We conducted two experiments to evaluate the effects of errors of omission and commission during alternative reinforcement of compliance in young children. In Experiment 1, we evaluated errors of omission by examining two levels of integrity during alternative reinforcement (20 and 60%) for child compliance following no treatment (baseline) versus treatment at full (i.e., 100%) integrity. Results indicated that compliance varied according to the level of integrity in place. In addition, compliance in the 60% integrity condition was high and stable when it followed baseline, but was substantially lower for one participant and slightly lower for a second participant when it followed the full integrity condition. In Experiment 2, we evaluated errors of commission. For three participants, we compared treatment at full integrity to a condition in which errors of commission were made on every trial (i.e., 0% integrity). For one of these three participants, we also compared treatment at full integrity to baseline and to a condition in which errors of commission were made on 50% of trials. Results of all four evaluations again indicate that compliance varied according to the level of integrity in place: compliance was low in both the 0 and 50% integrity conditions, regardless of the preceding condition. These results suggest that during alternative reinforcement of compliance, the effect of occasional errors of omission may depend on the immediately preceding context but that errors of commission are more detrimental.