Comparing development‐matched and age‐matched play targets: A replication and extension

Agana et al. (2024) asked a simple question: should we pick play goals that match a child’s age or their developmental level?

Four autistic children took part. Each child got two kinds of play targets in turn: age-matched and development-matched.

The team used a single-case design and counted how many scripted play actions each child showed under each target type.

Every child showed more play actions when the goal fit their developmental level, not their age.

The results repeated an earlier study, giving the same clear signal: developmental fit wins.

Morgan (1988) also used a single-case replication design. They taught identity matching with signs, while Agana taught play, but both show replication logic works.

de Almeida Soares et al. (2014) looked at pre-term babies and found one short practice bout was not enough. Agana’s work says the same: pick the step the child is ready for, not the calendar age.

Morris et al. (2022) used the matching law to measure social time in autistic kids. Agana adds a practical rule: set play targets at that measured level to get the best gain.

Next time you write a play goal, test the child’s current play first. Choose targets at that level, even if the toy is meant for younger kids. You will see faster growth and fewer frustrated tears.