Effects of and preference for conditions of token earn versus token loss.

The effects of earning and losing tokens on the disruptive behavior of 12 first-grade students were evaluated under symmetrical contingencies of earn and loss. Both contingencies produced decreases in disruptive behavior. For some participants, more consistent decreases were observed during the loss contingency. In addition, participants generally earned or kept more tokens during the loss contingency. When offered a choice of contingencies, most participants preferred the loss contingency. The results showed some consistency with behavioral economic principles of loss aversion and the endowment effect.

[1]  R. A. Wright,et al.  Class-Wide Positive Behavior Support and Group Contingencies , 2012 .

[2]  J. McComas,et al.  Responding to rule violations or rule following: A comparison of two versions of the Good Behavior Game with kindergarten students. , 2010, Journal of school psychology.

[3]  T. Critchfield,et al.  Concurrent schedules of positive and negative reinforcement: differential-impact and differential-outcomes hypotheses. , 2008, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[4]  M. C. Newland,et al.  Asymmetry of reinforcement and punishment in human choice. , 2008, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[5]  W. Fisher,et al.  On the effectiveness of and preference for punishment and extinction components of function-based interventions. , 2005, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[6]  R. Miltenberger,et al.  A comparison of response cost and differential reinforcement of other behavior to reduce disruptive behavior in a preschool classroom. , 2004, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[7]  P. Balsam,et al.  The negative side effects of reward. , 1983, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[8]  A. Kazdin.  The token economy: a decade later. , 1982, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[9]  T. Foster,et al.  Performance of humans in concurrent avoidance/positive-reinforcement schedules. , 1982, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[10]  B. Lahey,et al.  Direct and Collateral Effects of Positive Reinforcement, Response Cost, and Mixed Contingencies for Academic Performance. , 1978 .

[11]  B. Iwata,et al.  Reward versus cost token systems: an analysis of the effects on students and teacher. , 1974, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[12]  K. O’leary,et al.  Reward, cost, and self-evaluation procedures for disruptive adolescents in a psychiatric hospital school. , 1972, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[13]  M. Wolf,et al.  Good behavior game: effects of individual contingencies for group consequences on disruptive behavior in a classroom. , 1969, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[14]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2022 .

[15]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias , 1991 .

[16]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .