , B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n U s i n g Grades as Tokens. E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1968, V o l . 34, 745-753. Montgomery, J . and McBurney, R.D. Operant C o n d i t i o n i n g Token Economy. C a m a r i l l o , C a l i f . , C a m a r i l l o S t a t e H o s p i t a l , 1970. O'Leary, K.D. and Becker, W.C. B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n o f an Adjustment C l a s s : A Token Reinforcement System. E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1967, V o l . 33, 637-642. O'Leary, K.D., Becker, W.C., Evans, M.B. and Saudargas, R.H. A Token Reinforcement Program i n a P u b l i c S c h o o l , A R e p l i c a t i o n and S y s t e m a t i c A n a l y s i s . Journal of Applied B e h a v i o r a l A n a l y s i s , 1969, V o l . 2, 3-13. P h i l l i p s , E.L. Achievement P l a c e : Token Reinforcement i n a Home-style R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e t t i n g F o r P r e d e l i n q u e n t Boys. J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v o r i a l A n a ^ s i s , 1968, V o l . 1, 213-233.  88 Renner, K.E. D e l a y o f Reinforcement: A H i s t o r i c a l Review. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1964, V o l . 61, 341- 361. Rose, S.D., Sundel, M., Delange, J . , Corwin, L . and Palumbo,A. The Hartwig P r o j e c t : A B e h a v i o r a l Approach t o the T r e a t ment o f J u v e n i l e O f f e n d e r s . I n R. U l r i c h , T. S t a c h n i k and J . Mabry ( E d s . ) . C o n t r o l o f Human. B e h a v i o r , V o l . 2, Glenview, S c o t t , Foresman and Co., 1970. Rosenhan, D., Greenwald, J.A. The E f f e c t s o f Age, Sex, and Socioeconomic C l a s s on Responsiveness t o two C l a s s e s o f V e r b a l Reinforcement. I n E . McGinnies and C.B. P e r s t e r ( E d s . ) . The Reinforcement o f S o c i a l B e h a v i o r , Boston, Houghton M i f f l i n , 1971. Schwarz, M.L. and Hawkins, R.P. A p p l i c a t i o n o f d e l a y e d C o n d i t i o n i n g P r o c e d u r e s t o the B e h a v i o r Problems o f an Elementary S c h o o l C h i l d . I n R. U l r i c k , T. S t a c h n i k and J . Mabry ( E d s . ) . C o n t r o l o f Human B e h a v i o r , V o l , 2, Glenview, S c o t t , Poresman and Co. 1970. S k i n n e r , B.P. 1953.  S c i e n c e and Human B e h a v i o r . N.Y., M a c M i l l a n ,  S k i n n e r , B.P. The Technology o f Teaching, N.Y., A p p l e t o n C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1968. S l o g g e t t , B.B., B e h a v i o r M o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e U n d e r a c h i e v i n g R u r a l Hawaiian: An E x p e r i m e n t a l Classroom. Pacific A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l Records, No. 5» 1969. S u l z b a c h e r , S . I . and Houser, J . E . A T a c t i c t o E l i m i n a t e D i s r u p t i v e B e h a v i o r s i n the Classroom. I n R. U l r i c k , T. S t a c h n i k and J Mabry ( E d s . ) . C o n t r o l o f Human B e h a v i o r , V o l . 2, Glenview, S c o t t , Foresman, 1970. S u l z b a c h e r , S . I . and Sherman, W.D. The Importance o f Coo r d i n a t i o n i n the Management o f an A d o l e s c e n t . I n G.A. Pargo, C. Behrns and P. N o l e n ( E d s . ) . Behavior M o d i f i c a t i o n i n t h e Classroom,Belmont, C a l i f o r n i a , Wadsworth Pub., 1970. Thomas, D;R., Becker, W.C, Armstrong, M. P r o d u c t i o n and E l i m i n a t i o n o f D i s r u p t i v e Classroom B e h a v i o r b y Systema t i c a l l y v a r y i n g Teacher's B e h a v i o r . J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d 1 B e h a v i o r a l A n a l y s i s , 1968, V o l , 1, 35- Fr* Ullman, L.P. and K r a s n e r , L . Case S t u d i e s i n B e h a v i o r Modi f i c a t i o n . N.Y., H o l t , R i n e h a r t , and Winston, 1966. U l r i c h , R. S t a c h n i k , T . , Mabry, J . C o n t r o l o f Human B e h a v i o r V o l . 