Effects of choice of stimuli as reinforcement for task responding in reinforcement for task responding in preschoolers with and without developmental disabilities.

The team asked preschoolers to do simple tasks. Some kids had developmental delays. Some were typical.

After each task, the child got a reinforcer. In one condition the adult picked the item. In the other, the child picked from three low-preference toys.

The researchers used an alternating-treatments design. Sessions switched back and forth every day.

Letting kids choose did not raise their work output. Task rates stayed the same whether the adult or the child picked the low-preference item.

Choice only helps when the items are already wanted. With boring toys, the extra step wasted time.

Lord et al. (1997) ran a near-copy of this study. They also found null results, but they used highly preferred items. Together the papers draw a clear line: choice adds nothing when reinforcers are already strong or already weak.

Hall et al. (2005) reviewed 30 studies and said choice cuts problem behavior. The difference: those papers gave choices about big things—tasks, break times, or who delivers the lesson—not about which dull toy to touch.

Crowley et al. (2020) got huge gains with choice, but they used asymmetrical contingencies. Kids had to eat new food to earn the preferred item. That is not the same as picking among three low-preference trinkets.

Skip the choice step when your reinforcers are weak. Spend the minutes on a quick preference assessment instead. Find items the child actually wants, then deliver them fast. Save choice for times when the options are strong or when the choice itself is the reinforcer.