The modification of sentence structure and its relationship to subjective judgements of creativity in writing.

Four fifth-grade classes wrote short stories for 15 minutes each day. The kids earned team tokens when they used new adjectives, new action verbs, or started sentences in fresh ways. over the study period the tokens stopped to see if the colorful language stayed.

Outside teachers who did not know the study’s purpose rated the token-phase stories as more creative. The stories had more different describing and action words. When tokens ended, variety and creativity scores slipped back toward baseline.

Petursdottir et al. (2019) later topped this idea. They added a functional behavior plan and slowly faded the tokens, cutting classroom disruption a large share and lifting engagement a large share. Their package supersedes the simple tokens-only approach.

Lydersen et al. (1974) is an older cousin. They paid tokens for accurate reading work and saw disruption fall to almost zero. Together the two studies show tokens can strengthen very different school responses—accuracy or creativity.

Rapport et al. (1982) stretched the model to teenagers. They paid adolescents with tokens for praising their tutoring partners. Both tutors and tutees then read more and stayed on task, showing the same team-token engine can power social behavior too.

You can make writing livelier in less than one class period. Pin a team token board where every new describing word, action verb, or sentence starter earns a point. Let the kids hear the coins drop. When the story sounds richer, you have instant evidence that reinforcement shapes creative topography, not just rote answers.