Behaviour Modification in Custody (AQA A Level Psychology): Revision Note

The use of token economies to change behaviour

• Behaviour modification programmes are designed with the aim of reinforcing obedient behaviour in offenders whilst punishing disobedience, in the hope that the former continues and the latter dies out (becomes extinct)

  • This is made possible in prison through the use of a token economy, which is based on operant conditioning and is managed and co-ordinated by prison staff

• Token economies are a feature of offender behaviour management as well as being used in health settings such as mental hospitals or care facilities

• The aim of a token economy is to incentivise offenders to behave in ways which are socially acceptable (e.g. avoiding fights and confrontations both with staff and other prisoners and keeping their cell clean and tidy)

• The behaviours to be reinforced are decided upon in advance, broken down into small steps called increments, and a baseline measure is established

  • All those who come into contact with offenders must follow the same regime of selective reinforcement, so prison officers may reinforce a particular prisoner for working positively in a group or 'turning the other cheek' when provoked

• Tokens are in themselves valueless, but can be exchanged for desirable rewards such as a phone call to a loved one, time in the gym or exercise yard, extra cigarettes or food

  • Each of these behaviours and rewards is made clear to the prisoners before the programme is implemented, and it is emphasised that non-compliance or disobedience may result in tokens and their associated privileges being withheld or removed, which is a form of punishment

• Tokens act as secondary reinforcers; i.e., it is not the tokens themselves that provide the reward; it is what they can be exchanged for (e.g., the primary reinforcement of food, extra visits from family etc)

Research which investigates behaviour modification in custody

• Hobbs & Holt (1976) introduced a token economy programme with groups of young delinquents across three behavioural units, with a fourth unit acting as a control, and observed a significant difference in positive behaviour compared with the non-token economy group, with a similar effect found in an adult prison (Allyon et al., 1979)

• Milan & McKee (1976) conducted experimental research in a maximum security prison and found that the combination of praise and tokens was more effective in changing behaviour than the threat of punishment through removal of social or recreational time

Evaluation of behaviour modification in custody

Strengths

• Behaviour modification is easy to implement, as there is no need for expertise or specialist professionals of the kind required for other forms of treatment such as anger management, so token economy systems can be implemented by virtually anyone in any institution

  • They are also cost-effective and easy to follow once workable methods of reinforcement have been established

• Token economies are most effective when tailored to the individual, e.g., Field et al. (2004) found that young people who initially did not respond to a programme improved when moved to a scheme with more immediate and frequent rewards

  • This suggests failures may reflect poor programme design rather than a flaw in the underlying principle

Limitations

• Blackburn (1993) argues that behaviour modification has little rehabilitative value, as positive changes made in prison may quickly be lost on release

  • Token economies work best on a narrow set of specific behaviours, so progress is unlikely to extend beyond the custodial setting, especially as law-abiding behaviour is not always reinforced on the outside while the rewards of offending, such as group status, may be more powerful

• Behaviour modification has been described as manipulative and dehumanising (e.g., Moya & Achtenberg, 1974), as participation is obligatory rather than optional in an institutional setting

  • Withdrawal of privileges such as exercise and contact with loved ones is ethically questionable, even though offenders can ultimately choose whether to comply

Issues & Debates

• Behaviour modification focuses on environmental reinforcement to shape behaviour, exemplifying the nurture side of the nature vs nurture debate

  • It assumes that offending behaviour is learned and can be unlearned through positive reinforcement

• Token economies may be reductionist as they simplify behaviour change to reward-based conditioning without addressing deeper cognitive, emotional, or social causes of offending

  • A more holistic approach might combine token economies with therapies like CBT to address the root causes of offending