Basic research shows that token-production and exchangeproduction schedules in token economies affect each other as second-order schedules (i.e., the exchange-production schedule's requirements affect responding toward the token-production schedule). This relationship has not been investigated with children in academic settings despite the widespread use of token economies in this context. This study compared the effects of fixed-ratio (FR) and variable-ratio (VR) exchange-production schedules of equal ratios (2, 5, and 10) on responding toward an FR 1 tokenproduction schedule with a child diagnosed with autism. A concurrent chains assessment was also conducted to assess the participant's relative preference for FR and VR exchange-production schedule arrangements within her typical discrete trial training. Results showed no difference in response rate between the two schedule types. However, the concurrent chains assessment revealed an exclusive preference for the VR arrangement.

No abstract

Token economies for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) might work best when tokens are exchangeable for multiple and varied backup reinforcers, which can be displayed in a token store. Prior research with typically developing populations has reported that large array sizes and presentation methods can produce “choice overload” effects, which include choice avoidance, postchoice preference reversals, and other negative collateral effects, leading some to suggest that care must be taken to avoid such effects when working with children with ASD. However, choice overload has not been directly evaluated within token economies for individuals with ASD. Additionally, it is unknown whether choices in the context of a token economy are consistent with preferences displayed during preference assessments. We examined preference for array size across 4 presentation formats and when a work requirement preceded array selection. Results indicated that, overall, participants selected the large array condition most often across all presentation formats. Furthermore, two of three participants selected the large array condition most often, regardless of whether a work requirement proceeded array selection. Overall, we found minimal evidence of choice overload in this population.

No abstract

No abstract