1 & V o l . 2, Glenview, 111., S c o t t , Poresman, 19^6,  1970.  Winer, B . J . S t a t i s t i c a l P r i n c i p l e s i n E x p e r i m e n t a l D e s i g n , T o r o n t o , McGraw-Hill, 1962. Wolf, M.M., G i l e s , D.J., H a l l , R.V. Experiments w i t h Token Reinforcement i n a Remedial Classroom. B e h a v i o r R e s e a r c h and Therapy, 1968, V o l . 6, 51-64. Z i g l e r , E . , E a n z e r , P. The E f f e c t i v e n e s s o f Two C l a s s e s o f V e r b a l R e i n f o r c e r s on t h e Performance o f M i d d l e and Lower-Class C h i l d r e n . Boston, Houghton M i f f l i n , 1971.  89  APPENDIX  FIGURE 2 PERCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR -AND VERBALIZATION AVERAGED OVER' SIX SUBJCETS /oof  BASELINE  STRUCTURE  PRAISE S  jam?. •  WITHDRAWAL  FOLLOW-UP  to •  80  K  OBSERVATION DAYS PERCENT INTERVALS... — « — K — Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e Behavior -x—x-Verbalization mean o f treatment l e v e l  sx> 'O  FIGURE 3 PERCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AND VERBALISATION OVER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT 1 lOO-i  BASELINE <  STRUCTURE i  PRAISE J iranRE  TOKEN II  I  35 • '  , i -x—x-  OBSERVATION DAYS Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e Behavior Verbalisation Mean o f treatment l e v e l  I  '  ' W  •  \  '  • > ' iJS '  '  F0LLOW-  n-n-  '  q-tu-n~ n~ir -Q  • so ' '  '  ' SS  FIGURE 4 PERCENT INTERVALS OP COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AND VERBALIZATION OVER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT 2 MSU1NE  I  STRUCTURE  1  PRAISE i IGNORE  OBSERVATION DAYS — — -x—x—x  Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r Verbalization Mean o f treatment l e v e l  FOLLOW-UP  FIGURE 5 fERCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AND VERBALIZATION OVER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT $ BASELINE  STRUCTURE  ' 1  PRAISE 5 IGNORE  I  OBSERVATION DAIS .— . — —x—x  Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e Behavior Verbalization Mean o f treatment l e v e l  WITHDRAWAL  ]  w  ro;  FIGURE 6 FEfiiCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR VERBALIZATION OVER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT 4POLLOW-UP  / « ' ' • '  is  >  >  <  > io >  1  30  '  '  '  > IS  OBSERVATION DAYS — . — Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e Behavior -x—x-x- Verbalization Mean o f treatment l e v e l  '  >  '  ' VO '  '  1  ' Yff •  '  I  i  go  i  >  I  • to  vO  FIGURE 7 PERCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AND KERBALIZATJON OVEE,EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT 5 TOKEN  10 ' ' ' ' tS  1  ' ' > M  > • < • iS  1  '  1  1  <SO > < < > 3J ' ' • • Vo ' '  OBSERVATION —v— -x—x—x  DAYS  Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r Verbalization Mean o f treatment l e v e l  1  1  II  V«" ' • ' > SO '  FIGURE 8 PERCENT INTERVALS OF COMBINED INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR AND VERBALIZATION OVER EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS FOR SUBJECT 6 J 1  — — . — -x—x—x  STRUCTURE  | '  IGNORE  «  !  1  TOKEN I  Combined I n a p p r o p r i a t e B e h a v i o r Verbalization Mean o f treatment l e v e l  WITHDRAWAL  TOKEN  II'  FOLLOW-UP  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0101647/manifest

Comment

Related Items