The document discusses and compares the effectiveness of two programs for managing anger and behavior in prison populations: anger management programs and token economy programs. Anger management uses cognitive behavioral therapy techniques to help prisoners learn to control anger through changing negative thought patterns and developing coping skills. Token economy programs reward prisoners with tokens for good behavior that can be exchanged for privileges. Several studies on the programs are reviewed, with anger management found to have slightly better outcomes in reducing recidivism compared to token economies, though both approaches have limitations.

1. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ANGER
MANAGEMENT?
Pavlov’s Blogs

2. WHAT IS ANGER MANAGEMENT?
The term “anger management” refers to a type of cognitive behavioural
therapy which a person may undergo in order to manage their anger.
Anger management programmes can be either voluntary, (people who feel
their anger is getting out of hand can self-refer themselves) or compulsory
(people may be sentenced to attend anger management sessions in court or
by their GP) and are usually delivered in weekly or twice weekly group
sessions delivered by qualified psychologists.
Anger management consists of two elements: cognitive restructuring and
skill training. Cognitive restructuring aims to change the way you think, eg.
someone who experiences anger problems may lash out violently during
arguments and would therefore be taught how to think logically in these
situations in order to minimise violence – is violence really necessary here?
Skill training aims to equip you with skills that will help to prevent anger; for
example, guided imagery helps to place calm thoughts into your head, which
is designed to prevent angry and violent outbursts.

3. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ANGER
MANAGEMENT?
Several studies have been conducted into the effectiveness of anger
management programmes in prisons…
Watt et al (1999) investigated two groups of prisoners in a West
Australian prison; one group had been regularly attending anger
management sessions whilst the other group was on the waiting list.
The two group’s levels of anger were measured in a variety of
categories such as prison misconduct and aggressive behaviour.
The study found that there was no difference between the levels of the
anger that the two different groups showed, thus it was concluded
that the anger management programme was not effective.

4. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ANGER
MANAGEMENT?
Another study that looked at the effectiveness of anger management
programmes in prisons is Towl & Dexter (1994), conducted in the UK.
Towl & Dexter surveyed prisoners in nine different institutions after
completion of an anger management programme. Most prisoners
reported feeling less angry after the programme, however some
reported an extreme reduction in anger levels and others reported no
change. Overall, the programme was deemed generally successful.
An obvious problem with this study is that the data for this study was
self-reported by prisoners, therefore it is questionable whether the
data is valid or not, as prisoners may just be claiming to have reduced
levels of anger in order to reduce their sentence.

5. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ANGER
MANAGEMENT?
Finally, Loza & Loza-Fanous (1999) conducted a study in which they
studied a total of 271 Canadian male offenders. They compared
groups of violent offenders (those who had committed crimes such as
murder, assault and robbery) with those who had committed non-violent
offences (such as fraud), and a group of rapists with a group of
non-rapists.
Using several psychometric measures of anger, they concluded that
there was no significant difference in the levels of anger displayed by
the four groups, suggesting that anger was not the reason behind
their violent offences, meaning that anger management programmes
would be of no use to them. They even went as far to suggest that
anger management problems could be harmful, as they could cause
offenders to blame anger for their offences, instead of taking full
responsibility for their actions.

6. WHAT ARE TOKEN ECONOMIES?
Token economy programmes are an alternative way to manage anger and
violent behaviours in a prison environment, where desired behaviours are
rewarded with tokens (secondary reinforcers), which can then be exchanged
for material objects or privileges, such as sweets, cigarettes or a phone call
home (primary reinforcers).
Token economies work on the basis of operant conditioning; if a behaviour is
rewarded, it will more than likely be repeated to earn another reward.
As the programme develops, regular meetings are held with the prisoners to
evaluate the programme so it continues to be effective; if a prisoner is not
responding to the programme, it is changed so that tokens are easier to earn
and more immediate. Similarly, if a prisoner is responding well to the
programme and earning lots of tokens, the programme will be changed so
that the prisoner has to work harder to earn the tokens. As the prisoner’s
behaviour improves, they gradually get used to not receiving tokens for good
behaviour, which aims to get them used to life outside of prison, where they
will not receive tokens anymore.

