Comparison of edible and leisure reinforcers.

Boudreau et al. (2015) asked a simple question: do kids prefer edible or leisure reinforcers? They tested children with autism and neurotypical kids in a single-case design. Each child tried both types of reinforcers across teaching tasks.

Kids picked edibles more often and kept working longer for them. Yet when the team looked at how fast new skills were learned, both edible and leisure items worked equally well. Preference and learning did not line up.

Jason et al. (1985) found the opposite thirty years earlier: sensory toys beat multiple edibles for both accuracy and how long kids stayed motivated. The older study used sensory items like light-up spinners, while the 2015 study used general leisure items like puzzles and cars. This difference may explain the flip in results.

Milo et al. (2010) add another layer: rotating different edible items keeps kids responding longer than giving the same edible every time. Their data support the 2015 finding that edibles can win, but only if you vary them.

Cox et al. (2015) ran a similar 2015 study and also saw mixed results: bigger edible portions were preferred yet did not speed up learning. Together, these papers warn that stronger preference does not promise faster skill gain.

You can trust either edibles or small leisure items to teach a new response, so pick what is practical. If motivation dips, switch to a rotated set of edibles, or try sensory toys like spinners or light wands. Keep measuring acquisition, not just what the child likes, to be sure learning stays on track.