High Level Of Recognition Research Articles

In token economies, we typically consider the instructional opportunities available during the periods of token delivery, but may overlook educational opportunities available at the time of token exchange. The present studies examined the use of labelled tokens and routines in the token exchange period to teach alphabet letter recognition to economically disadvantaged preschool children. The children earned points for a variety of academic behaviors in an early morning classroom setting. At no time were alphabet letters introduced or taught during class. Later, during a midmorning token exchange period, operated according to a department store model, the children were given their points in the form of poker chips inscribed with upper‐case alphabet letters. They were required to discriminate among these lettered chips before exchanging them for backup reinforcers sold in four or five stores. To assess alphabet letter knowledge, probe evaluations were periodically conducted in which questions requiring alphabet letter recognition and labelling were asked. The answers to these questions were not reinforced. Alphabet letter training during token exchange periods consisted of having a child display the lettered chips, whereupon a teacher asked a number of recognition‐type questions. Wrong answers were corrected, and correct answers praised. The child was allowed to exchange the tokens when the number required for a purchase had been recognized correctly. The periodic probe evaluations revealed consistent increases in correct alphabet letter recognition and, as a byproduct, alphabet labelling was facilitated, even though not explicitly trained. Thus, once the letters were recognized, correct labelling shortly followed. The sequential training of new sets of letters was used to demonstrate experimental control within subjects for two children. A control for exposure to the letters was provided by using the labelled tokens, but requiring the counting of chips rather than letter discrimination in the exchange period for two other children. This procedure produced chance levels of letter recognition, which were subsequently improved when the discrimination procedure was added. Posttraining probes, conducted at one and three weeks after training when the labelled tokens and discrimination routines were no longer in use, revealed the same high levels of recognition and labelling performance found during training. Thus, it appears that labelled tokens may be used to teach discriminations during token exchange periods so long as responses are differentiated on the basis of relevant dimensions of the stimuli.