7. HOW EFFECTIVE ARE TOKEN
ECONOMIES?
Like anger management, several studies have been conducted into the
effectiveness of token economy programmes in the prison
environment, the most well known of which is Hobbs & Holt (1976),
who studied the effectiveness of token economies on 125 boys in a
correctional institution.
If boys followed rules, co-operated, were non-violent and did not
damage property, they were rewarded with tokens by 17 members of
staff, who were well trained in the programme. The tokens could be
used to buy rewards such as drinks and toys, or saved up in banks for
off-campus events like sports games or visits home.
The programme was found to reduce undesired behaviours, however it
raised an important question - are token economies effective in
improving behaviour in prisons, or do they just make the prisons
easier to run?

8. HOW EFFECTIVE ARE TOKEN
ECONOMIES?
An alternative study to that is Field et al (2004), who examined the
effectiveness of token economies on young people with behavioural
problems. Tokens were rewarded for desired behaviours.
Whilst most responded well to the programme, some people did not
respond at all. Therefore, a specialised programme was put into place
for them, meaning that they could earn tokens faster and more easily
than others, helping them to respond to the programme.
Overall, the programme was deemed successful.

9. HOW DO THE TWO PROGRAMMES
COMPARE?
In criminal psychology, recidivism refers to relapsing into criminal
behaviour after receiving treatment or punishment for said behaviour, eg.
a car theft is released from prison and begins stealing cars again upon
release. Both anger management and token economy programmes can
be evaluated by how likely recidivism is after completion or release from
prison.
Anger management has lower recidivism rates than token economies,
because the skills that the prisoner learns during anger management
sessions can be easily transferred to life outside of prison. It is therefore
seen as a long-term solution to anger problems.
In comparison to this, Hollin (1989) investigated recidivism rates for
token economy programmes and found that whilst token economies help
to delay recidivism, they do not prevent it, making it a short-term
solution as prisoners often cannot continue their good behaviour outside
of the prison environment when they are no longer receiving tokens.

10. HOW DO THE TWO PROGRAMMES
COMPARE?
Anger management programmes ensure that prisoners are actively
involved in their own rehabilitation by getting them to reconsider how
they think and act when angry. In contrast to this, token economy
programmes are passive, as prisoners are having something done to
them and can choose whether or not to respond to the programme by
performing desired behaviours (and therefore earning tokens) or not.
Anger management programmes are also holistic, as they look at
every aspect of the problem (what triggers anger, how it is responded
to, etc.) to ensure that the problem is treated at the root cause and is
completely solved. Token economy programmes are reductionist, as
they reduce the problem and only treat the symptoms of anger such
as violent behaviour, rather than focus on how to prevent the prisoner
from becoming violent.

11. HOW DO THE TWO PROGRAMMES
COMPARE?
Both programmes could potentially present as unethical, as neither
programme offers prisoners the right to withdraw; token economy
programmes do not give the option to opt out, whereas court-ordered
anger management sessions are compulsory. On top of this, token
economies could be seen as unethical, if they make prisoners work for
basic rights such as phone calls home and access to food.
In terms of how the programmes are measured, anger management
programmes are evaluated through self-report data from the
prisoners themselves, which presents a validity issue – have prisoners
really been cured of their anger problems, or are they lying to reduce
their sentence? Token economies are evaluated through regular
meetings with prisoners to assess how the prisoner is responding to
the programme, a method with an arguably higher validity than self-reported
data.

12. HOW EFFECTIVE IS ANGER
MANAGEMENT?
In my opinion, anger management programmes are more effective
than token economies, as cognitive behavioural therapies have been
proven to provide long-term rehabilitation, proven by low recidivism
rates. Anger management teaches skills that can be used outside of
the prison environment; this is where difficulties arise with token
economies, as prisoners may find it difficult to continue behaving well
outside of prison when they are no longer receiving tokens for their
behaviour.
However, as data is self-reported, problems could arise if prisoners
are released after saying they feel less angry, when they are actually
lying.