Behaviour Modification in Custody

• Behaviour modification is based on operant conditioning where desirable behaviours are reinforced.
• One of the aims of custodial sentences is to provide rehabilitation for prisoners. This includes behaviour modification such as token economy programmes
• Token economy programmes are examples of behaviour modification and can be used within institutions to encourage desirable behaviour.
• Token economies modify behaviour by giving tokens for desirable behaviour, which can be exchanged for genuine rewards.
• Tokens act a secondary reinforcers which are issued by prison staff when the prisoner exhibits desirable behaviour. These are later exchanged for genuine rewards a prisoner values, such as cigarettes or phone cards.
• In prison tokens are exchanged for genuine rewarding items or privileges, such as phone calls, time in the gym or extra food. These are examples of primary reinforcers.
• Token economy programmes can be used in prisons to encourage desirable behaviour and manage aggressive behaviour with inmates.
• Desirable behaviour in a token economy programme must be objective and measurable and agreed with prison staff and inmates in advance.
• Staff and prisoners using token economy programmes should be made aware of the scoring system before it begins. Staff will need training at the start of the programme.
• Cohen & Filipczak (1971) compared 2 groups of young male prisoners. One group was reinforced with tokens exchangeable for phone calls, tobacco and family visits. The other group was a control group which did not receive any treatment. Prisoners on the token economy programme showed more desirable behaviour and less reoffending for up to 2 years.
• Hobbs & Holt (1976) tested young offenders in institutions and found that the behaviour of prisoners improved when they were placed on a token economy programme compared to a control group.
• Field et al (2004) found a token economy programme used with young people with behavioural problems was generally effective, especially if the rewards were immediate.
• Behaviour modification is relatively straightforward to set up within a prison environment.
• Token economy programmes are dependent on the individual motivation of the offenders. The rewards also have to have some genuine value otherwise the system does not work.
• Rice et al (1990) found that token economy programmes only work on some prisoners and that many of the improvements are only short term.
• Token economy programmes must be administered fairly and consistently, if this is not the case, they are not effective.
• Reppucci & Saunders (1974) found that token economy programmes often vary in consistency between prisons and can vary within the same prison itself. This means they are not effective as a form of behaviour modification.
• Bassett & Blanchard (1977) suggest the success of token economy programmes depends on a consistent approach from prison staff. They found any benefits were lost if staff applied the techniques inconsistently.
• Token economy programmes can be seen as a form of social control and it could be argued that this breaches the human rights of prisoners by only giving them the things they want when they perform appropriately.
• Token economy systems are limited to the institution in which they are used, often they do not work outside of this, so lack ecological validity.
• Offenders could easily play along with a token economy system in order to access the rewards but may not produce any change in their overall behaviour.
• Once out of prison many offenders quickly regress back to their former behaviour, suggesting that behaviour modification is limited to the controlled environment of prison.
• Alternative treatments which use more cognitive skills such as anger management may lead to more permanent behavioural change.
• Moya & Achtenberg (1974) describe behaviour modification as manipulative and dehumanising.
• Many Human Rights Campaigners argue that the controlled access to privileges in token economy programmes are unethical.