Token Economy Programmes
Use the principles from operant conditioning as a behaviour modification technique. The focus is on the offender and the guard identifying what the desired behaviour is e.g. not swearing or getting into a fight and are therefore used to encourage pro-social behaviour. If the offender does the desired behaviour they are given a token – this acts as a secondary reinforcer which can be traded in for a primary reinforcer which meets a basic need e.g. a chocolate bar as a luxury food item. This acts as a way of reinforcing the good behaviour. It is important that an exchange rate is established, this determines how many tokens are required for the reward to be given. The reinforcement schedule will change over time so that whereas before tokens may have been given every time the offender does not swear it may be for every day they don’t swear and then every week
Evaluation
Supporting evidence:
Milby found TEP were successful in psychiatric hospitals however follow up studies needed to see if effects lasted
Dickerson found TEP were successful in obtaining desired behaviour in schizophrenics
Both the above studies not specifically related to criminal behaviour. There may be differences between psychiatric patients and the behaviour of someone who is antisocial or a criminal.
Field (2004) used TEP in the treatment of young people with behaviour problems. This had a positive effect on the whole but still a number who did not respond. The programme was then adapted for non responsive youths with instant rewards and more frequent, this lead to greater success. This shows how the programme can be adapted to meet individual needs. However we do not know what happened afterwards – only measured short term effects on behaviour.
No specialist training required which can make it cheap to implement. However training is recommended to ensure consistency between staff members and to ensure it is being used as a reward system and not withholding basic needs
Gives individuals a sense of control over their behaviour which helps them develop independence. However there is the risk of learned helplessness
Account for individual differences – can use different reinforcement schedules and rewards that are specific to the individual
Opposing evidence:
Success rate is questionable – may be due to relationship between staff-prisoner, extra attention or just having clear rules
Need careful monitoring else may become contraband
Prisoners need to be engaged with the programme and have motivation
Different explanation:
Anger management uses CBT to teach inmates ways of identifying what triggers their anger and gives them the skills in managing it, such as relaxation techniques. This method may lead to more long lasting change as it teaches skills, rather than simply managing the behaviour.
Application:
TEP is widely used e.g. in prisons, schools and hospitals. It may however lack application as it may not be generalised to the outside world – studies often do not focus on what happens once the prisoner is released so recidivism may be high. It is seen as a way of managing behaviour and creating calm in an institute.
Use the principles from operant conditioning as a behaviour modification technique. The focus is on the offender and the guard identifying what the desired behaviour is e.g. not swearing or getting into a fight and are therefore used to encourage pro-social behaviour. If the offender does the desired behaviour they are given a token – this acts as a secondary reinforcer which can be traded in for a primary reinforcer which meets a basic need e.g. a chocolate bar as a luxury food item. This acts as a way of reinforcing the good behaviour. It is important that an exchange rate is established, this determines how many tokens are required for the reward to be given. The reinforcement schedule will change over time so that whereas before tokens may have been given every time the offender does not swear it may be for every day they don’t swear and then every week
Evaluation
Supporting evidence:
Milby found TEP were successful in psychiatric hospitals however follow up studies needed to see if effects lasted
Dickerson found TEP were successful in obtaining desired behaviour in schizophrenics
Both the above studies not specifically related to criminal behaviour. There may be differences between psychiatric patients and the behaviour of someone who is antisocial or a criminal.
Field (2004) used TEP in the treatment of young people with behaviour problems. This had a positive effect on the whole but still a number who did not respond. The programme was then adapted for non responsive youths with instant rewards and more frequent, this lead to greater success. This shows how the programme can be adapted to meet individual needs. However we do not know what happened afterwards – only measured short term effects on behaviour.
No specialist training required which can make it cheap to implement. However training is recommended to ensure consistency between staff members and to ensure it is being used as a reward system and not withholding basic needs
Gives individuals a sense of control over their behaviour which helps them develop independence. However there is the risk of learned helplessness
Account for individual differences – can use different reinforcement schedules and rewards that are specific to the individual
Opposing evidence:
Success rate is questionable – may be due to relationship between staff-prisoner, extra attention or just having clear rules
Need careful monitoring else may become contraband
Prisoners need to be engaged with the programme and have motivation
Different explanation:
Anger management uses CBT to teach inmates ways of identifying what triggers their anger and gives them the skills in managing it, such as relaxation techniques. This method may lead to more long lasting change as it teaches skills, rather than simply managing the behaviour.
Application:
TEP is widely used e.g. in prisons, schools and hospitals. It may however lack application as it may not be generalised to the outside world – studies often do not focus on what happens once the prisoner is released so recidivism may be high. It is seen as a way of managing behaviour and creating calm in an institute.