Group-based preference assessment for children and adolescents in a residential setting: examining developmental, clinical, gender, and ethnic differences.

Matson et al. (2009) gave a short paper survey to youth living in a residential facility.

Kids rated how much they liked items used in the unit’s token store.

The team looked at whether age, diagnosis, sex, or race changed the ratings.

Almost every token item scored as “liked.”

Still, older kids picked different top items than younger kids.

Girls, boys, and different ethnic groups also showed unique likes.

Nelson et al. (1978) ran a token economy in a similar home and showed self-evaluation works. L et al. now tell us which items to stock in that store.

Guercio et al. (2025) used the same idea with staff: ask what they like, then make it contingent on work. Fidelity jumped past 80%. The youth survey mirrors this adult success.

Heinicke et al. (2019) and Kittler et al. (2004) push for direct, one-on-one preference tests. L et al. traded that depth for speed, giving a group snapshot instead.

You can hand the one-page survey to every new resident in ten minutes. Circle the top two choices for each demographic group and load the store shelf. No extra staff time, no long paired-stimulus sessions, yet you still raise the chance that tokens will feel like gold.