Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior

Living Edition
| Editors: Jennifer Vonk, Todd Shackelford

Token

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1863-1

Definition

Tokens are object or symbol that has no intrinsic value; its function is established through relations to other reinforcers. Tokens have been described as secondary reinforcer that can be exchanged for a primary reinforcer like food (Sousa and Matsuzawa 2001; Wolfe 1936).

Introduction

Token systems are ubiquitous in human culture, providing the basic framework for economic transactions within the world. A token is often manipulable and easy to handle (e.g., coins, cubes) but can be non-manipulable as well (e.g., stimulus lamps, points on a counter, checkmarks). Tokens are called secondary reinforcers when they are collected and later exchanged for a primary reinforcer, as a meaningful object or some food. A primary reinforcer is an unconditioned or unlearned reward (e.g., food), whereas a secondary reinforcer is a conditioned reward associated with a specific value, which will be learned over time (e.g., money). Token’s value can remain unchanged for extended period and,...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Addessi, E., Crescimbene, L., & Visalberghi, E. (2007). Do capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) use tokens as symbols? Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274(1625), 2579–2585.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2007.0726.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Addessi, E., Mancini, A., Crescimbene, L., Ariely, D., & Visalberghi, E. (2010a). How to spend a token? Trade-offs between food variety and food preference in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Behavioural Processes, 83(3), 267–275.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2009.12.012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Addessi, E., Mancini, A., Crescimbene, L., & Visalberghi, E. (2010b). How social context, token value, and time course affect token exchange in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). International Journal of Primatology, 32(1), 83–98.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-010-9440-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bourjade, M., Call, J., Pelé, M., Maumy, M., & Dufour, V. (2014). Bonobos and orangutans, but not chimpanzees, flexibly plan for the future in a token-exchange task. Animal Cognition, 17(6), 1329–1340.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-014-0768-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bräuer, J., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Are apes inequity averse? New data on the token-exchange paradigm. American Journal of Primatology, 71(2), 175–181.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20639.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brosnan, S. F., & Beran, M. J. (2009). Trading behavior between conspecifics in chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 123(2), 181–194.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015092.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Carpenter, C. R., & Locke, N. M. (1937). Notes on symbolic behavior in a cebus monkey (Capucinus appella). The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology, 51(2).  https://doi.org/10.1080/08856559.1937.10532502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cherot, C., Jones, A., & Neuringer, A. (1996). Reinforced variability decreases with approach to reinforcers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 22(4), 497–508.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cowles, J. T. (1937). Food-tokens as incentives for learning by chimpanzees (Comparative psychological monographs). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dale, R., Quervel-Chaumette, M., Huber, L., Range, F., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2016). Task differences and prosociality; investigating pet dogs’ prosocial preferences in a token choice paradigm. PLoS One, 11(12).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Defulio, A., Yankelevitz, R., Bullock, C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2014). Generalized conditioned reinforcement with pigeons in a token economy. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 102(1), 26–46.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Drayton, L. A., & Santos, L. R. (2014). Insights into intraspecies variation in primate prosocial behavior: Capuchins (Cebus apella) fail to show prosociality on a touchscreen task. Behavioral Sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 4(2), 87–101.  https://doi.org/10.3390/bs4020087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dufour, V., Pele, M., Neumann, M., Thierry, B., & Call, J. (2009). Calculated reciprocity after all: Computation behind token transfers in orang-utans. Biology Letters, 5(2), 172–175.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2008.0644.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellson, D. G. (1937). The acquisition of a token-reward habit in dogs. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 24(3), 505–522.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans, T. A., Beran, M. J., & Addessi, E. (2010). Can nonhuman primates use tokens to represent and sum quantities? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 124(4), 369–380.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019855.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Evans, T. A., Beran, M. J., Paglieri, F., & Addessi, E. (2012). Delaying gratification for food and tokens in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): When quantity is salient, symbolic stimuli do not improve performance. Animal Cognition, 15(4), 539–548.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0482-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hackenberg, T. (2009). Token reinforcement: A review and analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2(2), 257–286. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1901/jeab.2009.91-257/abstract.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hopper, L. M., Schapiro, S. J., Lambeth, S. P., & Brosnan, S. F. (2011). Chimpanzees’ socially maintained food preferences indicate both conservatism and conformity. Animal Behaviour, 81(6), 1195–1202.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.03.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Jackson, K., & Hackenberg, T. D. (1996). Token reinforcement, choice, and self-control in pigeons. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1(1), 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Judge, P. G., & Essler, J. L. (2013). Capuchin monkeys exercise self-control by choosing token exchange over an immediate reward. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 26(4), 256–266.Google Scholar
  21. Kabadayi, C., & Osvath, M. (2017). Ravens parallel great apes in flexible planning for tool-use and bartering. Science, 357(6347), 202–204.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam8138.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lakshminaryanan, V., Chen, K. M., & Santos, L. R. (2008). Endowment effect in capuchin monkeys. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 363(1511), 3837–3844.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0149.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Marshall-Pescini, S., Dale, R., Quervel-Chaumette, M., & Range, F. (2016). Critical issues in experimental studies of prosociality in non-human species. Animal Cognition, 19(4), 679–705.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0973-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Massen, J. J. M., Lambert, M., Schiestl, M., & Bugnyar, T. (2015). Subadult ravens generally don’t transfer valuable tokens to conspecifics when there is nothing to gain for themselves. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(June), 1–10.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mulcahy, N. J., & Call, J. (2006). Apes save tools for future use. Science, 312(5776), 1038–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Osvath, M., & Osvath, H. (2008). Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and orangutan (Pongo abelii) forethought: Self-control and pre-experience in the face of future tool use. Animal Cognition, 11(4), 661–674.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-008-0157-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pelé, M., Dufour, V., Thierry, B., & Call, J. (2009). Token transfers among great apes: Species differences, gestural requests and reciprocal exchange. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 123(4), 375–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Péron, F., John, M., Sapowicz, S., Bovet, D., & Pepperberg, I. M. (2013). A study of sharing and reciprocity in grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus). Animal Cognition, 16(2), 197–210.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0564-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sousa, C., & Matsuzawa, T. (2001). The use of tokens as rewards and tools by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Animal Cognition, 4(3–4), 213–221.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s100710100104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Wolfe, J. B. (1936). Effectiveness of token rewards for chimpanzees. Comparative Psychological Monographs, 12, 1–72.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of StrasbourgStrasbourgFrance
  2. 2.Bureau d’étude AKONGOToulonFrance

Section editors and affiliations

  • Valerie Dufour
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Ecology, Physiology and EthologyUniversity of StrasbourgStrasbourgFrance