Abstract
Howie and Woods (1982) have provided data that, they claim, indicate that a token reinforcement system is redundant in instating and shaping fluent speech within a stuttering treatment program developed by Ingham and Andrews (1973a, b). However, there were substantial procedural differences between the treatment programs referred to in both studies, as well as methodological weaknesses in Howie and Woods' study. These factors provide ample sources of explanation for Howie and Woods' failure to demonstrate benefits from their token reinforcement system.
Keywords: stuttering treatment, token reinforcement, adults and adolescents, prolonged speech
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Howie P. M., Woods C. L. Token reinforcement during the instatement and shaping of fluency in the treatment of stuttering. J Appl Behav Anal. 1982 Spring;15(1):55–64. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1982.15-55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ingham R. J., Andrews G. An analysis of a token economy in stuttering therapy. J Appl Behav Anal. 1973 Summer;6(2):219–229. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1973.6-219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ingham R. J. Modification of maintenance and generalization during stuttering treatment. J Speech Hear Res. 1980 Dec;23(4):732–745. doi: 10.1044/jshr.2304.732. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]